I don't generally favour changing leaders this close to an election, except in extreme circumstances. The ALP are probably in extreme circumstances and I think if I were in the Labor caucus I'd be voting for Rudd.

Labor desperately needs a leader who can promote the key issues. I think Beazley has passed the point where he is capable of doing that. I saw him speak at the Brisbane Institute about a month ago. He appeared to be on auto-pilot. Afterwards just about everyone was saying what a poor performance it had been.

Beazley appeared to be trying to enunciate a new policy position targetting families. I gather that he had chosen the Institute rather than the other way around. This was presumably a speech in the mould of the Howard "headland" speeches that he gave in the lead-up to the 1996 election. The point of this type of speech is to establish some policy credibility, but not to say anything that you can be criticised for. It then works in tandem with a small target strategy. When the leader is criticised for having no policies, the "headland" speeches are referenced.

So, getting a speech like this right, and selecting the right audience for it is critical. One reason the speech was criticised by the audience was because it was about families (defined losely as couples with kids) and the BI audience is well past that stage of their lives.

Rudd might be cold-hearted and lacking in the "common touch", but as my local member I've seen him speak at plenty of community functions, and he exhibits just the right touch. Presumably he, and his advisors, would have made a better fist of the BI speech, which suggests they would handle many other things better.

I have to agree with you on this one Graham. I'm not
looking for leaders that I love as they are warm and fuzzy.
I'd rather look up to leaders who are intelligent, even
if I agree to disagree with them on issues.

IMHO Rudd is by far the smarter of the two and Kim would
make a great Santa at Christmas time, surely loved by
all the kiddies etc, but there is a huge difference between
that and leading a Govt

Well then we should have shown far more appreciation for Paul Keating as an intelligent leader ..Australias best PM in my veiw.

As for the Beazley/Rudd scrap..Rudd seems to a fresher more 'on topic, on task' approach..does that mean the electorate will overlook his obvious lack of experience in favour of the more travelled and more 'portfolied' Beazley? Beazley does have the common touch about him, even his lack of spark cant negate his value in this area.

Im inclined to think stick with Beazley, Rudd is unproven and its wether he can convince voters that theyre vote wont be wasted on him in the end.He has to prove he has the political toughness and acumen to win the voters.
I dont think he can, not enough time.

"Well then we should have shown far more appreciation for Paul Keating as an intelligent leader ..Australias best PM in my veiw."

I hate how Howard keeps bringing up the interest rates with impunity. The recession was global. Everyone who knows anything about this understands this, but the Coalition still uses it to dupe the ignorant Australian public.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/the-real-reasons-why-it-was-the-1990s-recession-we-had-to-have/2006/12/01/1164777791623.html

"Of the 18 OECD countries of reasonable size and development, 17 experienced a recession in the early 1990s — a similar situation to the mid-1970s and early 1980s global recessions."

Yes Steel,

The Libs have made a meal out of their economic 'success' but it should be noted it came off the back of the groundwork Labor set down up to ,during and after the recession.


That you and I have to highlight this point is rediculaous in my book.It goes back to the heart of the problem in the Labor Party at present.

Why isnt Beazley out there driving all these things home to the voter?
This is his job..reminding the electorate of why and how they been duped lied too etc.

The 'children overboard'..AWB..Iraq..GST..IR reforms and on it goes.

Labors job is to clear up the misinformation, lies and ommissions of the Liberals..

They barely touched this.

There is something I find particularly uneasy in engaging in a comparison of Rudd or Beazley in that neither of them has really delivered anything of substance before.

Labor have been on a holding pattern for years. A new vision will require more than just a change in leadership - it will need something groundbreaking, something innovative.

In many ways we may just be comparing who is the best captain to man a sinking - or an already sunk ship.

6 months of post caucus-election / analysis of whether or not they got it right is not something I'm looking forward to.