I don't think Rudd would welcome the comparison with Keating. While I think Keating may have been the best treasurer we have ever had, he was a disaster as a Prime Minister. Being Prime Minister requires a lot more than intelligence and a cutting and glib wit.

Rudd will have seen the mistakes Keating made and probably learnt from them. He will have also seen the mistakes that Wayne Goss made while he was his Chief of Staff. Some of the mistakes were the same ones.

Rudd does seem to understand that winning elections is partly about the battle for Australian culture. He's the only Labor politician to be trying to engage as a Christian and to take on some of the Christian Right. Beazley has the credentials to do this too, but he hasn't attempted anything.

I suspect Rudd's problem will be going beyond the fashionable issues. If he sticks with the things where he is comfortable, such as Foreign Affairs, then he's probably heading for a hiding.

I feel deeply sorry for the Labor Party, as they seem to be in a quandary with no solution. We have moved from a society with large factories (now relocated to China) with unionised workers, to individual contractors with no interest in unions. As unionism seems to be the essence of the Labor party, this means that they are on a steadily downward path, and it matters little who leads them.

Take no notice of the media, who have a vested interest in change (it makes news), and no interest in anything but themselves. I don't take any notice of media opinion polls, as they never offer any evidence for their conclusions. The only thing I watch is the odds at Centrebet, as they HAVE to be right. Current odds for the next federal election are:

Howard $1.40

Labor $2.75

As I see it, the basic problem the Labor party has was typified by the Tampa issue, where the strongest supporters of Howard were the Labor party's heartland. The party seems to be divided between a heartland and an elite, with the elite in charge. Until they sort this out they may well remain in perpetual opposition federally.

I would agree with Rudd that the next federal election could be the most important for a generation, as a success by Howard will cement the changes he has introduced. That is why I think it is so important that Labor be defeated, so we can reduce wages and build shareholder value. With the end of the age of cheap oil there has to be a considerable cut in the standard of living of the ordinary person, and the sooner the better.

GY, yes it will be interesting to see if the Boy from Nambour can think outside the square of adversarial oppositionality (ie, what Howard et al are doing wrong) and come up with 'visionary' policies and issues.

While he may be an ex Goss cabinet boss, playing with social and economic policy on a national scale and with the Murdoch Media requires an ability to tap into the psyche of the electorate.

This is a skill few Labor leaders have had in opposition.

It’s been a long time since Labor had to win government from the starting blocks.

Yes Rudd is a major God botherer and conservative.

• Howard versus Rudd?

Now this introduces a whole new set of variables.

Howard could get away with the 'he's got no ticker’ slag at the Bomber.

Latham was much too juvenile and dug his own political grave.

Will it matter what Rudd proclaims or does if you have an electorate that is just sick of Howard, Iraq, AWB and Bush?

Lastly I must declare that I went to the same High School as Rudd and Swan and it wasn’t exactly a school that was focused on grooming future political leaders. But perhaps it was?

• Have you seen this piece? -:

Labor ahead no matter who leads: poll

"A new poll has put Labor ahead of the Coalition no matter who wins the party's leadership ballot tomorrow".
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200612/s1802994htm

"Well then we should have shown far more appreciation for Paul Keating as an intelligent leader"

I actually think that history will judge Keating kindly, as one
of the few politicians who understood the global picture, economics
and our role in the world. What he lacked was people skills,
which Howard has, thats why he wins. Howard can read the electorate
fairly well and knows which emotional buttons to push, something
that Keating simply wasn't concerned with.

IMHO if we should land up with a Beazley Govt, we'll go back to the
past, which is not what Australia needs for the future.

So I hope that Rudd wins, as if we should land up with a labour
Govt, with a smart leader there is at least some hope. The election
of George W shows us the dangers of having a dumb dumb as leader,
no matter the advisors etc. Voting for so called experience means
voting for more of the past and I don't think that Kim has such
a great record that I want more of that past.

Kevin Rudd is a career bureaucrat,what sort of mind set would he bring to the table of business?Julia Gillard is an avid socialist.Are we going to see a Swedish model of high taxes which punishes small businesses?

I fear the pedulum under the auspices of this duo,will just swing the other way.The Coalition are making positive ground in IR reform,however there neeeds to be a delicate balance that does not give total power to the employer.The Coalition could very well lose the next election over IR reform and with an incompetent Labor Party at the helm,we will see discipline disolve and economic anarchy again reign supreme.

Well perhaps its time for greedy small businessmen to start having a grander vision of this nation?