Watching politician Albanese being interviewed on The Bolt Report yesterday, I said to my wife, "Now there's a man who could wipe the grin off Turnbull's face"

Despite his political colours, I have always had a grudging respect for Albo. That he had the grit, unlike his leader, to face Bolt, who leaves it to poor old Bruce Hawker (another nice bloke) to attempt to explain Labor's failures and ineptitude.

I'm begining to think that Albo is a neoconservative, even though he probably doesn't know it, and might not care to admit it because of the 'nastiness' the description raises in the minds of the ignorant, who use it as term of abuse. We need more neoconservatives on both sides of politics; liberal-minded people who are sickened by socialism (which is no way liberal) and by conservatives, who don't have the will or the courage to defend their values
or their country. If Labor want's to do Turnbull, who thinks his job is just public relations, then Albo is their man.

Well Ttbn, the last thing one wants to do is to vote for a prime-minister.

Even if you like the wo/man, you actually bring in a whole party and as the last years' experience shows, it's unlikely that they will remain in power anyway.

I always only vote for the policies on the party's agenda, not the persons.

(and BTW, I think that Labor has a good chance next time, should they oppose the GST-increase while the Liberals push for it)

He can't be any worse than Shorten. But Yuyutsu is right; and in our system we don't get to vote for party leaders (unless we live in their seat, which most voters don't). You're better off focusing on policies rather than personalities. The person selling a policy might be erudite, charming and witty, but the policy they're trying to sell might still be awful.

Turnbull could sell ice to eskimos but the policies he has to sell are determined by the whole party room and thus likely to be crap, as Liberal policy usually is. Shorten, on the other hand, would struggle to sell eskimos central heating at below cost price, which is a shame because the Labor party typically have a better platform then the Liberals. So I still vote Labor even though Shorten is a dud because a) I'm not voting for Shorten, he doesn't run in my electorate and b) I want Labor to win the seat because they have a better platform.

Thanks for your responses.

I am fully aware that we do not vote for party leaders, as you both should know. I can still comment on individual politicians (most of whom I can't stand).

I am merely expressing MY opinion of a certain person. If the Labor Party wants to stick with the totally inept Shorten, that's up to them. I don't want them back in power, anyway. Nor do I want Turnbull as PM and, of course, I can't do anything about him, either. All I hope Is, at the next election there will be enough choice that I can put the major parties on the bottom, but just above the Greens. The stupid quasi socialists in the Coaition have to be taught that they cannot morph into another Labor Party. They have effectively an arrogantly deprived voters of choice.

After thought: perhaps we should be electing the leaders; they all act like presidents these days. Turnbull's first lie was his 'return to cabinet goverment. His leading rat Bishop put a stop to that.

A wise friend said to me about a year ago "The first Party to change their leader will win the next election". I think they were right.

If Albanese had been elected to lead the Party - and he was only frustrated by the union block-vote - we would have the makings of a credible opposition. As it is, we have a popularity contest in which there is at present only one winner.

And the idea that we "always only vote for the policies on the party's agenda, not the persons" is misguided in the extreme. One of the hopes that created Turnbull's accession was that he would be an entirely different "person" to Abbott, and that his less confrontational mental approach to politics would effect a change in policies over a period of time.

Whether he is able to live up to that hope remains to be seen, of course. But I for one find his presence, as exemplified by his sessions with other world leaders, to be far less excruciatingly embarrassing that his predecessor's.

Contrary to Toni Lavis opinion, I think verbal diarrhoea Turnbull is Labors greatest hope.

The fool will continue running off at the mouth progressively alienating more of those who might vote for him, winning only those who would never vote Liberal, like Tony. Thus they give Labor a real chance, even with the dropkicks they continually chose as leaders.

It seems at present the parties are having a competition to see who can elect the worst possible leader.