…Would it not be fair in the argument for Rudd to be resurrected as leader for the salvation of Labor to add a call for the return of John Howard to replace Tony Abbott as a hedge against negative PR of Abbott? My own answer to that question is that the reality of Abbotts negatives are currently unimportant since Gillard has so successfully shot-off the feet of Labor and so effectively that the Liberal party could be led to electoral victory by a donkey walking backwards. So the question for the future is, at what “point” will Abbott be jettisoned as the liability he really is?

"Our respondents are looking for leaders who have ability"

Fair enough, most seem to be concerned and involved in political debate .. for those not as well engaged, it's a matter of who will do less harm.

To the average not so well connected voter:

The ALP are stuck in the mode of arrogance and internalism while knowing best about everything, to the point of "let them eat cake" displays of hatred towards some of the community who dare disagree. No collective Australian feeling there, they outright and blatantly hate anyone who is ideologically different .. that's the perception anyway. Their attack mode, so well honed in opposition, is still the only thing they know, so they continually attack an impotent opposition, instead of getting on with the nation building stuff .. they just cannot let go of petty and and major hatred.

It is so obvious, so monotonous, so "negative" .. people have just turned off.

The coalition is trying to work out which of all the possible strategies is best, they all work, they will destroy the ALP/Green/indie junta, but risk having too many messages. I don't believe anyone in the community, outside the political interested, does not despise Turnbull. He is seen as a two faced self centered person, regardless of his spiel, he is not trusted by the general public.

The coalition need not win the next election, the Green Junta will lose it, and lose it by a huge margin, the public WILL have revenge, on this poisonous lot.

Trying to re-educate us and socially engineer Australia with scorn, bile and taxes, is not working.

Polling schmolling.

People are sick of polling. Changing leaders continually in a revolving door process is not going to make a difference to policies at this stage.

People are sick of the superficiality of strategy and tactics over good policy and implementation, and continual erosion of democratic principles. Changing leadership again will not change the way the economy is managed or the adherence to perpetual growth economics and lack of representation.

There is an interesting op-ed in the Australian by Peter van Onselen in which he speaks of the poisoning of the ALP by Rudd and Gillard. We will be a long time getting over the damage those two have inflicted on their party and our national politics.
On the other side of the room, the Coalition will sooner or later have to get over Abbott. He has served his purpose by pointing out just how bad are Rudd and Gillard, but he didn't win his election and has to go.
I am surprised that Turnbull gets such a negative portrayal from rpg above. To me he has more stature than any other realistic choice in the current round of leadership musical chairs. The other three, Rudd, Gillard and Abbott, don't come close.

I have never been able to fathom why people care so much about political leaders. Politicians are a grey, bland and thoroughly boring mob, and the chances of any who do have a slight streak of non-conformity of making it to leader must surely have been obliterated by the Latham disaster (which is a shame for poor old Barnaby Joyce - he's far too interesting to ever be put in charge of the levers). As a result, the leaders and the aspiring lackeys are all pretty much indistinguishable, and thoroughly uninspiring.

But in the end, it doesn't matter that the leaders are all the same: my vote is determined by policies, not who's running the party at the time. Given what a boring lot they are anyway, either political party could dress up an crash-test dummy in a suit, stick a tape recorder in his pocket for interviews and declare him their leader, and I'd still vote that party if they had better policies. And how cool would it be to be the only country in the world with an inanimate object as PM?

'Changing leaders continually in a revolving door process is not going to make a difference to policies at this stage. '

True Pelican only changing Governments would put an end to the total farce we have with the 2 current incompetent PM's (Brown and Gillard). Whitlam is looking more competent every day compared to this lot and that is aying something.

Hush your mouth Graham, we do not need you giving good advice to this lot of twits in Canberra. God knows they might take it, & somehow manage to stay in government longer.

Of course their own polling would be giving them the same answer, so I suppose you are merely rubbing it in, nasty man.

Still the preference for both Rudd & Turnbull is a worry. It shows that Ozzies will still fall for a good lie, smoothly presented.

From when the pair first came into prominence, it has been obvious to me, & many others, that they were actors, presenting a concocted persona that they believed most ozzies would like in a prime minister.

Rudd is a better actor, he seams to be able to nail that slimy smile on his face, despite what ever it is covering. He may even exceed Beattie in this ability.

We are indeed fortunate that Abbott managed to break the twins in their rush to heard us over a cliff into a carbon [dioxide] trading scheme a couple of years ago. With this tax, it will be removed, fortunately.

How much of the vote for Turnbull came from the left? I have often felt he was perhaps the best Labor leader who never was. The fact that he has great difficulty forcing the truth past his lips, but can make any lie sound plausible, makes him ideal for the job. Julia's & Ruddys efforts pale compared to him, in that area.

I would be very interested in Graham's online sample of 1108 respondents. Their location, their political predilections and backgrounds. So many things can make such polls sound realistic but which, on analysis, are totally misleading. However, I add my ten cents worth to the comments today.

Stephen Smith would be a great mistake.

I feel safe in saying that those people promoting this idea would be from clearly conservative backgrounds. A stand-in appointment like Smith would be just another failure, while providing time for the Liberals to reorganise with someone worthwhile, however few and far between they are in that camp. Just look at the Coalition front bench.

Smith is compromised, weak and colourless, indecisive and not any sort of a leader. Also, the smallest swing in his state would see him lose his seat in the next election. He is from WA, after all. No one in Labor is safe in that state. No politician is safe anywhere. A great opportunity for a clean sweep of the awful bunch of hacks, from both parties that is. What Australians would give for an alternative option, but certainly not the Greens, perhaps also heading for extinction.

Malcolm Turnbull is the only politician on that side of the fence that has my respect. He is a decent person, has values, an idea of what Australia should be, leads a normal life albeit privileged through hard work and in an international environment would credibly represent Australia as a professional. How many others meet that criteria.
May I suggest that there are none. How badly served we are.

On the Labor side, Doug Cameron has my vote but perhaps far too honest to receive the numbers through rank and file support though. Not devious enough. But an honest and worthy man who would never compromise his values, making him somewhat unique in any country in 2011.

Cont...

cont....

Gillard is finished, has been since day one. There is no force in existence that can resurrect her into a marketable Prime Minister
A big mistake by Arbib, Shorten and Howes and her little clutch of US / Israel sycophants to whom she is totally indebted, people like Emerson, Danby and the self-serving Melbourne bunch.

Gaining insidious influence by default.

Rudd has no value now, a wet firecracker with no sparkle. Allowing himself to be overthrown by such a mob confirms that. He should have told them all to leave his office and stop bothering him back in 2010. Except for Lindsay Tanner, all the other knives were firmly planted in his back. Had he raised his voice, they would have scattered like frightened sheep. He gave in. No courage then, therefore no respect by the people.

His contribution to our history is over..

Abbott has a higher rating than Gillard, courtesy of Gillard and nothing else. He is a misfit, there by one vote. Hardly a mandate. A political embarrassment. Intelligent but absolutely devoid of common sense. Pell’s puppy. No ideas, no initiatives. If he is the best....?

A quick dose of realism. Imagine Abbott on the International stage?

I would anticipate that the groundswell would be extremely high for a new party with decent principles, worthy policies for all Australians, equitably sharing the financial load, solving current problems and future needs. An independent country with its own objectives, making decisions for Australia and nobody’s lackey.

Time for a major change

It would be interesting to know the political preferences of those who prefered Abbott to Rudd compared to those who prefered Turnbull to Rudd. I'd then love to know the number of those who preferred labour who would actually vote for Turnbull ahead of Rudd.

Interesting article

Does it really matter who currently leads either the liberals or labour?

Most of them, from both sides of politics, are like a bunch of long-tailed cats in a room full of rocking chairs. They will squawk what is needed, when needed, not a great deal of talent here.

Of all of the cats, Turnbull has demonstrated the best experience, a successful businessman, thus experience to know how to run an organisation properly.

Politicians in this country are similar to what we currently see in the U.S., basically a farce.

My two cents worth

rexw nails it .. "Malcolm Turnbull is the only politician on that side of the fence that has my respect."

That's Turnbull's problem, he appeals to the ALP voters, because he is really what they want, and yet there is no one in the ALP who measures up.

Whenever you see people questioning why do people scorn him, they are invariably people who would not vote Liberal if the world was ending.

Tony will be a good leader, regardless of the ALP spit and poison.

It's just their manner, to destroy .. they are what they are and nothing good comes of the ALP anymore.

I used to vote Labor when young, now they are a different mob, all ex-union bosses and lackeys who are used to power and not being questioned.

Kevin said he had a plan, then it turned out, he didn't so he picked 1,000 of the best and brightest except he didn't, he picked easily led idiots and he asked them to help develop a plan, but he already had the answers and they were wrong.

4 years later and the ALP still cannot turn a trick, because they never had one.

Let's face it, they have turned from a representative party into a self obsessed bunch of "power for the sake of it" fools.

Malcolm Turnbull is a Goldman Sachs accolyte.He like Al Gore, believes
in carbon trading the new derivative which the elites can use to screw the poor/middle class even more.The ETS is open to scamming way beyond the Fannie May/Freddie Mac debacle.How will such a nebulus scam be policed?

Environmentalism is the new guilt complex being used to make the masses submit to more debt slavery.In the past the Catholic Church used guilt of our own sexuality to oppress us.Now it is the religion of Anthropological Global Warming which has morphed into "climate change' to cover all options. Well guess what? Climate has been constantly changing for 5 billion years!The earth has not warmed since 1998 even with expoential increases in CO2 by China and the rest of the planet.

The best argument I now get from the believers is,"Well it cannot be good for the planet putting all this pollution into the atmosphere." This is not peer reviewed science,just value judgements based on optical and sensual imputs.

Arjay,

"...just value judgments based on optical and sensual imputs."

Like not being able to see the main stadium in Beijing due to it being obscured by a curtain of smog.

Certainly,in that situation my optical and "sensual imputs" would inform me that I'm not supposed to be able to see the atmosphere that I'm inhaling.

There was graffiti scrawled on a wall on the approach to Sunshine railway station in the mid 1970's":
"DON'T VOTE, IT ONLY ENCOURAGES THEM"
It stayed there until the 1990's, it may still be there for all I know.

Arjay,
It's a fine line, the elites are also fostering the climate of mistrust of National governments and institutions in order to make us dependent upon extra territorial or global entities .
What they're doing is atomising society by creating all these artificial fault lines around non issues like climate change, refugees, racism, gay marriage etc.
Nobody can agree with anyone on a range of issues, I might share with my neighbour a view on Gay marriage, but we'd disagree on irregular migration, neither are issues which are crucial to the progress of the nation, yet the likelihood of he and I becoming political "comrades" is remote.
We need to promote leaders who are willing to look at what would be progressive policy for the Nation, that is to say the people, not the state, which is now no more than an organ of the NWO.

Who is Steven Smith?