Originally I wanted Gillard to stay around, so the people she has so badly treated could kick her out. The voters really do deserve that much.

However after seeing Mr. Slimeball himself, Rudd on TV a few times recently I realize it is much more important that the voters kick him out. It says a great deal about ABC journalism that they adore him so much. Talk about fawning fools.

With his ego bigger than Britain, he really thinks the majority still love him. If we don't get him standing the fool might stay around for years, with that disgusting smile, covering all the bile.

How Labor can get themselves with 2 such horrible people their only choice for leader I really can not understand, but surely they could come up with at least someone better than this pear.

However I now want Rudd standing so we can vote him out once & for all.

Rudd is not stupid.
I expect he is sitting back waiting until after the election.
Then he can have 3 years of fun tormenting PM Abbott.
Just like he did to Howard.
2016 and it could be KRudd as PM again.
Stranger things have happened.

Be careful what you wish for Hasbeen, because there is no bigger 'slimeball' than 'I'll stop the boats' Abbott.
His deputy Julie Bishop is almost as bad.

Surely the Liberals could find a better leader than him?
Anyone else at all?

Hasbeen thanks for the well informed and balanced post.
The one you may write one day.
Be very careful what you wish for indeed.
The warm and refreshing poll waters your side are bathing in would turn a bit chilly.
If my party found the Guts to get Gillard out, I remain interested what job she will be handed should that happen, as a reward for hurting the party so badly.
Even more? how the power brokers, party owners survive their treachery.

2016 and it could be KRudd as PM again.
mikk,
Kevin 16 will be looking rather thin. If Rudd gets the ALP leadership again then Australia will get into the Guinness book of records for having the most morons per capita.

Surely the Liberals could find a better leader than him?
Suseonline,
yes they probably could but Abbott could not be blamed for wishing for smarter voters than you also.

The problem is not with Rudd, Gillard or Abbott. The problem is in the Westminster system itself. A few people can determine who the prime minister is. A few people can determine who the leader of a party is. Gillard became prime minister by persuading a few people to bounce Rudd. Abbott became leader of the party by persuading a few people to bounce Turnbull. The system is rotten, and both Gillard and Abbott played by the rules of a rotten system. The people of Australia cannot determine who their prime minister is, and the members of the Liberal and Labor Party cannot determine who the leaders of their parties will be.

Assume a parliament of 100 members - 51 government, 49 opposition. Party discipline demands each party vote as a bloc. In the party room the most influential members decide what the vote on the floor will be. Ten or fewer members may determine that the party will vote for a certain piece of legislation. That legislation will pass even if the entire opposition and most parliamentarians are against it.

Party discipline and the method of selecting leaders ensure that Australia is not a democracy.

I wonder what will happen when Abbott is let out of the wardrobe and allowed once again to comment on things of substance.

Although it is fascinating that keeping him from opening his mouth too often has been a great tactic (the only thing he seems to comment on is that Brough is a wonderful fellow who deserves to be endorsed).

However, we all know of his penchant to put his foot in his mouth - should be endearingly entertaining once he gets to do it on the world stage.

'I wonder what will happen when Abbott is let out of the wardrobe and allowed once again to comment on things of substance. '

like the 48000 or so illegal immigrants invited here by the Greens/Labour Poirot. Not of any substance to the latte sippers. It is to those families who drowned and also to pensioners waiting in Centrelink queues for hours.

like the idiotic carbon tax that Abbott has promised to rescind. This lie of Gillards might not be of substance to the true believer's Poirot however the fraud is no longer believed by many.

like the total mismanagement of the economony Poirot. The constant promises of surplus. Again it has never been a matter of 'substance 'to Labour voters.

I don't think the Labour/Greens/Independants want these issues of substance discussed. They prefer to bang on about empty promises and dogmas such as Gonski which can't be funded thanks to Labours incompetence. What other issues of 'substance' r you referring to Poirot?

I think Labour would be better off not talking about matters of substance. Their primary vote is likely to drop as we are reminded of incompetent and economic vandalism.

How is this for a scenario, especially for david f.

The PM is voted for by the population.
They vote in Rudd for two three year terms.

The government is in utter chaos because Rudd fights with all the
cabinet members and makes wild decisions without a business plan such
as the NBN etc etc.

Some ministers resign from cabinet because they cannot work with him
or because he blames them for his own stuffups.

Sound familiar ?
So what can be done about it ?

Absolutely nothing, he is there for another five years.

Do you really think that is a better way to run a government ?

runner,

I'm referring to "any" issue of substance.

Can't wait for Tony to wax lyrical - I mean to say, they've kept him nicely gagged for ages - knowing what he's like and all that.

He's a mediocre pollie who seems to have landed in fortuitous circumstances.......

And all he had to do was keep his trap shut.

I agree with Poirot.

The 'no means no' episode was the funniest. The ironing comment, the comment about Julia's father, I still believe all these episodes were genuine slips of the tongue. If not he's a good actor. I think it would be more scary if he wasn't just being devious, and treading that fine line of plausible deniability, but I think he's in the realm of Eddie McGuire and his King Kong remark; He's just one of those people who puts his foot in it.

On topic I remember how happy I was that Costello didn't take the Rodent out before I could. I did hate captain smirk too, but I would have been disappointed.

It's even funnier because Captain smirk never had the balls really, and the smirk will be forever ridiculed for it. Took his bat and ball and went home too after the event when he could have been leader, proving he was a sooky little wimp all along.

It's funny how Juliar is castigated for having the balls, but I suppose she really wouldn't fess up like Keating and stick the knife in the front, and she denies any hand in it, which is probably the difference more than gender.

That and the press being pissed off that they were left out of the loop. I reckon so many journos are so pissed mostly about that, and they cant forgive her for making fools of them. They play like they're 'insiders', but they had no idea. So now they're constantly banging on about leadership changes just in case. It's so funny watching them.

'He's a mediocre pollie who seems to have landed in fortuitous circumstances.......

And all he had to do was keep his trap shut. '

Oh the envy Poirot. If only Ms Gillard had get her trap shut. Disposing of Rudd and probably Gillard and turning the polls from 52/48 against to 58/42 for actually makes him possible the most successful opposition leader in history.

come on Poirot and Lexi just try very very hard to give Tony a little credit. We know you despise him but the facts speak for themselves.

Individual do you understand you do more than enough keeping the Morons seen here?
Rudd if he does not stand, and he probably will not, will leave Federal Politics.
He may re-emerge in QLD state politics or just go.
Remember without his return Labor will have trouble finding a Cricket team.
It may well see, gee I hope so, Gillard go , any place will do, and her support team will struggle to remain with the dead body of the party around their necks.
Now INDY I know my comment was not nice, I know that, and, because I AM A BETTER PERSON than you I feel dirty but you are master of spite and must expect returns.

runner,

I haven't got much time for Gillard, as it happens.

Neither have I much time for middling-Tony.

(I note you haven't kicked the habit of accusing those who think differently from you of "despising"....there's probably some kind of help group to address that out there somewhere - good luck with that!)

runner,

I don't "despise" anyone.
And if their behaviour is "despicable"
then I realise that they are troubled
and should seek professionable help.

As for Mr Abbott - I have nothing against
him. I simply don't want him as PM. I
frankly am concerned about the "do whatever
it takes" mentally that Mr Abbott possesses.
He finds condemnation easier than coming up
with policies of any substance. This is not
the type of leader that I think should
detrmine the future direction of this
great country of ours and representing us on
the world stage.

Dear Bazz,

Presumably a politician cannot be elected for more than one term at a time.

An elected head of government need not be a dictator. There can be mechanisms to keep him in check. One is recall. A sufficient percentage of voters signing a petition can call for new elections. There is also impeachment which can be for reasons of malfeasance (acting badly), misfeasance (acting wrongly) and nonfeasance (not acting).

Recall involves the entire electorate. Impeachment involves the entire parliament. Right now there are no effective checks on the head of government as long as he or she retains the support of the influential parliamentarians in her or his party.

With an elected head of government attention would be focused on the candidates for that position in addition to the candidates for local representative. In the case of Rudd I don't believe he could be elected if attention was focussed on his failings.

We could learn from Norway. No political advertising is allowed. Candidates must debate with each other face to face with no moderator involved.

Hi LEXI...

I applaud you for your measured comments apropos the fitness or otherwise of Tony Abbott being a good Prime Minister. Many of those herein have variously described him as being 'slime' and other less complimentary terms, but you merely insist that your don't wish for him to be your Prime Minister ! Good on you for that.

In my recent memory, I've not known so much anger, or vitriol expressed about politicians, then in recent years. I too am as guilty as anyone for joining in this virulent and rancorous chorus of denunciation, for most of our current crop of politicians, as anyone else on this Forum. And I really don't quite know why. But it surely does worry me ?

I am unhappy that Rudd, Gillard and Abbott are all discussed in such negative terms. I think they possibly all got into politics with mixed motives. Among their motives were personal ambition and a sincere desire to make things better. I see nothing wrong with either motive. I think Gillard is the best of the three. However, Abbott may even turn out to be a good prime minister. I regard Rudd as a failure, and as Keating said, the souffle does not rise twice.

One reason all three are discussed in such negative terms is that the media focuses on their personal qualities rather than their policies. I would be unhappy with any of them as a next door neighbour. However, one might be a lousy next door neighbour and a perfectly good prime minister.

Hi there DAVID F...

I quite like your summation on the 'terrible trio', perhaps Mr Abbott may well make a half decent Prime Minister, until he's elected it's all rather a matter of pure speculation ?

Your correlation, as to who you'd prefer as your next door neighbour was again interesting given you'd prefer none of them ? I'm in the same boat, as I'm sure none of them would care to reside in our modest neighbourhood ? I suppose at the end of the day, it's real, honest to goodness leadership that's needed in this country, together with some plain, good old fashioned (transparent) honesty ! I suppose we don't have a need to like our Prime Minister, just as long as we can trust him/her with whatever decision(s) they make.

As an example say, boat people ? If they promise to stop the boats, then stop them. If they have no intention of stopping the boats, don't give an undertaking that they will ! Misleading or deceptive conduct, will very quickly disillusion the entire electorate, as well as casting a dark shroud of uncertainty and cynicism amongst the voting public. And if they can't stop them at all, then admit it, without trying to shift the blame to others for your mistake in judgement. Often a government initiated, bi-partisan approach, will give the government more 'brownie points' than any attempts to blame the other side.

The electorate are NOT stupid, not at all. Any evidence of recurrent effectuation of either; deception, obfuscation, or mendacity, by any 'alleged' responsible government, will very quickly turn the electorate completely against them ! And if perpetrated enough, people will simply stop listening altogether, whatever the truth is they may be trying to get across !

<< How Labor can get themselves with 2 such horrible people their only choice for leader I really can not understand, but surely they could come up with at least someone better than this pear. >>

Right on Hazza.

I don’t get it. And I don’t understand how you and the good people of OLO cannot consider or promote anyone else as Labor leader. They have MUCH better people than this ‘pear’.

As I have said many times, Bob Carr and Kelvin Thomson would make excellent leaders. Also Craig Emerson. And just about every other sitting member would be better than the incumbent and former PM!

It's been a perfect act of self destruction, this past three years.

As I said back in 2010, given enough rope they will self destruct and I couldn't have written the script any better, as they have done a marvelous job.

Not only have they self destructed, but they will take those back stabbing independents with them, hopefully along with the greens as well.

They (labor) are screwed, because they can't be negative in their campaign, because the past two terms are full of negatives.

They can't be positive, because nothing positive has happened, unless of cause you call passing legislation and dreaming up UNFUNDED policies, a positive.

As for Kevin, my tip is he has a nice little job lined up, but is hanging around to offer a glimmer of hope to the poor old, easily led, or should I say, miss led, followers.

If not for the FOUR HUNDRED BILLION DOLLAR PRICE TAG, I would be suggesting the past three years was well worth the wait.

Oh well, once again we will leave it up to the libs to pull us out of the poo.

Until next time.

David Gillard insults us daily by expecting us to believe the rubbish she spouts. You can't expect to insult people without copping it back. As I said the insults are simply hers bouncing back to where they come from.

Luddy did I really do that? Well it is probably because it's such a fruity subject.

Dear Hasbeen,

No politician on the scene today has a monopoly on rubbish. I don't feel insulted at all by Gillard. I think she has a lot of guts and is a clever politician. She outsmarted Abbott in getting the independents to back her government. Frankly I am somewhat afraid of Abbott and of what will happen to the environment when he gets in. Somewhat but not completely afraid. If, as seems probable, he will get in Abbott may prove to be conscientious in preserving our environment. What politicians say when they are out of power may be quite different from what they do when they get in power. There may be nothing at all wrong with that. In order to do their job properly they may realise that it is best to do something other than what they said they would do.

Newman has been trying to make the cities inside the Great Barrier Reef iron ore and coal ports. With shipping going in and out there it is only a matter of time before there are more oil spills and damage to the reef. I think Tony Burke in declaring national Parks in the seas around Australia has done a great job in preserving our fisheries by giving fish breeding places. He is concerned with Australia's future in contrast with Newman who seems only concern with next quarter's balance sheet.

It is unfortunate that both Labor and the Coalition supporters are beset with melancholy, but understandable. On one hand there is the incompetence of Gillard and Rudd for Labor, but there is equally no joy from the other side, the buffoonery of Abbott and Bishop.
Take heart my friends there is a third alternative, a party with noble leadership, a party of the people, a party one can support with confidence, a party of vision, compassion, unity, a party one can trust with conference. THE GREENS.
Come September, I can see no alternative than a vote for, stability, democracy and down right good governance, a vote for THE GREENS.
Without bias I can assure one and all, Green politicians are of the noblest order, particularly my friend Lee Rhiannon, but the rest are top notch as well

David F, while the environment is important, it's all about balance, between that, and our balance sheet, as you put it, because there is little point in having a POTENIALLY wealthy country, if no one can axcess that wealth.

As for saving the reef, more has to be done to put protection in place, as simply shutting up shop will also shut up shop for our economy.

Now while you may not care about this, I hope you don't have children/grand children, because if you do, you are actually wanting to deprive them of the rights and life style you were lucky enough to enjoy yourself.

As for Cambel Newman in QLD, perhaps you can answer the question that no other on OLO has dared answer, that being, how else would you propose we pay back the huge debt accumulated by labor, other than by the slash and burn method he has adopted.

Dear rehctub,

I have children and grandchildren, but they all live in the US. The environment is all important. It cannot be disregarded if we are to have a future. It is not a limitless source and sink. Campbell Newman somehow doesn't realise that, and I don't think you do either.

Dear rehctub,

Surely there must be a better way of paying back
debts than in making cuts to the very basics like
front-line staff in hospitals. What's the use of
having surpluses or money in banks at the expense
of people's lives and well-being. That's not what
governments are supposed to do. A balance in everything
should be maintained. Going down the destructive path
of severe cuts is not the answer. Especially while
giving themselves high salary increases and other
benefits.

Belly,
What, you're a better person because you continue to support the most abject failure of Government in the history of this country & because you were one of those unionists who contributed to this mess ?
Get serious feller, Rudd is gone. It is nothing short of insulting to battling Australians that you continue to push for those morons. Have some thought for the victims of Labor Government Policies. Don't be so heartless.
Labor will have a totally new leader very soon, someone no-one even considers at this stage.
Labor could be a good party again if only it divorced the corrupt unions. Once that big Goaf is gone everything will change.

Yes Lexi, there is a better way, it's called SOUND ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT.

You see what the likes of you seem to conveniently ignore, is that all that is happening, is the incoming governments are faced with these huge debts, amd as in QLD's case, gross over employment within the public sector, and some how, they are trying to first, sto the bleeding, then secondly, try to pay back the debt.

I would also suggest that you and your supporters have allowed these messes to happen, so seriously doubt that you have any right to complain about the solution.

QLD is about a year or two away from a huge revenue spike from the CSG sector, as the past four years have been relatively, non productive.

The REALLY SAD part of this, is that this revenue bonanza, rather than be shared to all , Queenslanders, will be used to pay back labor's appalling debt.

You, and your labor lover mates, should give yourselves a stiff upper cut, because this is your doing, with your unconditional support, as much as it is the respective governments.

One could assume we may still own the likes of Telstra, if not for labor imcompitence, as it was also sold to pay down labor's debt.

Sound familiar, there's a pattern there Lexi!

Lexi & Hasbeen,
The problem is that the debt is so large that it is pointless going
after the smaller cost centres, you are much more likely to get at the
waste by tackling those departments with the largest budgets.

In those departments the waste can be easily hidden but it is in just
those departments where the biggest economies are possible.

There is a very limited time in which to go after the savings before
our fall in growth overcomes all spending.
If and when that happens, the cutbacks will make the Queensland
cutbacks look like a minor review.

I have read with interest the opinions offered under 'I,ve changed my mind'. I would like to say this, I am a conservative voter, always have been.That said, I was absolutely saddened to see the departure of Simon Crean, He was the one single genuine person in the current pack of criminals in government. You ask, who should lead? Simon Crean would have been the answer. Be interesting how Julia Gillard will fare over the AWU/Slater and Gordon rort once she is shovelled out of Office.It has been absolutely disgusting the gag on the media has been over this issue. She should have gone the way of Gough when he toadyed up to the Arabs to bail his govt out. Keep up the comments it is refreshing to read all points of view. Cliffy

Well, I got my wish. Now for the public to do it's part.