Dear RobP,

Personally I believe that all governments
need at least two terms before they should
be judged. Especially in the present
circumstances where the global economic crisis
has undermined the time-frame to achieve
their agenda.

We gave the previous government repeated 3 year term
opportunities - until in the end - the electorate
lost patience.

Foxy do not fear I have never let you down.
This government is going to get its second term.
Most people think as you do.
I have studied the form judged the horses, some are either standing the wrong way around or have an unfortunate head.
In my life it has often been my unhappy job to tell my party it has lost an election weeks before it took place.
Not this time.
Tony Abbott/Barnaby Joyce.minister for tobacco interests and all, this election is going to be very bad for the extremist pirates running the Liberal party.
Trust me.
And let us not devalue our achievements rarely has a government done so much while the senate was in the hands of fools.
Every conservative leader post ww2 used fear lies headlines in their media outlets, well they never owned them but controlled them.
Our national news paper is unfortunately a front for them ,but we will return to Parliament I promise and just maybe three terms too.

Foxy,

I agree that Governments usually need at least 2 terms to get their agendas through to the point where they can be judged. As long as the current Government doesn't do anything too radical (a la Whitlam) they'll get re-elected for sure IMO. The current staffing of the Opposition front bench will only reinforce that outcome.

How long Labor goes after that will depend on how Rudd/Gillard/whoever can reinvent and/or recalibrate the party over the journey. It will also depend on what new talent the Liberals can bring into their midst and promote to the voters.

For years us country bumpkins couldn't see the difference between The Nationals and Liberals. Bob Katter left The Nationals because he is different. Barnaby Joyce is different. He says what he means and he means what he says.
When no one else was prepared to stand up to the gullibles and their scare about harmless CO2, Barnaby said what many of us felt.
Here in the country we have to have balance. There is no such thing as an easy source of funds when times are tough. We know what it is to budget to achieve balance.
So does Barnaby Joyce.

Not much of a tactic to play the man boys. Need more than this childish focus on the frontline foibles of others to hamper a man who says what he thinks and has half the country asking the same questions; particularly --why the rest of Canberra can't do the same when the spending to save game is over . thenextelection.blogspot.com

Hanrahan,

There's more to it than playing the man which, in my case, was only skin deep. Now, Barnaby doesn't resile from calling it as it is, why can't we do the same? The point behind the Addams Family quip is that it was a dysfunctional and extremely eccentric family. Is a future government with them at the helm what the country wants? Or needs? Not to my way of thinking.

Pauline Hanson said exactly what she thought too, but did that qualify her to get into a position to implement them? Barnaby can get the issues onto the agenda, fair enough. But can he solve them? That's the important question.