Julia Gillard’s ridiculous ‘moving forward’ has made me move sideways away from supporting her.

Initially, she had my strong support because any new leader had to be a vast improvement on Rudd. Then my support grew as she started to say the right sorts of things about a sustainable Australia, etc, and to make strong moves away from some of Rudd’s worst failings.

But crikey, she’s not helping by spouting this simplistic slogan, which really is an insult to the intelligence of ordinary Australians.

I have never liked Peter Costello, but he gave me a good laugh a couple of days ago when he parodied this stupid slogan.

“moowving foorwood……….mOOOOwwvving FOOAAARRRWWWOODH!”

Hahahahahaaaa!!

.

.
Hwaaaaw (:>(

The "Australian" article is correct in condemning both major parties for their stupid slogans and predictable advertising, but as usual fails to point out the obvious conclusions. Perhaps its owners don't want you to even think of them.
The obvious conclusions are that neither major party has anything much to offer other than the sort of mismanagement each of them has saddled us with in the past. Therefore it is high time that someone else was given a go... most likely the Greens as the leader amongst the minor parties which scarcely ever get fair coverage in the media.

I've said it before and I'll say it again- never in Australian history have our major candidates been such a waste of space, and of so little consequence if one or the other gets voted, and care just as little about Australia as the other, what better time than to not vote either and see if there is anyone else that might correspond to your political beliefs?

I mean seriously, unless your political beliefs are doing nothing, taking huge sums of money for it, and pandering to lobbyists first and foremost, then by all means pick one of the two!
You won't be disappointed then!

I have to agree with King Hazza on this. We should weep in the streets for the lack of political talent and the paucity of choice in this election.

The Greens have some bright young candidates -

Isn't that the only way to go - strengthen the presence of minor parties in the hope of keeping whichever major gains government accountable?

How have we come to this parlous state?

I think our major parties are too afraid to actually offer anything of substance, for fear of breaking promises following the election. It was, after all, Rudd's major undoing... not coming through with ALL of the promises he made. So the vague, variably interpretable slogans come in to play. No promises to break.

I strongly agree, there is almost no difference between the ideology of the two parties any more, they have both learnt from JW Howard that you don't actually need to do anything productive to stay in power. Just "manage" things and pander to the fears and greed of swinging voters in the marginal seats.

I hope enough people vote for the Greens, not because I want them to run our country, but so the major parties are shaken up enough to actually enact some meaningful, productive and progressive policy decisions. Unfortunately, policy in this country has been stagnant, and in some areas regressive, since Howard/Costello took over in caretaker mode.

I agree that the immediate benefit would be that the majors would try to actually do something- but I have no intention of letting either of them remain in government- since the 60s they have shown themselves to be so corrupt, lazy and indifferent that to expect them to suddenly turn into honest hard-working people who sincerely care is not something I hold on to.
And to WANT to believe otherwise is silly. Nothing will truly motivate them to be decent.

Leopards changing spots and whatnot.

And I do imagine the Greens would do a better job of all sectors than the current lot- as I imagine many other parties nobody knows about due to the fact that they don't accept 'donations' to advertise as much as the Libs and Labor mob does (another reason I will vote Green- they don't take donations (aka bribes) as part of party policy.
And I guarantee you, 2nd,3rd, 4th, etc WILL go to the other minors that correspond closest to my beliefs (with the majors at the very bottom to minimize the amount of Preference they can get.

And if YOU don't want parties to preference others, I suggest YOU also fill out all boxes yourself.

Moving Forward, Moving Forward, Moving Forward, Moving Forward.

Direct Action, Direct Action, Direct Action, Direct Action.

Working Families, Working Families, Working Families, Working Families.

Great Big New Tax, Great Big New Tax, Great Big New Tax, Great Big New Tax.

They all treat us like the mugs we are - so what's the big deal?

briar rose,

Is Rhiannon, the NSW MLC who herself stands accused for misusing government funds for her own advancement for a federal Senate seat, the sort of candidate you are talking about? You know, a Green who can be trusted to keep others honest?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/09/2949504.htm

"If Senator Brown decides to step down as leader of the Greens in the next parliament, the battle for the ideological soul of the party will be on in earnest.

The Greens skate away from a lot of scrutiny of their policies, largely because they are a minor party but they do share one thing in common with the majors. The Greens are riddled with factional feuds and a furious though largely circumspect loathing of one another on ideological grounds."

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/jacktheinsider/index.php/theaustralian/comments/red_and_green_and_everything_in_between

Thanks for this article. I can no longer stand being treated as a person without inteligence, just another stupid voter. Yes, it's been particularly bad in this campaign and I'm turning off already.
But Australians should feel lucky if they're not Victorians, with a state election in about 120 days and a government which dictates instead of consults; presumably because Victorians are too stupid to waste time on.
I still retain some hope that Ms Gillard's natural intelligence will take over

Keep in mind, that article places a LOT of assumption of people remaining stuck in 'celebrity culture' that helped votes of yesteryear.

Not to mention that the Greens losing Brown (personally preferred by myself I admit) would still leave them in a position better than Labor and Liberals now (having lost John Howard, Peter Costello, Kevin Rudd, Kim Beazly, and countless other remotely distinguishable faces).

This won't go down too well with the urban luvvies but unfortunately what we are up against in Australia are a lot of people (including Gillard and Co) who have no experience in business and little understanding of what drives investment. To most of them if you invest or own a business you are 'rich' and deserve to be soaked by the Government and the 'wealth' redistributed. Never mind if you employ people and would have to lay staff off if costs rise. Never mind if you make little or no money in order to pay ever increasing staff costs (as is the case for many small businesses I know). Their thinking never seems to extend that far. Indeed the Labour Party does not want their thinking to extend that far and it has a strong history of playing on the ignorance and fears of these people in order to get re-elected. In addition, their slogans, symbolism and outright lies will almost always be cloaked in a moral observation. After all that makes it so reasonable does it not? Until there is better education in this country then we will always have a large segment of people who are antagonistic to and suspicious of business, never mind that it provides them with an income. I always make the same comment to the Labour supporters - put your money where your mouth is, start a business, take a risk and employ people then make an EDUCATED comment. I GUARANTEE that if you do this you won't vote for Labour too long. But they won't will they? It's far too easy to sit back, criticise others who try to make a profit and take your weekly hand out...

I am surprised that no-one has provided comments on the truly atrocious media coverage of the election so far. For nearly all channels to devote all of Saturday morning to something we knew was going happen was awful television. Couldn't they just have had a news break? We had coverage of Julia leaving home, Julia arriving at the airport, Julia arriving at Canberra airport all the time accompanied by earnest discussion (babble) of whether her partner was with her and on and on with large chunks of fill.

For me the lowest points were the comments about how many times Julia would have her hair done during the campaign and the extended coverage of the door that she would walk through announce the election. This was almost beaten by the shots of the empty room from which Tony Abbott would make his speech.

The only amusement came from Laurie Oakes who has his nose out of joint, presumably because she chose not answer his question the day before or as one of my colleagues at work suggested because Gillard didn't clear her ousting of Kevin Rudd with Laurie first.

Can I suggest that OLO start a discussion where people can nominate their "worst/funniest election" moments relating to the media? Kevin Rudd feeding the media chooks this week is my first nomination. Masterful! He dragged them around his electorate and didn't tell them anything and so the story became about how Kevin lead them around the electorate and didn't say anything. Moving the debate because of the Masterchef final is my nomination for runner up.

Forrest Gumpp you have been so supportive of Melissa Batten (ex staffer of Belinda Neal Iguanagate) that I am letting you know that Melissa is standing for the seat of Robertson in the next election. Yes, she was in March, but then stood down when BN was rejected by her own party. Thank you Forrest for your support.

Funnily enough I have managed to avoid all nearly all news coverage of the election campaign - the first time I have endeavoured to achieve this. I've found it relatively easy, as well...It really is just so much clap-trap.

I am the original swinging voter, I vote on track record. It is abundantly clear that the Feds are out of their depth when it comes to reality over ideology.

Federally we are in financial tatters, N.S.W. is a basket case, Qld is close behind, and it has not been for lack of funds. Crappy hospitals, poor roads and infrastructure, and a trail of lies and deception culminating in the cost of taking a breath taking every cent we earn, I am beaten bruised and sick of it.

Further I am sick of the simple minded electorate that buy the lies and deception and vote these incompetents in over and over again.
I wrote a similar sentiment in another thread and a poster asked me to qualify the "simple minded electorate". I gave her the analogy of a child who burns their hand in a fire, then does it over and over again, that is what we have been doing in our states and quite possibly now federally. I struggle not to believe that half the population are imbeciles; the election result will confirm or deny that observation.

Neil Lawrence:>> both Abbott and Gillard are cardboard cut-outs. Dull, uninspired, uninspiring.

Neil I don't give a tinkers cuss as to how these figure heads present, they have a team and a plethora of policies, and one has a track record to be used in judgment. Taking into account the easy run the socialist journo fraternity has given the Labor party their failure is apparent to all, except imbeciles.

I was privy to a conversation amongst a group of women who agreed they would vote for Gillard along gender lines, later in the conversation they complained about the cost of utilities, electricity in particular, no idea that a tax on electricity comes with Gillard via a carbon tax....imbeciles.

Makes me wonder if such people would even bother to vote at all if it were voluntary SonofGloin- at least people would not be so motivated just to make a point over something that shallow and fickle.

KH, I am no political animal, and the women could vote for how curly the candidate’s hair is for all I cared in previous elections. But this one is important; the others I have been around for were more like a changing of the guard. This one is do or die for Australia.

I voted for Bob Hawke three times, he was a good politician and a good PM. In four terms he racked up a bill of $90 billion that the Howard government paid off over 4 terms and handed a surplus of $20 billion to Rudd. The Rudd government spent the $20 billion and racked up more than $90 billion in less than one term. These people are poison for Australia and people who vote on personality or party lines are imbeciles.

Agreed Son.

I wonder if they are not game to run with serious vision because that provides to much ammunition for their opponents to run scare campaigns. Change always carries risk and upheaval, any party sprouking any proposals of substance leave themselves open to a fear campaign based on worst case scenario's by those opposing them.

R0bert

Son of Gloin, and Your Majesty,

Somebody has to win the election. And once somebody has got their name on the electoral roll, yes, it is compulsory to go into the voting booth. But how you vote is secret: nobody would know if you accidentally returned an informal vote - not that I am advocating such action, of course, that might break some law or other.

So I urge all voters to be careful how they fill out their ballots. If very many people inadvertantly spoiled their vote, it might give the impression of a general dissatisfaction with all Tweedledee/Tweedledum parties.

Joe Lane

sonofgloin,

Do or die? THIS election? Well it's a shame we have no choice to make any difference... I can see almost NO difference between the two majors anymore, except on a few insignificant issues, so the election is, for the most part, just a formality to see which 'personality' is our new esteemed leader.

The Liberals would have done exactly the same thing as Labor over the past term, although we'd still have workchoices. Of course I admit that's unprovable.

Therefore, we are basically left to vote for who we like, or which team we barrack for if we're do-or-die Labor or Liberal. Either that or vote Green and stimulate the major parties out of their popularity-focused stupor to actually do more than pander to the fickle swinging voters in marginal seats and start coming up with some serious, progressive and effective policy.

Personally Loudmouth and Trashcan I'd just go straight for the jugular and vote a different party;

We can all agree by now that Labor and the Liberals (and Nationals) have eliminated themselves from deserving a vote, so I'd suggest you do what I do and look up all your candidates, and set your paper from numbers 1 to whatever, every single one of them, starting with whichever OTHER party best reflects you. That would also minimize preferences politicians would be able to throw around.

But the point, your Majesty, is who do you give your second preferences to ? Tweedledee, Tweedledum, or Tweedledummer ?

I just hope I don't get confused, at my advanced age, and muck up my ballot paper. Wouldn't it be a shame if 'Informal' gained the most votes ? Who would he/she give her/his preferences to ?

Loudmouth it's very simple- you list every candidate, and rate them from best to worst (the most effective way to control the preferencing arrangement yourself)- or you can vote 1 on the only remaining party you might actually like after doing some research (but leaving the rest means that you entrust this party with your preference), or you could just leave it blank, its up to you.

For me;

1- Greens
2- Any independents that match my important viewpoints (on say, democracy, privatization and such).
3- Single-issue parties relevant to me
4- One Nation (plenty I agree with that would make politicians take note, but plenty I dont so not too high a place)
5- Family First (same as above, though the added implication that I would support the 'stronger family/more religion' movement forces me to put them lower than ON)
THEN there are the parties I absolutely have no support for
6- Gray-voters, Fishers and Shooters (just unimportant lobbies to me to put the really bad ones lower down)
7- Communist parties
8- Libertarian Parties, other christian parties, miscellaneous Small L liberal parties
9- Democrats
10- Nationals
11- Liberals
12- Labor

You can arrange it however you want- just remember, that by voting with all numbers, every vote for a useless party HIGHER than a party you earnestly despise REDUCES the vote the second party gets, so every vote counts!