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.