As the author says:

Julia, we’re just not that into you. He, she, it, they, are just not that into you. What part of ‘not’ don’t you understand? We don’t need any more opinion polls. We weren’t that keen on you in the first place, otherwise you would have won a majority in the last federal election.

Therefore it follows that this is also true:

Tony, we’re just not that into you. He, she, it, they, are just not that into you. What part of ‘not’ don’t you understand? We don’t need any more opinion polls. We weren’t that keen on you in the first place, otherwise you would have won a majority in the last federal election.

Ho hum. Here we go again.

Look, I have been disappointed with Ms Gillard's stint as Prime Minister, too. But at least I am realistic enough to accept that drinking from a poisoned chalice is likely to be injurious to one's health. And that if there are enough people holding that chalice to your lips, the chances are that every so often you will be forced to take a sip.

The problem occurred at election time. Anyone who thinks that Mr Abbott would have had any more success managing a coalition of independent nobodies with aspirations only for themselves and the seventeen people in their electorate to whom they owe favours, has political rocks in their heads.

The only answer is to accept that in Australia, a government that depends upon the random whims of a couple of country hicks is no government at all. Rather than constantly demonizing the holder of the ticking time bomb, we should send ourselves back to the polls, quick sharp. And if that results in a Liberal government, so be it, we will no doubt get what we deserve.

But this process of targetted destruction of one individual is having an appalling effect on the political structure of this country - which was nothing to get excited about before. The institution is already notorious for the expediency and self-interest of its membership, and any residual respect for its role is being eroded daily. We should consciously move the debate away from personalities, and concentrate on the bigger picture.

Yeah, I know. Fat chance of that. We prefer to hit people when they're down, don't we. It's so much easier to write articles like this, for one thing. No thought or reflection required.

But Rudd or Abbott would be worse.

24/7 Kevin ignored most of his political colleagues and bullied public servants with 4am phone calls. Does anyone think Rudd would bother to consult the Greens and Independents - in this hung Parliament?

Meanwhile Abbott is a political pole apart from the Greens and Independents. Abbott exhibited intolerant rightwing tendencies when he was a henchman of the Howard Government.

Go on, just admit it Tess, you don't really like Julia do you.

This rant of an article is unfair and if the author must give vent to her rabid denunciations I'd rather she didn't speak collectively by using the term "we're".
I also have grown increasingly disenchanted with Gillard during her ascension, but that's because she does not espouse Labor values; but then neither did Rudd. There was an interesting talk on Radio National this morning wherein they discussed the fact that political machinations, misdeeds and assassinations have been par for the course in Australian politics forever, and that no one bats an eyelid when it's a man wielding the knife, so why should Gillard be demonised for her ostensible betrayal? As if any member of the party would have rejected the overtures of the backroom boys, or couldn't have easily rationalised and been persuaded that it was all for the good of the party.
I remember being nauseated by Rudd and his incongruous conservatism and blossoming megalomania and capitulation to popular fickleness after he'd received a mandate. I rejoiced when a female Prime Minister was appointed at last, though I also rued the circumstances on her behalf. In hindsight I'm sure she'd agree she'd have been better off letting Rudd lead the party to ruin and to have taken the leadership with a clean slate. And because she's had to lead the party and amend policy from a position of perpetual weakness, compromising all the way while her handlers fret and fuss over her equally perpetual makeover, she's deemed incompetent and worse in this vile article from someone who owes her at least a modicum of comradeship. Gillard may hobble away on one shoe, but I hope the author does herself an injury on her stilettos.
Gillard might have made a great Prime Minister under more favourable circumstances--though her espoused ideology needs a rethink--but she's paying the price for trying to right a party in disarray.
Considering the enormous pressure she's under, I think she's acquitting herself with great forebearance and dignity--especially as compared with the boganesque tirade on show here.

Sorry Julia is not going anywhere, she has a nation to run,