Both Gillard and Rudd are proven liars, by their own statements.
At least, at this stage, Abbott hasn't fibbed, yet.
Gillard still has to face the law in respect of her criminal involvements with the union funds and now out of her own pockets. That will be fun.
Did you notice Rudd carrying his bible very prominently. Abbott and Rudd both have God on their sides. Which God is the true God?
Remember Gillard was Godless. Perhaps that is why she fell to the devis sword.

"....Abbott hasn't fibbed, yet."

Au contraire.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2003/s933489.htm

This is a sterling effort, worthy of an Olympic gymnast.

Oh dear, Chris "gaff" has done it again. He lied about Abbott not having fibbed (thanks Poirot). He thinks the reason Gillard is not still PM is because she's "Godless". He thinks Rudd became PM specifically to "increase his superannuation and pension".

Oh deary, deary me.

Gee, I hope Mr Gaff becomes Abbott's speech writer. I really do.

What does KRudd stand for:

Wild spending and huge deficits
Very expensive school halls
Pink batts with dead teenagers and house fires
Open borders
Failed health reform
Grocery watch
Fuel watch
Mining super tax
Asbestos fibre to the home?

My concern with Abbott is also with his character. I don't think he is a monster or a misogynist as some have tried to paint him, but his penchant for vitriole and negative campaigning is a concern. It is more than just an Opposition keeping the government honest and many times the media did not call him out on misrepresenting government policy (many of which they voted for in Parliament).

His attacks against Gillard (no matter what you think of her policies) sunk to bottom-dwelling lows with the comment about her father in Parliament. This is not the sort of person I want as PM but more importantly the LNP have continually avoided discussing their policies which shows great disregard to the voters. The LNP may think the election is a done deal but the electorate will not allow itself to be disrespected or taken for granted.

Not that it is a big issue for me as I am not a Liberal or Labor voter as my first preference, although I have voted for a Liberal once for local government. I am now in a quandary. With Rudd as leader and with the LNP taking policy advice from the IPA and the big end of town, I am not sure who to preference in this election.

It is slim pickings. I hope that those who vote for major parties remember to keep some minor parties and independents in the Senate so we don't get a repeat of Workchoices (or worse) given the pressure on the LNP to go hard on the most lowly paid Australians.

Come on Poirot, you're usually very rational but today you seem to be just a little oppositional instead. You asked a question: 'what does Mr Abbott stand for?' I offered an answer. Simple as that. I have no reason to doubt his intent to deliver, but whether or not he is successful in the delivery remains to be seen. His plan for the North is a 17-year plan, which puts a lot of faith in the desire and ability of subsequent governments to follow through. It also puts a lot of faith in mysterious buckets of money that must come from somewhere, especially as he intends to repeal the carbon tax and mining tax (neither of which has proven particularly profitable to date).

A leader's intention and performance are two different things. I have no doubt that Julia Gillard INTENDED to deliver a better education system, but she didn't manage to do so in her time. Campbell Newman INTENDED to reduce the cost of living in Queensland (well, he said he did), but he hasn't managed to do so. Jenny Hill, our mayor here in Townsville, INTENDED to do all manner of things - water rebates, frozen rates, etc. - but hasn't managed to do so. Inheritance of dodgy finances and constant obstruction from those in opposition can wreak havoc with one's ability to follow through.

So, as I said: you asked what Mr Abbot stands for; I offered an answer.