Nairbe wrote
"Labor have only themselves to blame though as they could have gone to war on these points instead of fighting each other and having an unnecessary leadership change. Poor administrative leadership and inability to cover up or even turn it to their own advantage like Howard did with children overboard may yet cost them government."

I think the "behind the scenes" Kevin Rudd had taken on a life of it's own. His obssession with the failed Copenhaven affair disconnected him from the financial crisis & domestic involvement. I Suspect Julia Gillard, who was already responsible for 3 portfolios (Super ministry)& the ones that were the major players in the stimulus had probably had a gutful of doing his job as well.
Rudd's bad behaviour & dominant rebellion with inside mediators it was becoming more & more evident that something had to give, & Rudds obssesive demeanor was not one of compromise.
Untimely as it was, I think what they done was a culmination not a choice.

For me, we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't. We're not choosing leaders, we're choosing who we dislike the least.

Labor has a tradition for being good with the social policies, but being poor on the financial management of those policies. The Liberals have a tradition of being very fiscally efficient, but of slashing not only excess, but many socially oriented policies.

Currently, there's a significant lack of talent on both sides, each pawing for popularity, neither with a real "plan" other than gaining that popularity.

The mining industry, for a miserable few million in advertising, convinced the Australian public that they would lose on a mining tax, and the Australian people bought it hook, line and sinker....it's US that had them over a barrel! It's not as though they can go somewhere else to get the stuff! So for a few million in advertising, they won 20 billion PER YEAR, and forced a change (I predict) in government. That's not a bad return for your money, is it?

Rudd had the right idea, but dumb timing. He should have kept his mouth shut on that one until after the election, and then with another 3 years in office and time to develop some political balls and commitment to the concept in his team, make an announcement then. But politically, to make such an announcement at the end of a term in office, facing an election, and the team obviously unprepared, was suicide.

We're electing self-serving spokespeople of the oligarchs. That's the political choice...who we honor by bestowing ministerial authority upon them, to wine and dine with the powerful and influential, be put in their place, and then told what to recite to us. Enjoy the good life, and basically, do as you're told.

To bring back "government", bring back the regulation of banking and business. But while there is no regulation, then there is no government, other than that of over the people, but not over business. In that scenario, business rules government, and thus, rules the people.