Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[Cultured_Bogan]

Neither party has a grasp on proper infrastructure spending.

This problem is due to having to deal with an utterly reactionary electorate who will never look to the long term.

**Politics is now a media game entirely based on instant gratification for the electorate.**

Until this ceases than we will continue to get the government we deserve

Case in point: Kevin Rudd.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

We have to take the refugees from Malaysia as we signed an agreement with them. So we take 4000 of them and they take nothing from us. The Government has to go back to John Howard's origianl Nairu plan or Julia Gillard and Chris Bowen must resign TODAY!

Thats the problem though Chris with the High Court ruling any off shore solutions are now in jeopardy .
It has opened a very big can of worms and we have arguably the worst federal government in our history to try and fix it

The way John Howard got around the High Court was he intercepted the boats before they hit the main land and sent them off to Nairu. This government lets the boat people hit the mainland, thus allowing them access to our legal system. Diverting them to Nairu leaves them to deal with their legal system, if they have one.

Christmas Island is hardly the mainland… In any event the people who ended up in the Pacific Solution were still in Australian waters and in some cases were taken from Australian land. And as I recall the courts found they were still entitled to the same rights under Australian law as those in Australian detention centres.

In any case, the Nauru option is one of the all time great pieces of garbage presented as policy. If you're an Afghani fleeing poverty/war etc, do you really care if you spend 2 years in Nauru or 2 years in Port Headland? Of course you don't. You can say the same thing about Manus Island. The people coming on boats only care about the final outcome and close to 100% of the people from the Tampa were found to be refugees and were settled as such. The Malaysian option, although possibly immoral and apparently illegal, at least had a legitimate policy outcome.

The irregular martime arrival debate is a very sad indictment on Australian politics. The overwhelming triumph of political gesturing over decent policy with reasonably developed expected outcomes is a disgrace.

What's laughable is the is the intense scrutiny these boat people receive, when they only represent a minute portion of the make-up of illegal immigrants in this country. I never hear anyone complain about the Europeans that jet over here on a tourist visa and then just decide not to go home.

 

[stryker]

So we are staring down the barrell of a second prime ministerial execution…Gillard certainly deserves it but for gods sakes....not Dudd again?

Wouldnt it be great if the labor party acted democratically....

 

[Yossarian]

So we are staring down the barrell of a second prime ministerial execution…Gillard certainly deserves it but for gods sakes....not Dudd again?

Wouldnt it be great if the labor party acted democratically....

Let's leave aside the last sentence. Party's elect Prime Ministers, not the public. If you don't like agitate for a different system of government.

In response to the first part, I'd think it extremely unlikely they'd go for Kevin Rudd. I doubt Wayne Swan has enough support either which limits the choices given they hold the top 2 spots. Stephen Smith would probably be the next choice.

Realistically I don't see them moving against Gillard. In any case they'd probably be better off losing the next election and letting Phony Abbott self destruct for 3 years.

 

[stryker]

They're damned either way at the moment. Personally I'd like to see them fight and try to turn things around rather than take the easy way out and knife her.

She has been a pretty aweful PM to date however a large percentage of the public wanted her there. I dont like seeing PM's sacked unless they deserve it ala Whitlam.

BTW Yoss, my last sentence was a bit tongue in cheek.

 

[Yossarian]

They're damned either way at the moment. Personally I'd like to see them fight and try to turn things around rather than take the easy way out and knife her.

She has been a pretty aweful PM to date however a large percentage of the public wanted her there. I dont like seeing PM's sacked unless they deserve it ala Whitlam.

BTW Yoss, my last sentence was a bit tongue in cheek.

Fair enough! I might need another coffee to get my sarcasm detector running! I also don't agree with governments being sacked unless they are unable to govern or acting illegally. There are elections every 3 years which is fairly regular. I'd hate to think we go down the road where governments are unwilling to make any hard decisions.

 

[stryker]

They're damned either way at the moment. Personally I'd like to see them fight and try to turn things around rather than take the easy way out and knife her.

She has been a pretty aweful PM to date however a large percentage of the public wanted her there. I dont like seeing PM's sacked unless they deserve it ala Whitlam.

BTW Yoss, my last sentence was a bit tongue in cheek.

Fair enough! I might need another coffee to get my sarcasm detector running! I also don't agree with governments being sacked unless they are unable to govern or acting illegally. There are elections every 3 years which is fairly regular. I'd hate to think we go down the road where governments are unwilling to make any hard decisions.

Exactly…making hard decisions and sticking to them, (something little johnny was great at), will make you unpopular at times. However she still has 2 more years to bring some of these policies to fruition. How can they ever get anything done if they are sacked for having low opinion polls? They need to galvanise, and fight to convince the public that their direction is the way to go...if they fail to do this they'll be voted out...thats how it goes. At least give her the chance.

....and this is coming from someone who doesnt like Labors current policies..lol.

 

[hammertime]

They're damned either way at the moment. Personally I'd like to see them fight and try to turn things around rather than take the easy way out and knife her.

She has been a pretty aweful PM to date however a large percentage of the public wanted her there. I dont like seeing PM's sacked unless they deserve it ala Whitlam.

BTW Yoss, my last sentence was a bit tongue in cheek.

Fair enough! I might need another coffee to get my sarcasm detector running! I also don't agree with governments being sacked unless they are unable to govern or acting illegally. There are elections every 3 years which is fairly regular. I'd hate to think we go down the road where governments are unwilling to make any hard decisions.

Geezus, you are one of the most rusted on supporters I've ever seen Yoss. You still think that the current government should continue to waste your tax money and see out a full term?

Surely a drop of a primary vote to 20% should have the GG step in.

When Stryker was talking about democracy too. I agree. Our elected representatives are no longer at all acting on behalf of their constituents. Our system is Broken. Government dissolution from the GG must be used to solve it.

 

[Yossarian]

They're damned either way at the moment. Personally I'd like to see them fight and try to turn things around rather than take the easy way out and knife her.

She has been a pretty aweful PM to date however a large percentage of the public wanted her there. I dont like seeing PM's sacked unless they deserve it ala Whitlam.

BTW Yoss, my last sentence was a bit tongue in cheek.

Fair enough! I might need another coffee to get my sarcasm detector running! I also don't agree with governments being sacked unless they are unable to govern or acting illegally. There are elections every 3 years which is fairly regular. I'd hate to think we go down the road where governments are unwilling to make any hard decisions.

Geezus, you are one of the most rusted on supporters I've ever seen Yoss. You still think that the current government should continue to waste your tax money and see out a full term?

Surely a drop of a primary vote to 20% should have the GG step in.

When Stryker was talking about democracy too. I agree. Our elected representatives are no longer at all acting on behalf of their constituents. Our system is Broken. Government dissolution from the GG must be used to solve it.

It's not about being rusted on it's about the system of government we have. Unpopularity (especially as measured by opinion polls) should never be a reason for a government to be dismissed. There are elections often enough for people to express their opinion in a proper way.

So yes they should serve until they no longer enjoy support in the House. Same way Howard kept chugging along even when his numbers were in the gutter.

 

[hammertime]

They're damned either way at the moment. Personally I'd like to see them fight and try to turn things around rather than take the easy way out and knife her.

She has been a pretty aweful PM to date however a large percentage of the public wanted her there. I dont like seeing PM's sacked unless they deserve it ala Whitlam.

BTW Yoss, my last sentence was a bit tongue in cheek.

Fair enough! I might need another coffee to get my sarcasm detector running! I also don't agree with governments being sacked unless they are unable to govern or acting illegally. There are elections every 3 years which is fairly regular. I'd hate to think we go down the road where governments are unwilling to make any hard decisions.

Geezus, you are one of the most rusted on supporters I've ever seen Yoss. You still think that the current government should continue to waste your tax money and see out a full term?

Surely a drop of a primary vote to 20% should have the GG step in.

When Stryker was talking about democracy too. I agree. Our elected representatives are no longer at all acting on behalf of their constituents. Our system is Broken. Government dissolution from the GG must be used to solve it.

It's not about being rusted on it's about the system of government we have. Unpopularity (especially as measured by opinion polls) should never be a reason for a government to be dismissed. There are elections often enough for people to express their opinion in a proper way.

So yes they should serve until they no longer enjoy support in the House. Same way Howard kept chugging along even when his numbers were in the gutter.

His numbers were never close at all to 20% primary vote!! We do have a system of government that allows a decision, by the GG, to be made when the government is acting irresponsibly. Say a government gets voted in by a public, claiming to keep our budget prosperous and they do the opposite and spend on garbage. That's acting undemocratically and poling figures are one indicator of that.

Now lets add on the fact that portions of the house were bribed with our tax dollars and god knows what else. You wouldn't then think the government should be changed?

 

[Yossarian]

His numbers were never close at all to 20% primary vote!! We do have a system of government that allows a decision, by the GG, to be made when the government is acting irresponsibly. Say a government gets voted in by a public, claiming to keep our budget prosperous and they do the opposite and spend on garbage. That's acting undemocratically and poling figures are one indicator of that.

Now lets add on the fact that portions of the house were bribed with our tax dollars and god knows what else. You wouldn't then think the government should be changed?

Well what % would you set? Who decides what is too low? Why primary votes when Australia has a preferential voting system?

Governments aren't elected on a promise to keep their committments. Nobody seriously suggested Howard be kicked out for the infamous core/non core promise business. Australia is a representative government - you elect the people to represent you. There is NO legitimate expectation that governments or individual MPs (who you are electing - not governments) will honour every pledge they make. Governments need to be able to respond to changing circumstances.

If you think someone was bribed by all means make a complaint with the AFP. If not, then stop talking rubbish. The crossbenchers themselves have suggested that Abbott was prepared to go further in offering sweetners for support. Nothing illegal happened.

 

[Original_Magpie]

its only a matter of time before the ALP knife Gillard in the back like they did to KRudd

If I was a Labor strategist, I would be having very serious meetings with Malcolm Turnbull about defecting, then straight to PM

 

[hammertime]

His numbers were never close at all to 20% primary vote!! We do have a system of government that allows a decision, by the GG, to be made when the government is acting irresponsibly. Say a government gets voted in by a public, claiming to keep our budget prosperous and they do the opposite and spend on garbage. That's acting undemocratically and poling figures are one indicator of that.

Now lets add on the fact that portions of the house were bribed with our tax dollars and god knows what else. You wouldn't then think the government should be changed?

Well what % would you set? Who decides what is too low? Why primary votes when Australia has a preferential voting system?

Governments aren't elected on a promise to keep their committments. Nobody seriously suggested Howard be kicked out for the infamous core/non core promise business. Australia is a representative government - you elect the people to represent you. There is NO legitimate expectation that governments or individual MPs (who you are electing - not governments) will honour every pledge they make. Governments need to be able to respond to changing circumstances.

If you think someone was bribed by all means make a complaint with the AFP. If not, then stop talking rubbish. The crossbenchers themselves have suggested that Abbott was prepared to go further in offering sweetners for support. Nothing illegal happened.

Of course it's subjective. How do you weigh up performance otherwise? I said that the % of primary vote is only one indicator.

I understand that governments aren't elected to keep their commitments. But they should respect and follow democracy. We aren't talking about making the unpopular and hard decisions like Howard, we are talking about making stupid, wasteful and ineffective decisions. I find it hard to think of 1 thing that they done right! It's about an ineffective government who is wasting tax dollars. Could you say the same about Howard in the same magnitudes? It's obvious that the overwhelming majority of Australia agree with me.

Do you think the cross-benchers would say, 'yes, we went because Gillard offered us some pretty awesome sweeteners? really?.

I didn't say it's illegal. You are twisting statements. Who cares if it is or not. What I'm talking about is doing the right thing about the Australian people. Respecting democracy. Not respecting the flaws of the Westminster system that allows them to hang on and continue to drag Australia into the gutter.

 

[Old_Bluebag]

Just idle curiosity. I reckon that the posters on this forum represent a good cross section of the population; mostly NSW, but you seem to be from all walks of life. My question is this: with so much being made of Newspapers' Opinion Poll results have ANY of you ever been polled? I'm in my seventies and I never have, nor do I know anyone who has. What form do they take and just how representative are they of public opinion? I am being provocative because so much is made of them, but I'd really like to know.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Can't say I have Bluebag. Chances are I've been accosted in a mall/shopping centre or on the phone and roundly told the people to FOQ before they've had a chance to explain themselves.

 

[happy_tiger]

Couple of times Bluebag but not for ages in regards to federal politics
Get more in regards to local concerns now

Change of subject
\
\
Anyone care to nominate a date when Julia gets the axe ?? October the 11th I reckon
24% percent approval rating She's screwed And anyone care to nominate a replacement Possibly Shorten ??

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Couple of times Bluebag but not for ages in regards to federal politics
Get more in regards to local concerns now

Change of subject
\
\
Anyone care to nominate a date when Julia gets the axe ?? October the 11th I reckon
24% percent approval rating She's screwed And anyone care to nominate a replacement Possibly Shorten ??

If Shorten gets in, I don't see the government being dissolved before the next election unless the GG is replaced. Severe conflict of interest there.

 

[hammertime]

Couple of times Bluebag but not for ages in regards to federal politics
Get more in regards to local concerns now

Change of subject
\
\
Anyone care to nominate a date when Julia gets the axe ?? October the 11th I reckon
24% percent approval rating She's screwed And anyone care to nominate a replacement Possibly Shorten ??

I really hope we see a dissolution HT. Cash handouts are being thrown around AGAIN!!(To fathers capped at $150k). It's just disgraceful vote buying and by capping at $150k, it shows that Labor don't even understand the intention of Costello's baby bonus policy in the first place. How could they? That would mean they would have to look to the future rather than this weeks poling data.

It was my tipping point. I'm seriously thinking of moving to HK…. my tax money is being seriously wasted when we have so many future challenges. :brick: :brick: :brick: :brick:

 

[stryker]

God no Happy Bill Shorten would be a disasterous PM.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Couple of times Bluebag but not for ages in regards to federal politics
Get more in regards to local concerns now

Change of subject
\
\
Anyone care to nominate a date when Julia gets the axe ?? October the 11th I reckon
24% percent approval rating She's screwed And anyone care to nominate a replacement Possibly Shorten ??

I really hope we see a dissolution HT. Cash handouts are being thrown around AGAIN!!(To fathers capped at $150k). It's just disgraceful vote buying and by capping at $150k, it shows that Labor don't even understand the intention of Costello's baby bonus policy in the first place. How could they? That would mean they would have to look to the future rather than this weeks poling data.

It was my tipping point. I'm seriously thinking of moving to HK…. my tax money is being seriously wasted when we have so many future challenges. :brick: :brick: :brick: :brick:

I missed this one, what's the deal with these handouts?