It's obvious from many of the posts on this forum
that many people are dissatisfied with both Julia Gillard
and Tony Abbott as the only choices we have currently
for Australia's Prime Minister.
I thought it may be interesting to see what people
thought of Malcolm Turnbull as a possible alternative.

I would be interested to hear the pros and cons.

Thank You.

lexi,
Am sure Gillard will resign after the election, so that will be an opportunity for Turnbull to take over. Seems that many Labor supporters want him. But i cannot see him being any better than Gillard as party leader. Of course he would have to change camps, but has always been defacto Labor anyway and am sure the Libs will have the numbers to spare him. Labor is welcome to him.

Abbott may not have much, what we call chrisma, but while ever he leads in the polls the Libs will not change him. Although i am a little disappointed he has compromised a bit on human induced glabal warming. His original alalysis was spot on.

Yes Lexi, I am a fan of Malcolm Turnbull taking over from Tony Abbott as leader of the Liberal Party.
Unfortunately however, while the Liberals seem to be on a roll because of the discontent with the Labour Party, I doubt they would consider a change of leadership any time soon.

Turnbull is a much less conservative politician than Abbott, to say the least, and I like that in a politician.

He speaks very well, and would not cause many people to cringe at times as with the strong Australian accent of the Prime Minister, or the bumbling, hesitant speech of Abbott.
This may seem nit-picking, but these people are supposed to represent our country in many other countries, and in very formal state occasions, and their manner of speech and the way they present themselves is important.

Apart from that, I don't like Tony Abbott's history with his very religious background and the way he has discussed women's issues in the past.
I don't believe religion and politics should mix too closely, as some decisions may be made that are not as secular as they should be in a secular country like Australia.

I will remain concerned about any women's and religious issues such as abortion and euthanasia, should he ever become Prime Minister.....shudder...!

Dear Banjo,

Turnbull is a Liberal through and through. He will
not be switching parties. As for Tony Abbott -
he's not popular enough as the possible PM. Don't
forget Mr Abbott lost the last election due to his
lack of negotiating skills with the Independents.
Turnbull would have won that election. He's a better
negotiator.

Dear Suse,

Malcolm Turnbull is a great communicator. You may not
agree with everything he says - but what he says makes
sense because he explains it so well and he knows what
he's talking about. He's also willing to compromise
to achieve results that he feels will be for the good
of the country and what's impresive is that he's
willing to accept ideas that he feels make sense - even
though they don't come from within his own party ranks.
He is a leader - that more people would accept. One
that would do us all proud.

Lexi, when describing Turnbull, if you substitute con man for communicator, I could agree with you.

Perhaps the reason so many Labor folk like him is that he is a Rudd clone. Both of them are too stupid to know which way is up, look how they fell fore the global warming scam, & didn't have enough sense to get off the train before the crash.

He has proved himself to be in the business for his benefit, definitely not ours, & will never lead the Libs again. They have woken up to him. The only libs who supported him were those who, like Labor with Rudd & Gillard, didn't give a damn about good government, just winning. Winning with Turnbull would be no better than having Rudd or Gillard.

Why are you lefties so attracted to shonks, with a good line of gab. Just look across the Pacific, & you see another con man who won the lefties hearts, & is destroying the economy of the country that feeds him. The payola under Obama has almost reached banana republic levels.

Millionaire socialists should be viewed with great suspicion, & avoided at all costs.

Turnbull would be a better choice than Abbott. With his 20 or so pledges in blood, it's not going to be a good argument at election time.
Being a religious fanatic, and not a good track record when it comes to women's issues, makes Abbott look bad.
Abbott being in favor of the 1% can only turn people off.
I definitely think the opposition can do better in their choice of leader.
The Abbott opposition will not debate economy, and this alone will turn people away when the chips are down.
The govern for the rich and let the rest tag along, mentality makes abbott a dangerous man, possibly the worst in the liberal history.

I agree with you, Lexi. Many people could handle the Liberals, but
they don't want Abbott, including me,.

Abbott has shown poor judgement, time and time again and the hand
of the Catholic Church is never far away to guide him, even if for
political reasons he's gone very quiet about that. That was not
the case when he was in Govt.

Abbott is simply a shin kicker and Labour are giving him plenty of
shins to kick. We need a PM who shows good judgement.

Hasbeen, you should count your lucky stars that Obama won. The
alternative was Sarah Palin as vice president.

One single issue saw Turnbull replaced by one vote.
Lexi maybe we are not Representative of the real world.
I think we are.
It already has been said Labor voters want Turnbull.
But is that the only folk who want him, and why.
He here is said to be Socialist, maybe some can not under stand that word.
Even Abbott's CONSERVATIVES are in part Socialist.
As near as we will ever get to it on both sides, consider us against the USA, education health care and much more.
The single issue?
Climate change.
OH yes carbon tax, but both sides once agreed, this is the best way to do it.
Even now,but much less than just a year ago, some conservatives are ignoring their party's intention, to cut by the same amount, as Labor.
Turnbull would be no Friend to Labor or the unions,but he will be more civilized.
Abbott powers on fueled by Julia Gillards inability to sell her self or her policy's.
But in the streets, my e mails,from unionists and Labor activists, she is being torn to pieces.
At the same time Abbott, even in his own camp, is frightening people.
So Turnbull is my wish and tip.
ALP thoughts that we would never elect Abbott, as a single defense for keeping Gillard, ignoring better polling was the reason for knifing Rudd, is blindingly silly.
First team to change leader has the election won, but has to confront a new leader on the other side.
Banjo, Turnbull Abbott and Costello all once thought about the ALP.
Turnbull will never go Labor.

Yabby, I think even Gillard would be less bad than Obama, & that's saying something, coming from me.

Palin would be a breath of fresh air compared to both of them.

Turnbull is a Glodman Sachs boy and will continue to enslave us with the CO2 tax.How about looking beyond the image and look at the substance of their policies ?

Wow, this started sooner than I predicted. Flooding the forums with pseudo support for Turnbull by heartbroken ALP voters. I don't think & sincerely hope no other coalition supporters will fall for this faking of preferring Turnbull.
Now that ALP voters are looking straight into the gun barrel they're hoping that they can de-stabilise the coalition by drumming up Turnbull. As they say politics is a dirty game & dirtiest players are in the ALP.

First I think Labour voters have an extremely bad judgement when it comes to choosing their leaders. Look at the last three which makes me wonder why they want to tell the Liberals who to select.

Secondly Malcolm Turnbull was a diaster as oppostion leader and made no ground on Rudd as PM. He was takin in by the gw scam along with Rudd and Gillard. Abbott saw Rudd off and is now a country mile in front of our current PM. Unless the Liberals believed inself destructing they would leave Malcolm Turnbull where he is. He is a brough man but blinded by dogma which even the electorate can see through. Few opposition leaders have been as successful as Abbott despite it getting right up the nose of Labour supporters, the ABC and Getup. Suck it up guys.

Not much value in a couple of those posts.
It was not members who picked Gillard and Rudd.
Not members who picked Abbott Turnbull, Nelson, Howard.
And in a day yet to come, after Abbott slips over his inability to think other than negativity.
It will not be Labor voters who pick Turnbull again.
Palin? hasbeen , you have to be kidding!
She would give your day Lilly's root rot!

I'm quite amazed at some of the responses.
Accusations are flying with very little
evidence to support the assertions being made.

First and foremost Malcolm Turnbull has taken
very conservative positions in many areas.
People seem to have forgotten that Mr Turnbull
significantly watered down the CPRS legislation.
His amendments included, among others,
significant increases in compensation to
polluting industries.

Based on his conservative outlook it could be
very possible that watering down the current
carbon package could definitely be on the agenda
of a Turnbull government. I can't imagine any
scenario where Malcolm Turnbull would strengthen
climate laws as Prime Minister. So you conservative
posters out there don't know what you're talking
about and you are mis-judging the man.

Mr Turnbull is also conservative in other areas as
I stated earlier.

1) He recently stated that the Fair Work Bill has
gone "too far."
2) As leader of the Coalition he argued for the
re-introduction of Temporary Protection Visas
and for off-shore processing for all asylum seekers.
3) He continues to oppose means testing for the
private health rebate, the Minerals Resource and Rent
Tax, and the NBN.

I can't understand why some of you are so dead set
against the man. Take a look at the ministers who
would come with him. Based on his shadow cabinet
when he was leader - a Turnbull prime ministership
would result in a cabinet including -
Eric Abetz, Christopher Pyne, Peter Dutton,
George Brandis, Warren Truss. And certainly Sophie
Mirabella, Cory Bernardi, and Michaelia Cash would
be given positions of power as well.

So what's the fuss?

The man is an excellent negotiator, he's a realist and
knows when and how to negotiate to achieve what is
necessary. He explains things in a way that makes
sense - and all in all is impressive. Although he is
conservative - even on same-sex marriage - (although
he's pro - he understands the reasons some people
are anti) - so he's not agressive about things.
You know where you stand with him.

The only reason Abbott is popular is they havn't released any policies as yet, there isn't any thing to judge them on.
They are dreading the economics, of it all.
Big Joe has been very much in the shadows.
Abbott is the only one that makes any kind of sound, and then it's not on economics.
It's more like he's been digging around for some kind of slime.
Trying to crucify someone without a trial.
He will do anything except mention politics.
What he can't get around, is the economy is going along quite well. Considering all the bumps and pitfalls that has been going on around the world.

Well said Lexi.

Maybe many Labour supporters on this site are too worried by the obvious threat that a very bright Mr. Turnbull may be the saviour of the Liberal party?

If Runner and Hasbeen support Abbott and dislike Turnbull, then that's definitely all the more reason I need to vote for Turnbull :)

the economy is going along quite well,
579,
Are you of sufficient integrity to admit that this ok economy is to a large extent due to Howards much ALP maligned GST ?
What would the present Government do were it not for cleaning out the future fund put in place by a much more competent treasurer that the present one.
There's no competence in using other peoples' money.

Yair, Turnbull? I dunno. I used to despise him bit he’s sorta grown on me.

I reckon he’s got the potential to be a good leader, ‘cept for one thing; he’s a conservative, not a progressive sustainabilityist!

Lexi, you give a pretty good outline of the man. But the crucial point is; would he be good for Australia.. for our future wellbeing…for a sustainable society?

Um….. there’s not a lot of indication that he would.

In fact if he was to be elected, he could set the sustainability cause back a long way. His intelligence and highly articulate expression could engender a strong following and entrench the same old dinosaur continuous-rapid-growth-until-we-crash-and-burn doctrine right at the time when we desperately need an entirely different political direction.

As far as I’m concerned, he’d be an excellent leader if he listened to Bob Carr, Kelvin Thomson, Dick Smith, Ian Low, etc and embraced a stable population sustainability paradigm, and a really dangerously bad leader if he didn’t.

The real economy is collapsing .I'm down by 50% this year and so are the factories next to me.Unemployment will double this year unless they drop rates immediately.

If they don't drop rates now,we will end up like Europe and the USA ie people will lose total confidence and refuse to spend or borrow money.This means we will be all fighting over fewer $ in a collapsing economy.We then spiral backwards and no amount of austerity will reverse that.

Turnbull is a banker and has their view of the monetary system of counterfeiting our currencies being all supreme.They have a scortched earth policy so they can buy up assets for cents on the dollar when it all turns to sh!t.

Remember how much ridicule john howard had to endure ? Now it's Tony Abbott's turn and, just like Howard, Abbott may just surprise all the leftie hangers on. Turnbull might just be silly enough to listen to his ego rather than Australians & wreck our future even more.
The reason why the ALP is drumming up Turnbull is that he'd more than likely turn out worse than Rudd & Gillard. This would be the boost ALP supporters are hoping for, someone even worse than what they produced.

Dear Ludwig,

Don't be concerned about Malcolm Turnbull and
question his attitude towards the environment.
I remember how impressed I was when Mr Turnbull
was Federal Environment Minister and he imposed
46 tough environmental conditions on the
then proposed Gunns pulp mill in Tassie's
Tamar Valley. I believe he set a world standard.
Anyway, here's a brief summary:

http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/notices/assessments/2007/3385/decision.html

There's more to this man then meets the eye - and he's more then
just a "banker." He knows about economics and finance - he's
was also a rhodes scholar (a proper one), and even though he
was raised as a Catholic, he's not a fanatic. All in all -
a well balanced individual. Quite refreshing, for a politician.
He may, given the chance, just bring back the party to its
original foundations.

*The real economy is collapsing .I'm down by 50% this year*

That is what happens Arjay, when you take your focus off the business
and spend your time reading conspiracy theories. More switched on
businesses run past you.

Hasbeen, if Sarah Palin is ok with you, you might as well for
for Runner as PM, they would both fill your life with religion
to keep you from being bored.

Yabby I'm almost positive that I said she'd be a breath of fresh air, I really don't remember saying much more, but now you bring it up!

If I am going to have fools depicted on my TV talking rubbish, wouldn't it be nicer to at least have someone who was attractive to look at.

But one step further, even if she was not much good, I very much doubt she could be as bad as Rudd or Gillard have been, even if she tried. Hell, even Turnbull would be better than Obama. In fact Turnbull would be good in any other country but here.

Before you start knocking someone, do look at the competition. Have you heard that fool Clinton woman talking recently? Palin could never be as ineffective or annoying.

Then have a look at that Cofi Annan pontificating on the Syrian problem. I can't believe we still give money to the fools & monkeys at that useless United Nations.

So if you want to tell me how bad Palin may be, please do tell me, compared to what.

A few more details about Mr Turnbull.
Arjay called him a "banker."

This isn't accurate.
Malcolm Turnbull in his career has been a
journalist, barrister, company legal counsel,
merchant banker, and Leader of the Australian
Republican Movement. He's also the wealthiest
Australian parliamentarian and the only
parliamentarian to have made it onto the BRW's
Rich List.

His background is impressive - and being wealthy
he can't be "bought," like some of the rest of
them. Pretty good credentials all round.

Lexi, yes I remember Environment Minister Turnbull as being reasonably green. However, that is still a very long way from being a true environmentalist. ie; realising that ever-increasing human pressure on our environment via rapidly increasing population is something that must be curtailed decisively, and that sustainability is the all-important bottom line.

Now, please allow me to dream…..

I dream of a scenario where Bob Carr is Labor leader and Mal Turnbull is Lib top dog, and they are actually competing to be the greener party.

Carr is well ahead on the principle of sustainability, but Turny is catching up fast, due to his astute intellect, wonderfully articulate presentation and somewhat green history.

They are really slogging it out, ripping into each other. The media is loving it. The general public is lapping it up and really hanging out to see who will win!

And all the time they are upping the ante…offering greener and greener policies that are getting closer and closer to genuinely sustainability.

Oh yeah…….if only!

Fwaaark that's annoying!

< ....closer and closer to GENUINE sustainability. >

*wouldn't it be nicer to at least have someone who was attractive to look at.*

Hehe Habeen, you are meant to judge them by their ability to think,
not want to shag them.

Never understimate Obama. He's one cool and smart cookie and has
worked wonders with what he has to work with. You should tune in
to Bloomberg TV a bit

The ALP shills must be desperate to change the discussion away from the corrupt, vile, lying Un-Australian liars party. Why else would they want to convince conservatives to root for Mr Gold in my Sacks?

The Mad Monk must have them soiling their diapers hehehe :)

Your dilemma is a common one among the self employed & other wealth producers & they do understand. It's the huge number of Public Servants, Academics & other hangers-on who haven't a clue. We really need to come up with a way of getting them to understand what it means to actually do something for your money.
That's why they're drumming up Turnbull to keep the Gravy Train rolling. Absolutely no thought given to people who do it tough, as long as their Super keeps accumulating at our expense.

Malcolm was self made to a degree but he married into the Lucy Hughes family which has a lot of wealth and power to this day.

Turnbull was a merchant banker and like the NAB want the CO2 tax for the benefit of his elite.I've read and heard the arrogant rantings of this man and he treats anyone with a perceived IQ of less than 100 with utter contempt.Malcolm is a NWO elitist who uses the cover of environmentalism to be all powerful.

"""
We really need to come up with a way of getting them to understand what it means to actually do something for your money.
"""

Don't worry, Individual. That time is coming. They've just about run out of our money, GFC II is on its way :)

I look forward to nothing more than to see parasites begging for a feed!

Some find it hard to be part of humanity.
But RM you wait to see some starve?
How could any one enjoy that?
Some comments look very much like the worst graffiti,the kids without skill type.

Lexi, you said...

Don't
forget Mr Abbott lost the last election due to his
lack of negotiating skills with the Independents.
Turnbull would have won that election. He's a better
negotiator.

You're kidding!

He gained most of the dozen odd seats the PM lost, but didn't lie enough to win office.

As for who leads the libs, it won't matter, all that matters is that we will soon see the back end of labor, for a very long time.

Good rid dens I say!

Butch. And if they win life won't be worth living for you.
You are set to put a team in govt; and you don't even know what they stand for.
The mad monk has no policy's.
Now the Australian people are not idiots as you suggest.
The carbon tax will slip into gear like any other tax. The only disturbance was caused by Abotts buffoonery, telling people the sky was going to fall in and the sun won't shine any more.
Only the common SLEEZE that the mad monk handles, all very careful not to mention the economy.
The economy would bring unwelcome questions that he has no answers for, let alone Big Joe.
Pledges in blood, crap, No.

Lexi,

Malcolm Turnbull is extremely popular amongst Labor voters. However, few to none of these voters would vote for a liberal government irrespective. MT was focused on presenting an alternative government when no one was listening. The telling point is how many of these well thought concepts developed under Turnbull did the Labor government adopt or even acknowledge? The answer is Nada, zero, bugger all. The liberal party was dying through irrelevance.

The comparison with Abbott's strategy and success could not be more stark. When Abbott took over, Labor was leading in the 2PP 56% to 44%, and within 6 months of aggressive focus on Labors failings TA reduced this to 50/50 and had got Rudd deposed.

If Juliar had not called a snap election and forsworn the carbon tax, Abbott would be PM now. Thanks to the dirty deals that the PM did with the greens and Wilkie, The 2PP is now 57% to 43% in favour of the coalition, unlikely to move before the next election and has stripped NSW, Queensland and Victoria of their Labor governments.

This attack, with the added spice of union corruption and FWA incompetence is only going to get stronger, and unless Juliar makes some serious changes, Abbott will be the next PM with control of both houses of parliament, with huge majorities, and a range of coalition run states.

A range of noalition run states, will only compound the sleeze factor.
Abbott was well into the sleezy deals with the greens etc; it just happens that Julia won.
Malcolm Turnbull is a very competent politician. There is a great range of voters that would rather see him as liberal leader.
The mad monk has a doubtful political path. His ability to shoot before thinking, is a worry.
We all know his ability when he was a minister in a previous govt;
His religious assertions, are guiding his ways.
This man could be very dangerous, if not destabilizing in Australia's security.

Lexi would you honestly vote Liberal if Turnbull was leader and Gillard remained leader of Labour? I find it very hard to see you voting against the sisterhood. You seem to defend or excuse every action of Gillard.

The following website may be of interest:

http://inside.org.au/tony-abbott-prime-minister/

cont'd ...

It's not what you or I think
but what logic dictates.

runner you have special ability's.
It is clear,very much so.
That you can see faults in everyones ideas.
Except your own.

579, how on earth can you expect the worlds largest carbon tax, to just, slip in.

As for no policies as you say, that won't matter because labor has lost it's right to govern and, no government could be any worse than this lot.

They still continue to stuff things up,

They are quite simp,y beyond their use by date.

Now considering the massive win they had in 07, that's a disgrace.

Support in the 20 odd percent range is usually reserved for those in opposition, not those running our country.

By all means keep supporting these fools, god knows they need all the support they can get, but its best you accept the fact that you beloved labor party is all but finished.

If the polls are to be believed, there is one thing standing between the Liberals and victory at the next election and that is Tony Abbott. If he does not start to change tack, he may find change forced upon him in the form of new leadership.

579 the ALP is not finished.
We need a scrub up, partly our own fault.
And a second shower to remove the taint from this country's worst ever opposition and its Medea Friends.
You have got it right.
If Abbott turns from the worst, most negative leader his party ever had.
To our worst ever Prime Minister,as he is promising to be.
He could be defeated by that blue cattle dog of Bill Hayden's.
And ,within 12 months, the anti carbon tax/global warming crowd, will be trying to forget the words we never will.
Global warming will be proven true, our part in it, and only the impacts unknown.

Alister Drysdale has written quite a few articles
in the Business Spectator on Malcolm Turnbull,
and Tony Abbott. Drysdale is a Business Spectator
commentator and a former senior adviser to
Malcolm Fraser and Jeff Kennett. Drysdale points
out that these days - we are "watching a political
soap opera unfold. The story of leadership
tensions is never ending."

He reminds us of Opposition leaders who never made it
to the lodge - Bill Snedden, Bill Hayden, Andrew Peacock,
John Hewson, Alexander Downer, Simon Crean, Kim Beazley,
Mark Latham, Brendan Nelson, Malcolm Turnbull, and to this
point, Tony Abbott.

Drysdale infers that the general sense of political
instability is caused by the current leadership of the
Opposition. "Tony Abbott raises the temperature and noise
level of the political debate and shows us a pretty ordinary
front bench."

Drysdale tells us that "The Opposition of course is in an
enviable position. It can paint the government "as the most
incompetent in Australia's history" and have it faithfully
reported. It can continue to oppose almost everything the
government proposes; knowing it has the public largely
onside, along with sections of the media set on regime
change - whatever the price."

"It can continue with its own "aspirational" policies that
are not set in stone. It can continue to dig up dirt files
and call for instant elections, thus adding to a general
sense of political instability."

As for the Prime Minister - Drysdale says that -
"It's about doing her job and putting the National
Interest first. It's about delivering good public policy
and hoping that translates into good politics. It's
about substance - not sham."

Drysdale confirms that there is one calm, reasoned,
and intelligent exception - to Mr Abbott's
"pretty ordinary front bench." And that is -
Malcolm Turnbull!

Lexi,

Alistair has written many opinion pieces heavily in favour of the Gillard government. Many making predictions of a comeback for Juliar and an Atrophying of Abbott. Most of his predictions have gone very wrong.

His latest essentially says that Juliar should acknowledge that her goose is cooked and continue with the "reform" agenda irrespective of the polls and media as she has 18 months more of government.

The only flaw in his logic is that while Labor might retain power for 18 months, with the dismal polls and Thomson /FWA scandal, the chance is that She will be gone long before Abbott. The next 18 months is about saving the furniture, not reducing labor to a minor party.

While the polls seemed to indicate that Labor was recovering, as reality sets in, the next challenge might provide an "anyone but Juliar" candidate.

Belly,
You are living in hopes. You put to much emphasis on the party leader. That seems to be a failing of Labor. Your party seems to think the leader is the be and end all of the party. You continuely are looking for a messiah to lead you in from the wilderness.

No one knows how Abbott will go as PM, he may well be outstanding, and there is no way of assessing that now. Look at some of our Prime Ministers and their humble beginnings. I could not see a Liberal Cabinett allowing the situation to get as bad as Labor has. The first mistake was appointing a show pony, in Rudd, with a big ego. Then tossing him aside for a female, simply to get the womens vote, another failure. Turnbull is the same mold as Rudd with an ego to match.

Sorry but the wheels have fallen off the AGW band wagon, you have picked the wrong horse there. Time will show more and more the sceptics are right. The Libs can stop the boats, as proven before, and will better manage any projects undertaken.

My wish list is to stop the boats, abolish multiculturalism and reduce immigration. Oh, and train our own skilled labour.

For those of you who are still in doubt concerning
Malcolm Turnbull as an alternative to Tony Abbott
as Prime Minster I suggest that you have a good
read of the link I gave earlier:

http://inside.org.au/tony-abbott-prime-minister/

Norman Abjorensen gives us a summation of Tony Abbott
from a historical perspective. And reminds us that
Mr Abbott "won the leadership by a single vote,
of course, after an extraordinary ballot at the end
of 2009 that saw Malcolm Turnbull's leadership declared
vacant, the nominal challenger Joe Hockey eliminated in
a three-way ballot and in the final ballot several
Liberals who voted to unseat Turnbull returning to his
camp when faced with the alternative of Abbott."

Abjorensen stresses that "any protracted slide in Mr
Abbott's poll ratings will see a nervous party move
to dump him. And of course a now patient, but still
ambitious Malcolm Turnbull has decided to remain in
Parliament as a clear alternative and a far less polarising
figure."

We are told that "Mr Abbott has always been a divisive
figure even within his own party..."

Read the link and find out why.

Dear Banjo,

Rubbish. We have an excellent idea of how Mr Abbott
will be as Prime Minister.
Read the following link and find out the inside story:

http://inside.org.au/tony-abbott-prime-minister/

Tony Abbott will never become prime Minister of this country.
His short term ability to out maneuver Gillard is working against him.
End of month polling is likely to confirm Gillards fast fall.
That could see her removed.
Abbott confronted by a leader other than Gillard?
One gos both do.

Belly, you said the same about Julia, that she would never be PM.

As for climate change, there are many out there who agree that it is real, it's just that they also agree that taxing the smallest omitter, with the worlds highest carbon tax, is not the solution.

It is simply like pissing into a fan.

If anything, China should have the $23 per ton, and we the $3 per ton.

As for TA, well your party had the chance to get rid of him, by electing KR, but THEY, not the people, decided they knew best.

It would appea that the REAL JULIA number three is no different to the old one and two versions.

Furthermore, if TA is as bad as you lot make out, how on earth can Julia still be PM, as she struggle to keep up with him in the polls.

It just further confirms the mess labor are in. Trouble is, they have dragged us along for the ride.

I can see I'm going to have to live to a ripe old age.

You see I want to be around on the day when Tony Abbott exceeds John Howard's time as PM.

I really do want to hear what you lefties are saying then.

Dear Belly,

In the link I gave earlier we're given
an excellent summation which tells us that -
"Mr Abbott has always been a divisive figure even
with his own party... He's not known for his policy
work. He was at best a wayward minister and his wild
policy gyrations in Opposition suggest chaos,
rather than stability."

And it confirms that -
"any protracted slide in Mr Abbott's
poll ratings will see a nervous party move to dump him."

As far as the government is concerned - what happens now?
The link tell us that - "as far as
the government is concerned - nothing."

It predicts that - "The Gillard government's internal
focus until May will probably be to try to ensure they
deliver a budget surplus as promised. They will
continue with infrastructure reform. They will ensure
the NBN roll-out doesn't get bogged down in regulatory
morass and they will "sell" the carbon package when it
comes into effect July 1st." (BTW -
small polluters are not going to be taxed).
Mr Abbott blames all the current
price increases on the carbon package - even though it
hasn't been implemented yet.

The link stresses that - "Politically the government will
draw a deep line in the sand between its economic
sttrategies and jobs management and those spruiked by
the Opposition, in varying forms. "

In other words the government will simply get on with the
job of governing. While Mr Abbott will continue to -
"raise the temperature and noise level of the political
debate and continue to show the country what a pretty
ordinary front bench he has" With one calm, reasoned
and intelligent exception. ;-)

*You see I want to be around on the day when Tony Abbott exceeds John Howard's time as PM.
I really do want to hear what you lefties are saying then.*

Well I am not even a leftie, Hasbeen. I just remember Abbott as
Health Minister showing poor judgement and no doubt he will do the
same, if he should be PM. Your grandkids will be the losers.

Dear Hasbeen,

If you want to live to a ripe old age
just to see Tony Abbott as Prime
Minister I guess that means that you think it
will take that long for Tony Abbott to get
elected. Hard to argue with you on that score.

Coming from you, Arjay, that is a very confusing position to adopt.

>>If they don't drop rates now,we will end up like Europe and the USA ie people will lose total confidence and refuse to spend or borrow money.This means we will be all fighting over fewer $ in a collapsing economy.We then spiral backwards and no amount of austerity will reverse that.<<

You have previously given the impression that you are totally opposed to the extension of credit. I seem to recall many, many diatribes against the process - as recently as two days ago...

>>All our new money for inflation + increases in productivity is created as debt<<

Well, stap me vitals, as Mr Shakespeare used to say.

On the one hand you regard the creation of debt to be the work of the devil, and on the other you want more debt, at lower interest rates.

So, which is it to be, Arjay?

With the chaos and continuous scandals we have with this Labor government, and the intense dislike it has garnered with the voting public, I am looking forward to Tony Abbott being sworn in as PM, probably for more than 2 terms.

Lexi yes I read, just last night, about ten pages about Tony Abbott.
Even joke pages, but nothing as funny as hasbeens claims.
Yes Labor is gone,some silly beggar thinks he/she can fatten the pig on market/election day.
Howard knew that could not be done.
And a group of people depriving a few villages of their idiots, think Abbott is so unloved we will change our minds [not us Australians] in the polling booths.
More wait for us to look and see just how progressive this government has been.
Maybe the nigh mare Abbott's mob will be.
Few want to remember we took 07 on promises we broke.
Including one we will suffer for,we are not trusted.
Yes Rudd is the answer but he will not rise again, that can be fixed.
But only after the removal of Gillard.
Growing in NSW and Victoria, soon QLD is hope for future Labor.
Liberal coalition governments are seeing their supporters including business protesting against them.
But let us remember, if we can not confront our problem in office why would swing voters want us
Abbott will never be PM.

For those left wingers that harbor the delusion that there is any chance that Abbott will be replaced as leader, this opinion piece (from the non Murdoch press) neatly sums up the feelings in the coalition camp.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/supporters-hope-abbott-pm-will-be-fraser-with-teeth-20120409-1wl2w.html

It will be interesting to see what happens if Mr Abbott
begins to slide in the polls before the next election.

Especially if the Prime Minister continues to do
her job well. If she continues to deliver
good public policy - giving voters substance not sham.
That
just might translate into good politics and discredit
the Opposition's
painting of the government "as the most incompetent in
Australia's history."

Voters are undoubtedly
sick and tired of the digging up of dirt files
and calls for instant elections from the Opposition.
They are sick and tired of the general sense
of political instability. They are sick and tired of
the Opposition opposing almost everything the government proposes.
And most importantly voters may not find the Opposition's "aspirational" policies that inspiring.

Malcolm Turnbull - may just be the alternative that the
Liberal Party will turn to.

The biggest worry this noalition mob have is Tony's negative stance on everything. His string of pledges in blood is starting to conflict, among his fellow colleagues.
The murray darling water, he says he will only support a good plan. He is not saying what a good plan consists of. I do not think they are capable of putting anything together.
The Labor camp should put this one off till after the next election.
It's not going to suite all users no matter what the plan was. It needs to be a joint commitment.
Turnbull would see issues in a clearer light. Abbott has no idea.

Lexi you must be kidding

'Especially if the Prime Minister continues to do
her job well.

Even Belly knows the PM has not done her job well. If she did she would not be in the position she is consistently shown by the polls. She has lied, failed to listen to the public and done dirty deals with Greens and independants except Wilkie who she -- on. If you call this doing well! You need to remove your feminist blindfold.

Lexi my sweet, the coalition turning from Abbott to Turnbull would be very similar to labor turning from Rudd to Gillard. A prescription for suicide.

Lexi my heart is with you, but not my brain.
I prod and poke the party I love.
The only one I can see that truly is innovative and brings sustainable change.
I glory in policy's some here say are failures.
And along with superannuation, the preservation of Kacado ,Land rights, saying sorry, know carbon tax and pension rises, true care for life time injured, will be our proudest moments.
Mate, we can not win the next federal election.
It is lost, it was lost the night Gillard, under orders, knifed Rudd.
My thoughts in the form of a kick in the bottom,for my party are driven by love, and anger.
Our party history shows the scars of factional fighting, from our first day.
And in the weirdest way, it was that fighting that bought us the faction that won almost every government we ever made up.
Center Unity, the right.
Let my detractors have at me, but only that faction put Labor within reach of voters.
It too put Gillard on her thrown, and much sooner than some think it will take her from it.
That change could and should have been Rudd.
Too late now QLD will not forgive us, this time,WA is safe Liberal for years.
NSW is not yet ready to return to Labor.
We hug our selves and say how well we are doing,we are, but not in selling Gillard, or the things I am proud of.
With one exception, our detractors here think what they say, like thousands upon thousands out there, it always has been so.
Australia will not forgive Gillard, in a shop today I over heard folk laughing at her new look eyes.
She they said looked like a witch.
New contact lens ,first time I saw them today.
Turnbull is more likely than any one to return and can not fail if conservatives put party first.

Alister Drysdale in his "Business Spectator,"
article tells us that:

"When it comes to winning in politics - it's
real policy debate over economic issues that
matter not silly political debates."

He points out that "if Tony Abbott is elected as
Australia's next Prime Minister he'll have a
complex economy to oversee. He'll face issues of
productivity, labour force adaptability, an
over-regulated business sector, the issue of
middle class welfare, taxation distribution between
states, core roles of government, and so on."

Nothing new there - except for the fact as Drysdale
points out "that the world is moving so fast and is
so interlinked, that Tony Abbott is going to need
the best brains around him if Australia is to
measure up."

Therein lies the problem. And according to Drysdale -
Tony Abbott "doesn't have the team or structures in
place." All he has - "is sound bites, slogans,
and "look at me" TV pictures on track - but not
any underlying sense of economic competence."

Drysdale confirms that Tony Abbott's frontbench
economic team "is threadbare at best. Frequently
offering confusing, contradictory, and nonsensical
sounding messages. They lack a sense of purpose."

Drysdale explains - "The Opposition's economic
credentials look raggedy at best - the $70 billion
black hole arguments keeps getting regurgitated because
there's no answer. It won't stop - it will intensify
after the May budget."

He claims that "if the debate re-focuses on the
Opposition's costings and plans - including its
"direct action" plan and its internally divisive new
tax to pay for some strange and expensive paid
parental leave scheme - the certainty of an Abbott
victory is lessened."

According to Drysdale - economic credibility counts in
voter-land. Malcolm Turnbull on the other hand is
widely respected in the business and wider community for
his economic nous, his experience and acumen. He will
ensure to surround himself with the best brains - and will
also guarantee that Australia will measure up. As I stated
earlier - all the petty political and hyped grandstanding
will eventually stop working.

No joy there Lexi but keep grinning.
An Abbott supporter said to him yesterday.
*Tony every thinking voter will vote for you*
Tony replied not good enough mate! we need a majority!

Belly, & the rest of you, if we want bad policy we can elect the Labor party. We don't have to elect Turnbull to get bad policy.

If you want really bad policy, as we have said before, co-opt Turnbull. Add his fool ideas, & the rest of your bad policies together, & we can destroy the whole country even quicker.

How long will it take for you to realise, he is every bit as erratic as Rudd, & no less stupid.

Dear Hasbeen,

Sorry - but the evidence is the opposite of what you claim
about Malcolm Turnbull. He is if nothing else -
calm, well reasoned, and intelligent.
Of course it would be difficult
to agree with every view expressed by him but it would
be equally difficult to disagree with them all.
And it would be impossible to criticise any of them as
irrational or foolish. The man is far less
polarising then Mr Abbott.

And Alister Drysdale
has given a rather good summation. He knows what he's talking
about and so he should. Not only is he a regular "Business
Spectator" commentator. He was a former senior adviser to
Malcolm Fraser and Jeff Kennett. And he's in a good position
to judge what will work and what won't as far as the
leadership tensions of the Liberal Party go.

Of course you are entitled to you opinion - but it isn't
based on fact - simply your personal preference.

For those that think that Abbott is inept, the results of the past 2 years are far from luck. Everyone forgets that TA is a Rhodes Scholar, an accolade that is not given for attendance.

The positions that Abbott has taken has precisely been chosen to inflict the most damage from Labor's blunders, and sap any bounce from any victories they gained. In the last 18 months TA has not set a foot wrong, or exposed to Labor even a chink in the liberal armour to mount a counter attack.

These are not coincidences, but a high level chess game in which labor finds itself outplayed and about to lose its queen. It is precisely because Abbott has surrounded himself with far more intellectual horsepower than resides in the Labor camp.

Abbott as PM in 18 months will confound his critics as he has done over the past 24 months.

Tony Abbott as a Rhodes Scholar? I believe he
distinguished himself in the boxing ring at Oxford.
Which of course would explain the fact that he's
a street fighter, willing and able to weaponise
whatever blunt object he finds close to hand.
And in politics what seems to matter to the Coalition
under his leadership is that Mr Abbott can use any
issue as a bludgeon with which to renew his attack
on the government ('cause he wants to be PM so badly),
and the current PM's character.

And as for not setting a foot wrong? Mr Abbott hasn't
taken a positive step in any direction - so how could
he set a foot wrong? He hasn't done anything yet -
except cause havoc and destruction. Is that the kind
of man - we want as Prime Minister?

In the Howard Ministery he was initially kept
in a position where he could do the least damage.
And later as Minister for Health - we do know
what happened to the hospital systems.

BTW: -Malcolm Turnbull was also a Rhodes Scholar -
but the man actually did distinguish himself
academically - and later in his professional life.

Your team is losing badly, and Abbott is responsible. As far as chaos is concerned, the disastrous government policies are the sole responsibility of the Labor government. Their lies that Abbott has used against them with such good effect are of their own making.

I refer you all again to the following link:

http://inside.org.au/tony-abbott-prime-minister/

In which some interesting points are raised:

They are as follows -

What is rather disturbing is that as late as 2010 -
these comments came from Mr Abbott: -

"Poverty is ...a function of individual behaviour..."

And:

" What the housewives of
Australia need to understand as they do the ironing is ..."

As the article tell us:

"This from a public figure suggests someone quite blind or
unwilling to see the profound social changes of the
past four decades."

And -

"It all points to the fact that scattergun tactics which
can and do rattle a government may simply not translate
into office."

"Does Mr Abbott have a statesmanlike side Or whether
he is what he appears to be - a one trick pony?"

That is a question we need to ask - but more then that -
are we willing to take the risk?

Lexi,

If all you can find is 2 non PC tiny gaffes, from 2 years ago, then you are seriously grasping at straws. TA has conducted himself in a far more statesman like fashion than Juliar Gillard who has gone from self created crisis to crisis.

Saying she has full confidence in Thomson when the whole country believes he is a crook is both recent and very undignified.

There are two protagonists in this political battle, one will win the next election and provide the PM, and the other will not. I know where I would put my money.

Lexi and SM, I consider you both to be very good OLO mates with whom I share a lot of common ground. But surely the important point here is which leader would be better for the country.

I can’t see that either Abbott or whatshisname? er, Turnbull, would have a clear lead in this department.

The only leader who could do so would be Bob Carr!!

So until the Libs can get their heads around the concept of a sustainable, stable-population, resource-demand-equals-resource-supply-capability-in-an-ongoing-manner society, the argument between Abbott and Turnbull is entirely MOOT!

As I’ve said previously on this thread, Turnbull could potentially be really good or he could be really bad. I think Abbott would most likely be pretty bad, with much of the same old same old approach. No signs of him being particularly good at all.

The sooner Carr becomes PM, the better. Then maybe the Libs will be dragged kicking and screaming into a competition to actually be the better manager of this country, instead of the same old continuous growth crapload. And we’ll finally be on the right track towards a healthy future.

I'd have to favour Turnbull in this situation.

I wonder what you think about this, Lexi and Shadow Minister?

Dear Ludwig,

You've raised some valid points.

And I agree that the contest for the Prime Ministership
between Malcolm Turnbull and Bob Carr would be a
very interesting historical moment.

It appears obvious that the Labor right-wing looked
into the future and arranged for Bob Carr to step into
the Ministery - giving him enough time to prepare
and possibly step up into the Labor leadership.

As for Tony Abbott - I personally feel that his days are
numbered. And it is time that the Liberal Party realised
just how polarising a figure the man really is.
Against Bob Carr - he wouldn't stand a chance.

Posted by Belly:
"""
Some find it hard to be part of humanity.
"""

Not at all. In fact, I care more about people than you think!

"""
But RM you wait to see some starve?
"""

Yes! Those parasites that would take money from those least able to afford it to enrich themselves. Those that contribute nothing to society but take! I would love to see them do more than starve!

Raw Mustard swapping verbal shots at each other is of little use.
Lets agree we do not like each other.
From your first post I found we never would.
I have been hungry very much so.
And in truth would give my last feed away rather than see someone starve.
And those you want to see starve?
In my view are likely to be at least your equal.
The time it took to respond highlights this.
You come and post, only some times reading others contributions
Best read every new comment before posting ,be informed.
Hasbeen, thankfully you are not average in your views,on your side of politics.
Abbott will NEVER be Prime Minister.
His decline will be dramatic.

Raw Mustard you say:

Yes! Those parasites that would take money from those least able to afford it to enrich themselves. Those that contribute nothing to society but take! I would love to see them do more than starve!

Are you talking about the Big Banks? Sounds like them.

The distinguished Chief of Melbourne University Press,
Louise Adler listed in The Age, her disagreements with
Tony Abbott and they are:

1) The treatment of asylum seekers. 2) The republic.
3) Religion. 4) Abortion. 5) Stem Cell Research.
6) Homosexuality. 7) Global Warming. 8) A worrying
tolerance for hate speech. 9) A noisy contempt for
one's political opponents.

All in all Tony Abbott is described as -
"an ideological throwback to the 1950s and we're told that -
"the once great Liberal Party of Robert Menzies, as
imperfect as it was in many ways by contemporary standards
was a political nirvana compared to what Mr Abbott will
dream up."

It's interesting that it was Malcolm Turnbull who was
invited by the prestigious London School of Economics to
air his views on the need for long term thinking and
leadership in the face of the extraordinary rise of
China. It was Turnbull who received the invitation -
not Mr Abbott nor the Foreign Affairs Shadow - Julie Bishop.
Although I believe that Malcolm Turnbull did send a copy of
his speech to Ms Bishop.

Paul on this matter RM has re put his starve them quote to rebut my concern.
I reacted to his quote way up the thread.
It seems to have different targets for this form of death.
In truth not even in my lost days of childhood communism did I call for any one to die.
And still would not.
I would feed any human my last feed, rather than see this type of torture death take place.

It is amusing to see all the left wingers clucking like chooks about who they would prefer to lead the foxes.

The reality is that Abbott is highly regarded as he has almost single-handedly brought labor to its knees. MT would have continued to be a respected leader of the opposition, TA will be leader of the government.

SM, I refer you back to my last post and add a few more pertinent questions.

What would Abbott do to steer Australia away from its utter dependence on fossil fuels and minerals and record high immigration and towards a sustainable society?

What would Turnbull do?

Which leader would be more inclined to take a sustainability-oriented line if pressure was applied from Labor and/or the general populace and which one would dig his heels in and remain an antisustainabilityist dinosaur?

These really are the big questions. This stuff matters about as much as everything else put together.

Any thinking Australian shouldn't give a rats as to who leads the Liberal Party Malcolm Turnbull, Tony Abbott, a merchant banker or a defrocked priest, the result is always the same. The same applies to the Labor Party who really cares who sits up front, Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, Miss Piggy or Ron Zook from South Park. No change on the horizon under these guys watch. They all follow a set agenda and that agenda is not under their control.

"""
Raw Mustard swapping verbal shots at each other is of little use.
Lets agree we do not like each other.
From your first post I found we never would.
"""

If it make you feel better. Me, I really don't give a hoot either way :)

"""
I have been hungry very much so.
And in truth would give my last feed away rather than see someone starve.
"""

Anyone that goes hungry in this country is a sure fire sign they haven't got a clue. Perhaps if you had spent more time learning a valid skill rather than relying on the good fortune of others you would have been able to feed yourself better?

"""
And those you want to see starve?
In my view are likely to be at least your equal.
"""

My equal at what exactly?

"""
The time it took to respond highlights this.
You come and post, only some times reading others contributions
Best read every new comment before posting ,be informed.
"""

Did it ever occur to you that some of us don't trawl this forum 24/7 looking for some derogatory post aimed at some crap, liars party so we can jump on the poster and attack them with the vigor of a rabid dog?

That some of us may actually be working hard to make up the shortfall after the parasites have taken their share to pay for all the belly's in this world that are going hungry? So that we might feed our selves and our family in the manner they deserve!

That some of us might actually have a life away from these forums, one of family and reality?

That it's not worth reading half the junk posted on here by left wing junkies because it stems from pixy dust, ideology rather than reality?

cont'

There are so many leaches sponging off the system these days it's become a joke. Tell me why I should have to work harder to accommodate them all? I don't need anyone to feed me or pay me, I've done it all myself and still do and damn proud of it too. I give to those that have had misfortune. I look after other peoples children because they don't give a damn and yet that so called party of jokers you obsessively defend would take my last dollar to pay for prostitutes. Then they would proceed to tell me I need to vote for some moron that just wants to rob me of more money for his mates at gold in my sacks!

You're on drugs man, you need help!

@ Paul1405

"""
Are you talking about the Big Banks? Sounds like them.
"""

No! Banks do not force you to use them. They provide a service for those that are comfortable entertaining their services. If you don't like banks, then don't use them. They won't put a gun to your head, unlike governments and their union mates!

Also, Paul1405. Banks wouldn't get away with half they stuff they do if they weren't protected by the state! Think about that for a while.

Could we get back to the subject of this thread please.
And that is - Malcolm Turnbull - as an alternative
to Tony Abbott as Prime Minister.

I've stated quite
clearly as to why I would chose Malcolm Turnbull over
Mr Abbott. I would like to hear from posters - as to
why or why not they would prefer one or the other.
And why not.

I don't want to hear the same old arguments of -
"because Mr Abbott has brought Labor down et cetera."
That's silly. And not a good enough or valid reason
for why the man should be our Prime Minister. Having
a noisy contempt for one's political opponents is not
a qualification to run the country. So back to the
drawing board folks - and lets get serious and give
us something credible. Ludwig has raised some more valid
points - which of the two would be a better PM? And why?
or Why not?

Lexi and yet you ignore the question as to why you would vote for Gillard in front of Turnbull. Your stuck on allegiance blinds you to reason.

Lexi mate, we've had just about enough thoughts of Turnbull. Any more of him & half the keyboards in the country will be ruined by people throwing up all over them caused by the thought of him ever being our PM.

That is a thought about as bad as that of Rudd coming back, or Gillard still being in parliament after the next election.

Dear runner,

Again you have me confused with someone else.
I'll be happy to reply to you in greater depth
when you say something intelligent. Please stick
to the topic if you can.

Dear Hasbeen,

So I take it that you don't approve of Mr Turnbull as an
alternative to Mr Abbott as PM? Fair enough.
However you don't explain why?
I'd be Interested to know the specifics.

And if half the keyboards are going to be ruined by the
thought of Mr Turnbull being PM - does that mean the other half
will be ruined by the thought of Mr Abbott being PM?
(Law of averages - and all that).

the more Abbottphobia we have the more popular the Liberal party seems to be.

Runner Lets you and me talk about you opinion that any one disliking Abbott is wrong.
You will be aware long before his book and its clear intention to go for the leadership,battle lines.
He was not well liked or trusted.
By women and even within his own party.
Any brief look at his positioning on just Carbon tax, and the need for it, will be a surprise.
He took both sides.
It is my honestly held view, he changed ONLY to take advantage of growing deniers,hence take the leadership, by one vote.
His success is floating on a mat of sea weed.
His launching pad, big new tax, is rather weird as his plans, in almost every area, are higher tax's.
He intends to redistribute tax's and wealth, from the well of to the worst of, more tax for lower income earners.
Tony however would never have achieved his rise with out the kind support of?
The ALP!
Baffling but true, after the unity of the Work Choices campaign.
The sweet victory of 2007.
We are told no one could tame Kevin, that his every move was wrong.
The joke is it took one night to unseat him.
Gillard, no better leader of the opposition ever lived, on the government benches!
No good ignoring it,if she stood before the TV cameras this morning telling us every house holder will have the housing loan paid for them, she would be branded and not believed.
Abbott has told us he can not be believed, we knew that.
Abbott is propped up by the ALP/Gillard is propped up by Abbott.
The joke is on us all.
Both will never be elected to lead this country.

To All Posters particularly Lexi who started this thread.

Lexi said:
"I thought it may be interesting to see what people
thought of Malcolm Turnbull as a possible alternative.
I would be interested to hear the pros and cons."

Firstly there are no pros, only cons. I must make this abundantly clear.
It does not matter who so ever from the Liberal or Labor parties runs Australia. It does not matter who from either party is PM. The agenda is set. These parties are very much under the control of Big Business and Big Unions, and the Australian people are coned into believing they are in 'power' to serve them, nothing could be further from the truth. These people most likely delude themselves that they are serving Australia, when there are no more that the servants of the rich and powerful within society. We can argue well into the night as to how the deck chairs on the good ship Australian Titanic should be arranged, should they point to the right, or should they point to the left. Reality is, it don't matter people, the 'iceberg 'is dead ahead.
Social and economic change will only be achieved in this country when we sweep the decks clear of these servants and their masters and install true democracy.

Dear Paul,

Barrister and human rights advocate -
Julian Burnside has watched the mainstream media
transdform and the consequent decline ot policy
debate on the issues that matter. Here's what he
has to say:

"Policy formation is one of the most important functions
of government and opposition. Democracy assumes that
the governing party best represents the policy choices
of the majority of the people. Most people vote for a
party than for a person, although sometimes it means
that they vote for a PM, regardless of the identity of
the candidate in their own electorate. The party is a
proxy for the voter's political philosophy - and there
was a time when the policies of each major party were
fairly predictable."

"The Labor party had its origins in the Labour movement
and reflected the values of Labour rather than capital.
The Liberal party had its origins elsewhere: they were
not those of Labor, but they were equally distinctive. By
voting for one party or the other, a voter could be
tolerably confident about how the party would respond to
changing circumstances if elected to government."

"Those days are gone."

"Now it is difficult to see significant differences between the
policies of the major parties except on a few issues. It is
impossible to predict with any confidence how either party
will respond to changing circumstances. The modern fact
ofpolitical life is a result of new technology which allows
political parties to see what policy responses will
produce an electoral advantage in any marginal electorates."

"The mainstream media are very much a part of thie process,
since the loudest voices in the dominant outlets play a
major part in shaping the views which will be express in news
polls. Founding principles and hilosophy have disappeared as
significant forces in policy formation it seems."

Therefore in these circumstances it is more important
than ever to take a close look at what a leader of a particular
party stands for. That's the only hope(at present)
that we have of possibly making the right decision for our
country in our choice of PM.

Well said well quoted Lexi, in truth I can not disagree with it.
But Paul, gee bloke try to see what I am saying.
Your wishes are anti democratic.
And badly under value the thought processes of every voter in this country.
At polling booths almost every voters had made up their minds, after thinking it out.
They decide who, not you.
The fact is never ever will they install the greens, ever.
So?
Your form of democracy would be an enforced dictatorship!
Currently, if truth is considered, greens more than even Abbott fuel the discontent with politics.
Right now it is in their power to let Labor get offshore processing, and much more.
But they stand in front of 88% of the country and say no.
If one vote one value comes in you will see your vote, half a protest, halved.

Belly

You know that Abbott has always believed that man made global warming is c-ap. He even stated so before hypocritically towing the media line.

I have no problem with people disliking Abbott (though I obviously think highly of him). The ones with abbottphobia are intent on misrepresenting him. Much of the media that quized him re what he taught his daughters on virginity and Tony Jones disgraceful false demonisation regarding homosexuality is plain crass and despicable. The reality is that Abbott has been a good husband and father and that gets up the nose of many of the immoral failed journalist who constantly label him as homophobic, women haters etc.

Certainly Abbotts first and ingrain belief that gw is a total scam making charlotans rich should of been stuck by. Evidence now abounds for that view. On the other hand Gillards habititual lying and sleazy deals makes Abbott look like a saint. This is obviously what gets up the noses of the feminazis. Once they mocked him considering him unelectable now they despise him because unless something goes drastically wrong which it can in politics and life he will be our next PM.

GW is here to stay weather Abbott calls it crap or not. We can't live in the belief that the changing conditions are GODS will.
Abbott is a slime bag and will never do any good for this country.
He represents the 1% and his ambitions have been paid for.
His beliefs do not allow him to give impartial advice on women's issues.
We do not need a religious driven govt;
We must have govt; for all the people not the select few.

579

'We do not need a religious driven govt;'

Come out of denial. pseudo science and especially gw is a religion. It is full of dogmas, untruths, manipulation and every other mark of false religion. That is why our PM needed to blatantly lie to the public to justify her religous base tax. It just happens that God has allowed the public to laugh in the face of the silly High Priests whose prophecies were all doomed from the start.

runner you have been conned.
Abbott would ask you to be silent if he could.
He under Howard and before his leadership was for global warming.
I could flood the page with links.
Do not be fooled Tony has said both yes and no on every issue.
It is a standard for the bloke,to have no standard no limits.
I understand, in advance, the disappointment you will feel.
I felt it,after briefly thinking Mark Latham was something other than a rage filled fool.

Belly you write

'Abbott would ask you to be silent if he could.'

I am less interested in supporting a party or individual than I am truth Belly. I support Abbott not because he is perfert but because he is miles ahead of the current crop of deceivers including independants who went against those who elected them. If he was as silly as Turnbull in supporting a carbon tax he would immediately lose my vote. More than likely I would rip my ballot paper up. We have had enough of Governments ignoring what is good for this country and selling out to leaches in the United Nations.

Again Abbott is miles above Gillard on principal just as Howard was miles above Rudd.Obviously many disagreed with me in 07. Beasley was one decent guy from your crop even though he to believes in the gw nonsense. He had a good heritage and inherited some decent values from his father.

579,

That would make Gillard a lying slime bag? Direct insults are discouraged on this forum.

Lexi,

Labour has huge hypocrisy in demanding that the coalition produce detailed and costed policies when Labor never did in opposition, and
Labor is blocking any access to the public departments such as treasury etc or information that the coalition could use to flesh out and cost its policies.

Secondly policy development is the government's duty, the policies developed by the coalition under Turnbull were never even considered by Rudd. Policy principles are being developed, and some have been available for some time, such as a return of the pacific solution, removing the world's biggest carbon tax etc.

Abbott's main task is to hold the government accountable for its actions, and ensure that the coalition is in government after the next election. By this measure Abbott has been wildly successful.

Juliar on the other hand has been a dismal failure.

Once again - back to the topic of this thread.
As I stated earlier - the scattergun tactics
which can and do rattle a government simply
do not translate into office. What voters need
to ask themselves: - Is Mr Abbott so socially
conservative that he's unelectable? Will he
fail/succeed - as Prime Minister?

The public may be
annoyed with the government - but they didn't
vote in Tony Abbott. Most of the protest vote
went to the Greens. Does Mr Abbott have a
statesmanlike side, or is he what he appears to
be - a one trick pony.

What would Malcolm Turnbull be like as Prime Minister?
Is he a less polarising figure? When it comes to
winning in politics it is real policy debate over
economic issues that matter not silly political debates.
Economic credibility counts in voter-land. And as I stated
previously all the petty political and hyped grandstanding will
eventually stop working.

cont'd ...

It was pointed out earlier that:

"The Opposition's economic credentials look
raggedy, at best. 'The $70 billion black hole'
argument keeps getting regurgitated because
there's no answer. It won't stop. It will
intensify after the May budget."

"If the debate re-focuses on the Opposition's
costings and plans, including its direct action
carbon plan, and its internally divisive new tax
to pay for some strange and expensive parental leave
scheme - the certainty on an Abbott victory is lessened."

As experts have pointed out - Malcolm Turnbull is widely
respected in the business and wider community for his
economic nous, his experience and acumen. There is a
big difference between the two Members of Parliament in
more ways then one. Hopefully voters will make the right
choice.

Lexi. Thanks for the history lesson the Labor Party grew out of the shearers strike of 1891 okay nice bit of history. The Liberal Party grew out of the rear end of Pig Iron Bob Menzies while he was sitting in an armchair in the Old Melbourne Club, another nice bit of history as well, and the point is?
You say "Now it is difficult to see significant differences between the
policies of the major parties except on a few issues." I will add those (few) issues are in the main cosmetic and therefore of little significance. The 2 major parties in Australia have to formulate policy that is acceptable to the rich and powerful, the media will then do the necessities of convincing the 'voters' of the desirability or otherwise of said policies.
I simply calling for the people to be in the position of choosing for themselves who should govern for them, in their interest. Rather than being constantly manipulated to vote the way vested interest dictate.
My ALP friend here see this as a dictatorship. Belly writes:
"Your (Paul) wishes are anti democratic. And badly under value the thought processes of every voter in this country. At polling booths almost every voters had made up their minds, after thinking it out.
They decide who, not you. Your form of democracy would be an enforced dictatorship!"
If you question the status quo your labeled as 'anti democracy'.

On ya Paul1405 for spelling it out to the shills like it is!
Vote for who you want, it won't change anything. The poor will get poorer, the rich will get richer, the parasites will scream louder for their handouts and the middle class will be expected to carry the load, what's left of them that is!

Governments have become a waist of breath, it's everyman for himself! That's what humanity has come too. Greed and self preservation are king!

I'm a bit more optimisitc about the governments of this
country - past and present. Because overall - we've
been so lucky in so many ways when compared globally
to how others have fared and are faring.

Sure we have our problems - but somehow or other
the voters seem to get it right in the end.

We have a Constitution that
protects us. It can only be changed by laws passed by
the Commonwealth Parliament and approved by a majority
of voters acorss Australia and in a majority of states.
As you know this process is called a Referendum and since
Federation in 1901 - only eight out of 44 proposals to amend
the Constitution have been approved.

We have Bills that
are proposed through Parliament but these must go through
certain steps before they can become national law. The
Bills are debated in both the House of Reps and the Senate
and sometimes may be referred to a parliamentary committee
for detailed examination. Before any new law can be passed,
or changed a majority of Members of the House of Reps and
the Senate must agree. They must also be signed by the
Governor General.

So your fears of the total take over of
"vested interests," are not quite accurate. Of course
lobby groups,and vested interests can pressure for change -
but it doesn't mean that success is going to necessarily
be guaranteed with so many things involved.

It appears that this subject has now run its course.
I'd like to Thank every one who took the time to
contribute. It has been an interesting exercise.
And whoever you end up voting for in the next election -
may they prove to be the Prime Minister you had hoped
they would be.

I shall see you on another thread.

What I hear from the left is how Abbott is so one dimensional and unelectable. The link below might give those so wedded to their own propaganda some insight to a man who lives by a personal code that is far more tolerant and accepting than most on the left. The difference is that he is not prepared to sacrifice his values for political gain.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/tony-abbott-is-not-the-messiah-hes-a-believer-who-stands-by-his-sibling/story-e6frg7ko-1226325188557

As was posted earlier on this thread -

"Tony Abbott comes across as an ideological throwback
to the 1950s, depended and manipulated by a catalogue
of conservative male mentors from B A Santamaria to
Christopher Pearson." And citing something from an
article written by the right-wing conservative - Christopher
Pearson in a conservative newspaper like The Australian
only confirms that fact.

We were further told earlier that:

"Abbott will rely on skewered right-wing conservatives -
the likes of the church's George Pell, the racist
Andrew Bolt (Abbott was the first to leap to the columnist's
defence after Judge Bromberg's incisive judgement),
Michael Kroger, Hugh Morgan, to name just a few. All
unelected and dangerous politically."

And: -

"The once great Liberal Party of Robert Menzies, as imperfect
as it was in many ways by contemporary standards was a
political nirvana compared to what Abbott will dream up."

Personally, I wouldn't want to go back to the 1950s.
And have Australia again become a cultural backwater -
and worse. But all I can do is trust that all the petty
political and hyped grandstanding will eventually stop
working - and a new leader is chosen by the party.
One whose credentials are more than sound bites, slogans,
and "look at me" TV pictures. One who has an underlying
sense of economic competence. Malcolm Turnbull comes to
mind.

*The Left*
Pathetic Shadow Minister, anyone left of Abbott it seems is the left.
Truth is within his party/your party dwells many unconvinced he is the right man.
Deep rumbling like a distant earth quake often comes sneaking out.
Did you own that race horse Shadow Minister was its name.
May still be running, I gave up the punt 2 years ago.
Full of promise it won now and again.
But never put too many together.
I have a wager with you, you wait full of hope,to see me fall.
I said Abbott would not ever be elected.
You never put your cards on the table, you never do.
That walk to the rails to watch your horse, last minute check the betting tickets in your pocket.
Remember it well.
As I wait for the start,of an already lost race, the Federal election trot, my card says Abbott will not be a starter.
I have no sweat on my brow,just know, my cash is on a winner this time.
Shame without change the clerk of the course and Ambulance will be 5 lengths clear of the government.

All the anti Abbott quotes are from polemics written by left wing political authors writing for relatively unknown blogs. I think that Get up and other labor attack dogs must be terrified that the public will see that the claims about Abbott are beginning to ring hollow.

That Abbott is able to have a caring relationship with his gay sister and warmly receive her partner blows a huge hole in the "ideological throwback to the 1950s," And Perhaps you could remind me when last Pell ever gave Abbott any political support?

Belly, I do believe that Abbott will most likely be PM after the next elections.

It would mean much more to Mr Abbott's sister -
if rather then welcoming her partner into his
home - he would support the legislation that
would give his sister and her partner equal
rights to marry if they so chose. Welcoming
a sibling into one's home is a normal (and Christian)
thing to do. However, to support legislation when
one is in a position to do so - that would give
greater meaning to their lives - would be a far
more meaningful gesture. And that is something that
Mr Abbott is not prepared to do. This only confirms
that he is out of touch with the feelings of the majority
of Australians in our modern society.

Whether Mr Abbott wins the election - still remains to
be seen - regardless of what the partisan press may like
us to believe.

Mr Abbott pledges to work with Labor on the disability ins; scheme. This will only last so long and then we will make sure it comes to a no from abbott. We do not need abbott on side.
The Greens are in favor of Turnbull also, it seems every body wants Turnbull. The noalition had best hear what is best for them, or else political isolation, will follow.

Can't count, as well as can't think straight 579?

If all Labor & Greens want Turnbull, [by the way you can have him], that makes about 40% right now. You need another 60% to make that every body.

The left desire for Turnbull for a leader just reinforces the fact that you lot have absolutely no idea when it comes to picking leaders. Your last few decades, national & state confirms & highlights that.

Abbott is holding power by one vote, i can see a challenge coming on.
Tony's not the most popular, when it comes to moral beliefs.
Him and Pell are very close confidents, should the PILL be on the subsidized list.
We do not need a radical govt; If Turnbull does not lead the list i am not voting noalition.

Lexi,

"It would mean much more to Mr Abbott's sister -if rather then welcoming her partner into his home - he would support the legislation that would give his sister and her partner equal rights to marry"

Are you a mind reader? Do you know this? Or as I suspect you are arrogantly making assumptions on her behalf, in which case this is a brazen lie.

579,

Nice try, I don't believe that you would vote for the coalition under any circumstances. You prefer the crooked and incompetent labor/union/greens.

Dear Hasbeen,

Gee whiz - Australians have done rather well - with
who they've picked as leaders. Sure there's been
a few ghastly exceptions - like William McMahon
who was more concerned with the prestige of Prime
Ministership than actually doing anything as PM.
Then of course - John Howard's exploitation of
asylum seekers and invading Iraq were major blemishes,
as well as his refusal to resign which cost his party
the 2007 election. Still Hawke was a great PM. He was
more interested in building consensus then finding
fault with others. And as for State politics - look
at the years that Labor has had compared to the Libs.
And take a closer look at what's beginning to happen
in Victoria and NSW. The cracks are definitely beginning
to show under the Libs.

As for Mr Abbott winning the next election?
Don't be too sure about that. Mr Abbott keeps going
down a base-level political path and people are starting
to get tired of it. For example, Abbott has taken every
possible position on climate change. From skepticism
to warm embrace to horrified opposition.

In his latest phase he's concentrated on the PM's
trustworthiness - as he accuses her of having broken
an election promise not to introduce a carbon tax.
And he's someone who's offered one Independent a
$1 billion hospital if the Independent backed a Coalition
minority government while accusing the PM of selling out
to the Greens.

Lets look at Malcolm Turnbull as a comparison. Malcolm
Turnbull has held his climate change position - even
though it cost him the Liberal leadership.

Mr Turnbull stuck by his belief that there should be a
penalty on carbon emissions and that a market-based system
was the most effective way to do this.

Mr Turnbull has stayed true to his beliefs.
He is someone that doesn't change positions for political
expediency.

Dear SM,

I actually know more then you do.
And that's not a brazen lie!

The only reason the noalition changed their mind about the carbon tax is they could not be seen being in favor of supporting the labor camp.
The same goes with everything else, no no no.
He made a mistake the other day by saying he will support a national disability scheme. Another foot in mouth situation. Within a couple of months we will get a ;no; out of him, be more normal, labor works best alone.

Lexi,

I know that it is "more than" and not "more then"

So you know TA's sister then?

Rubbish! You just got caught in a fib.

Dear Shadow Minister,

And what fib is that?

That I know more then you do?

The fib is that you know what TA's sister thinks.

I would say that the fact that she hasn't made any comments to the press would indicate that while she may very well favour gay marriage, it is clearly far lower on her list of priorities than her relationship with her brother.

This is typical of lefties, because you fervently believe in something, you are surprised when everyone does not agree with you. This thread is littered with wild assumptions of what rational voters will think.

The polls tell you clearly what people think today, and so far Abbott is safe, and no one trusts Juliar.

goodonyaSM.
Abbott safe?
no but enjoy while you can.

SM,

"...it is clearly far lower on her list of priorities than her relationship with her brother."

Oh, so it's "you" who knows what Abbott's sister thinks.

Glad you cleared than one up for us.

Goodness me, I seem to have included a typo in my final sentence.

I know SM's penchant for pedantry will likely urge him to jump back on to correct me as he did a few posts earlier to Lexi, so...."than" should be "that" - all cleared up : )

Dear Poirot,

Love your wit and sense of humour.
Don't ever change!

Dear SM,

Here's something to lighten up your day.
Enjoy:

http://newmatilda.com/2012/04/12/queers-family

Poirot,

Believing that actions speak louder than words, TA's sister has made her priorities pretty clear. Or perhaps in your vast experience you could proffer a viable alternative. I am aware that Labor continually says one thing and does another, so you have difficulty with this.

Lexi,

Again, the assumption of homophobia on TA's part is unsupported by reality.

Dear SM,

And you know this - how?
Or is this another fib?

Tony Abbott says gays -
"challenge the order of things."

And: -

He feels "threatened by them."

But he's definitely not homophobic.

He's possibly (like so many of us) simply misunderstood.

The following website confirms what many of us
have known for some time. Voters have been
unhappy with the current choices that we have
in our political leaders:

http://www.smh.com.au/national/wanted-a-visionary-to-plug-the-leadership-hole-20120413-1wz3p.html

Hence my offer of Malcolm Turnbull as an alternative to
Mr Abbott. Mr Turnbull is widely respected in
the business and wider community for his economic nous,
his experience and acumen. He is a clear alternative and
a far less polarising figure. Mr Abbott won the
leadership by a single vote. It's time the party voted
again.

Lexi,

I don't claim to know as you do (fibber), I just draw reasonable conclusions from their actions.

Actions speak louder than words, Abbott clearly has no problem with his sister or partner, nor they with him. None of the out of context quotes indicates that Abbott ever was homophobic, possible unfamiliar, but you have not indicated any statement of hatred.

You can't handle that TA is a 3 dimensional human being.

Juliar I judge on her behaviour which is riddled with lies and incompetence.

Dear SM,

You seem to apply one set of standards to
yourself and another to me and others -
with whose opinions you don't agree.
That's nothing new of course. And expecting
any sort of balance from you - is like
expecting any sort of balance from Mr Abbott.
Perhaps one day you both shall surprise all
of us - I look forward to that day.
I would love to see you and him as three-dimensional
beings - but I judge you both by your actions.
Neither of you come across as offering
anything of substance as far as politics is
concerned. It's the same technique that is beginning
to wear a bit thin as many articles in the media
confirm.

As for my knowing or not knowing what Mr Abbott's
sister thinks - that's something that's been covered
quite adequately in the media and made very clear.
And calling people "fibbers," is again nothing new
from your side of politics. You've guys have
got nothing else. But you're not impressing anyone.

Anyway - you seem to have me confused with someone
who cares what you think. No ofense intended - but
I find you - the same as I find Mr Abbott - an
anachronism. So obsolete and out of touch, so archaic
(in other words - clueless). And totally irrelevant
to me.

Lexi,

The pot calling the kettle black? You are so one eyed that you echo the party line to a Tee. I have heard nary a peep about the Malaysian people dumping solution, nor why by your own criteria Gillard is homophobic. The concept of balance from you is a joke.

The media is quite clear, I have not read one jot about TA's sister preferring that TA support gay marriage to his acceptance of her. I you have feel free to share it.

As far as what voters are listening to, perhaps you should listen to this:

http://video.theaustralian.com.au/2223513329/Labor-in-death-grip

Dear SM,

I wish to apologise to you for my previous post.
I should not have said what I did and I did not
mean it. Your opinion does matter to me and I
do respect your point of view. I simply spat the
dummy so to speak and I should not have done it.
Anyway, I really don't have anything constructive
to add to this discussion. I feel that it has run
its course. At least for me.

See you on another thread.

http://www.northernstar.com.au/story/2012/04/20/former-leader-gets-a-rockstar-welcome-in-lismore/
May I present a replacement for Gillard.
Yes true, being popular seems to hold some back.

Belly,

Rudd would be more of a challenge for the coalition. However, Juliar and Swan have provided lots of ammunition in case he does try a comeback.

Lexi,

I also apologize for my more abrasive comments.