Belly,

The coalition differ from the labor party in that nearly everything they promise they deliver, as opposed to labor that delivers nearly nothing.

Kredit Dudd has not got a policy he hasn't back flipped on or stuffed up.

Poirot,

The original question was "does Rudd deserve our trust to govern".

I am not privy to the inner workings of either party. However, my own personal opinion is formed on Rudd's dismal past performance, and his past and present policies which have proved detrimental to not only our nation, but also his own party. His record so far has not demonstrated that he can be trusted in the future.

As Abbott is still in coalition, who can predict his future performance should he become P.M.?

Here again, it should be noted that Abbott's ministers trust him to be their leader, and to date [despite lacking the charisma of Rudd] he and his team have presented us with no reason to assume they could possibly do a worse job than Rudd with either his past or present team.

So, Poirot, why to vote for Abbott?

Maybe because he is relatively uncomplicated, and thus he, with his government, is far less likely to embark on some unaccountable and grandiose scheme(s) from out of 'left field', and far more likely to 'hear' what the constituency would like to see his government do.

Maybe also because he is likely to follow a conservative (meaning relatively traditional and non-confrontational) path in economic, budgetary, social, industrial and international affairs.

Maybe because he will listen to his colleagues, and take advice from advisers and consultants, and can be relied upon to be responsible and accountable.

Can Tony Abbott be a 'great' or 'revolutionary' leader? I don't really think so, but then I would not really expect him to try, for this is not in his nature, not in his ambition, and not his intention.

Want 'tried and true'? Then give Tony a go.
Want to be sitting on a knife-edge waiting for the next 'bold initiative' toward the construction of a homogeneous egalitarian Oz, then go with Kevin, and the best of British to you.
Want to create a mixed outcome, go 'Green'.
Want to 'leap' into the unknown, then go for Palmer or Katter.
What can I tell you, there are also the Shooters and Fishers, Marijuana, Family First, etc, for a 'well-rounded' representation to fill out the field.
A coin in the air, or a well-founded judgement?
Working dog, or 'show pony'?
It's all up for grabs, or so it would seem.

Thank you, Saltpetre.

But I'm unimpressed with Tony Abbott. I think he's mediocre. I think he became leader by accident (when Minchin was angling for Hockey). I think he had a good run when all he had to do was coast, he did okay.

It's obvious to me that now he's had to step up, he's lacking considerable substance.

By the same token, Rudd lost me with Manus.

So I'm sorry to say, that in the lower house I feel I have no-one to vote for.

I think the two majors both stink.

Poirot,
As one who has experienced politics in Australia for about 45 years I totally agree with you that Abbott is a mediocre lightweight in what are a general bunch of lightweights, including Rudd, and I hate to say it Milne is in the same category. I don't know if you ever experienced Whitlam at his best, Gough made the likes of Billy 'Big Ears' McMahon look like a fool and second rater both inside and outside the parliament.
In my book Australia's greatest politician and champion of the people was 'The Big Fella' Jack Lang, Premier of NSW, sacked by a governor, expelled from the Labor Party, sat in the federal parliament. I only knew of him when he was in his 90's but even at that age he could mix it with the best of them. My old man knew Lang well and told me he would chew up and spit out conservative politicians one after another, had them for breakfast. Lang wrote a few books I've read them and one by Governor Sir Phillip Game's daughter about Lang's sacking, they make very interesting reading.
p/s Lang still holds the record for a crowd at a political rally 200,000 in Centennial Park Sydney in the 1930's.

Poirot in saying Rudd lost you over his solution you highlight a truth.
See I once would never agree with his actions.
I like the bloke, and am full of joy at his return, he will reform my party.
About 50 years ago we had great policy,s, and no chance of ever implementing them.
Men like the big man Jack Lang briefly showed what we could be.
But it was not just a right wing nut who cut that ribbon who stood against him.
He found working class folk voted with conservatives against him.
Witlam had to endure power brokers and yes workers who bought the fear and loathing against him.
Hawk floated above all that and changed much, his followers too had to confront voters fragmenting Labor and sending us to the sin bin.
History shows it is not Liberals not their pup the Nationals.
But us the workers who in time and every time dump Labor.
We could do it again, it is on a knife edge.
Fragmentation of our vote and yes folk demanding we neck our selves, tie our selves to things Australians never will vote for see us out of office, every time.
At what point do we under stand? like the mischief filled greens we gain nothing, just get kicked out.
And those we oppose? the get the clear air from Australian Workers to do their worst, put their policy in place of ours.
Who wins Poirot then?