Juliar is tough, but so was Al Capone. It is not an endorsement of itself.

After labor failed to win the election in its own right, she managed to cobble together sufficient seats to gain power by abandoning her core promises, as once in power a government has no obligation to stick to any of its promises.

However, the "contract" that the government has with the voters, as defined by its promises will be judged at the next election, based on the achievements of the government, and the extent to which it delivered what it promised.

Given Labor's disasterous track record fiscally, and lies, the current polling reflects the judgement of the voters.

Julia Gillard is an extremely selfish egoist & a power monger. If she weren't she would make better decisions for the future of Australia. Sadly, she is not alone there. I'm going back to the last parliamentarian $50,000.- pay rise right at a time when most ordinary working Australians were doing it rather tough. I didn't see any Public Servant rejecting this immoral amount nor any other Party.
We really should demand from the Prime Minister to publish the pay rates for Public Servants before the next federal election. It certainly would sway the swinging voters in the right direction when they see how much of their tax dollars is squandered on utterly useless people whilst the ordinary blue collar worker is battling to make ends meet. It's the huge cost of keeping these maggots which forces our companies to go offshore at the expense of local jobs. I strongly suggest to anyone to look up how much these people get paid & you'll see that they could very, very easily handle a 10 % pay cut.

Lexi, if a politician makes a promise then cannot honor it for say,
financial reasons, then that is a bit like "Force Majeur".

However the now infamous promise "There will be no etc etc" promise
is not in that category as no condition affecting CO2 production, or
other environmental conditions had changed between the making of the
promise and the result of the election being known.

The abandonment of the promise was only done to gain power in government.

Therefore to abandon the promise was improper.

Dear Bazz,

With all due respect I beg to differ.

Julia Gillard did not lie to us before the last election.
As political commentators have pointed out," a lie is a
deliberate statement of falsehood. The liar is very conscious
of the misleading nature of what they are saying."

This was NOT the case with the PM. The election result no
one foresaw. And had the Opposition been successful in
persuading the Greens and the Independents to allow them to
form a minority government the Opposition would have
encountered the same problems - that of compromise.

When a party presents policies in their own right and they're
elected on those policies to government then they are
obligated to stand by those policies. But when a party has
to form a minority government with the support of other
parties then they have the responsibility of abiding by
the agreements made with those parties when in government.

This applies both to Labor and the Liberals. Unfortunately
with the Liberals in coalition with the Nationals, the Libs
don't always appear to respect the agreements made with
the Nationals. The Nationals frequently complain about that.

Lexi,
I appreciate your argument but when you look at the majority Rudd AND Gillard got in on & they STILL STUFFED up. If Gillard had had more sense BEFORE the last election she wouldn't be a minority Government in the first place.

Lexi, you shot yourself down in the first paragraph.
You said;
Julia Gillard did not lie to us before the last election.

I did not say she lied, but she did promise.
Having made such a firm promise she should not have made an agreement
that required it to be withdrawn.
It is certain she would have got the greens on board no matter what
terms were argued about. The PM fell for the greens bluff.

Whatever terms the opposition might have offered is not relevant.
It was a case of "Whatever it Takes !"