This morning SMH a paper showing some balance, has yet another leak.
For me at least it proves the need, desperate need, for reform.
My party must not remain in the hands of factions.
It is critical of Rudd's style in government, partly a shared concern.
And it puts the blame for the Leaks against Gillard on Rudd.
Ignoring? this whole story , its leaking from within the right faction of the party, along with the deliberate snubbing of Rudd, is just as bad.
If my party is to be time and again white anted by those faction heads.
May I ask these few things?
The supposed Rudd leaks, was anything he leaked about Gillard not true?
Without them,no happiness from me here, would we have any different opinions of Gillard.
If the anti Rudd faction insists he should not return, are they going to put up another or?
Ride Julie Gillard and my party into the ground leaving ALP supporters to suffer.
Last, those heads, the power brokers who own the power of those behind them.
Are you proud of putting your interests before the party's.
And in what way is my proud trade union movement benefiting by you ripping the guts our of both it and Labor?

The United States does not have compulsory voting either in the primaries or the general elections. The percentage of voters voting is much smaller in the primaries than the general elections. In the primaries in some cases the most ideological focussed candidates have been selected. They often are unacceptable to the general electorate.

Since there is no national law determining the primary voting regulations it varies widely in different states. In some states anybody can vote to select the candidates for a party even if they don't belong to that party. In other states one has to belong to a party to vote in that party's primary. To belong to a party all one has to do is register as a member of the party. There are no dues.

In Iowa there is a caucus system. Voters from a party will get together in various groups. Each group will discuss and agree on the candidate they will support. The results from the separate caucuses are not merged.

In Connecticut where I lived there was a convention followed by a primary. I was a delegate to the convention since I was a Democratic town councilman. At the convention candidates are nominated. If a candidate got a majority then that candidate would appear on the primary ballot as the party endorsed candidate. Candidates with between 10% and 50% would appear on the ballot as non-endorsed candidates. Candidates with less than 10% could still get on the ballot through petition. I was going to make a speech endorsing a candidate. Before I made the speech several party functionaries told me that Healy, a party identity, did not want a primary fight so I was pressured not to make my speech. I made it anyhow, and my candidate did not get 10%. He wound up endorsing the candidate with a majority. It was a thoroughly disgusting process.

having been political for a long time
the whole process is as david put it
""a thoroughly disgusting process.''

but much is to blame to media
9 reported the nuke thing passed by two thirds
10 reported again in a clever way

abc then said the same numbers as the gay thing
too much of a co-incidence

i noted the gallery appeard full when camerion spoke
but gradulally got more empty after that..as each speaker spoke

but all gouing to a party is for
is to sit and listen..then vote by absurdly antiquated method[designed to put on a show]..in lue of networking or talking..or actually exchanging info p-olicy[to wit the reason for meting]

but they aqre all the same
i have watched the same farce at many meetings..[to rally lol..the faithfull][..to bolster the esteam of the 'workers';at voting day or capital raising events

regardless unanswerd was the questions

was nbn partyy 'policy'
was the war on smokers..party policy'
was pink batts party policy,...no carbon tax/tyrading a party policy

in short i expect not
to wit its all show and mirrors
entertaintment for the party fatefull

to let the backroom backdoor men
run their perty party members...adendas
to serving the elite..who own all parties/media/public service

[plus so much more]..education finance
religeon war...others lands
others food others minerals
others water

bah the party system is rotted
from the knees up..stands on feet
of complicite malable..decieving..illinformed feet of clay

have a nice day eh

Those two posts while interesting are remote from the threads subject.
I do dislike our preferential system.
It rewards failure EB Wilkie running and winning on preferences of party's unlike him in every way.
Worth noting, shaking my head in my opinion, England is considering going to our system.
One vote one value is my wish.
My last post has now become the subject in our national papers.
I have dug my trench, will not retreat, I stand against the faction I am part of.
The gutless leak that Rudd leaked, is infamous, and the equal AT LEAST of his perceived crime.
It comes via what I hoped was dead in my party, the Sussex Street, thoughts we matter more than the party.
My party can rant and rave it can shore up Gillard till the numbers stack a wanted way.
But it can not constantly divert attention like this.
Rest assured power brokers, your on going actions are heart breaking and betray the ALP.
Gillard is unloved, she leads an unloved Abbott.
These two are less likely to survive than the Greek economy.
Grab two Commonwealth car drivers, do not bother picking, put one in the job of each above and watch the polls.
Wait for Julia to bounce and its NSW again.

Malcolm is asking Toni for a vote on same sex tango. Toni is in the wrong religion for such activities.

Turnbull however has some understanding of numbers and politics Abbott only says NO.
If the Mad Monk insists on his Church's path he wedges his party.

On subject the squabble Gillards supporters bought on, deliberately ignoring the man who said sorry, and who won for Labor in dark times.
Was is and always will be at least,more in my view, the equal of Rudd's supposed leaks.
Remember those leaks, the Gillard road train is most upset because they are true.

It seems we wait poorly lead till the numbers stack up for other than Rudd.
Even if it is on the apposition benches.