TOPIC:

DD wrote: It would be a great shame if Australians were so gullible to hand over the reigns of a growing economy and a government delivering surpluses, a government that has restored its AAA credit rating to a mob of drongos with an appalling track record of wasting money.

Do we need to be reminded of the cash splash of the previous Labor government? Pink bats that resulted in a bunch of cowboys suddenly starting up home insulation businesses identifying an opportunity to make a fast buck from tax payers money and kill innocent young men in doing so?

Solar batteries will be the next pink bats fiasco if that little smurf gets in power. Someone send him some hemoroid cream because Scott Morrison is tearing him a new one and he just sits there like a little girl.

Labors questions in parliament are pathetic and shows how incapable they are to govern this country. The way Labor carried on in Victoria dancing and chanting "4 more years..... 4 more years...." was sickening.

The Prime Minister is spot on. Victoria re elected an incumbent government in a growing well performing economy but federal Labor is already celebrating seeing it somehow as a vote against the federal government.

Surely Australians are not that stupid and gullible to be able to separate state and federal performance?

DD latest Newspoll (associated with The Australian in case you try it is a left leaning poll) 45-55.

Hawthorn is currently 50.38% (Liberals) to 49.62% (ALP)

Brighton where a 19 year old student campaigning as the ALP candidate for 6 weeks prior to the election: 47.01% (ALP) to 52.99% (Liberals).

Let me know whether you would like me to quote some more figures in blue ribbon Liberal seats.

You might need to re-visit how the Liberal coalition government has performed with respect to whether they have reduced or increased the debt.

As for your comments with respect to some work place deaths Abbott showed that he had no interest in improving workplace safety on the basis on the terms of reference of the RC.

For the record there has not been a surplus delivered since the time Abbott became PM.

How do you explain the PM has increased his lead as preferred Prime Minister after the Victorian election? Leading by about 10 percent from memory. That is the one you should be worrying about and your party is hamstrung by it's past too frightened of the backlash to replace it's unpopular leader.

Can your party come up with any other question than "Prime Minister, can you please explain why the former Prime Minister lost his job?" We've moved on, about time your party did too and got on with the job of PROVING it is capable of governing and managing a vibrant economy and that doesn't mean going on a debt fueled spending spree.

DD wrote: How do you explain the PM has increased his lead as preferred Prime Minister after the Victorian election? Leading by about 10 percent from memory. That is the one you should be worrying about and your party is hamstrung by it's past too frightened of the backlash to replace it's unpopular leader.

Can your party come up with any other question than "Prime Minister, can you please explain why the former Prime Minister lost his job?" We've moved on, about time your party did too and got on with the job of PROVING it is capable of governing and managing a vibrant economy and that doesn't mean going on a debt fueled spending spree.

There are 150 electorates in the House of Reps; only one electorate get a chance to vote for Morrison. 149 other electorates don't vote for or against Morrison. So would I prefer Shorten to be preferred PM with the Liberals polling 55-45 or the reverse> I will take the reverse every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

What is quite amusing is that you think the ALP should "move on". Do you mean move on the way that Abbott moved on in 2010 by moving time after time after timea motion to suspend standing orders rather than ask questions in question time? By the way he lost everyone of those motions to suspend standing orders. He lost the move to suspend standing orders 84 times.

I again ask if you are aware of whether the debt has increased or decreased during the lifetime of the Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison governments?

If things are so rosy why doesn't Morrison call an election now?

With respect to changing Prime Ministers the Liberals saw what was the impact on Labor when they changed PMs and despite that they did it.

Oh you mean like those polls that showed your girl Hillary was a shoe in to become America's first female President? Haha. It's pre season Swannie if you want to brag about being April premiers you go girl. Why should the Prime Minister call an early election? What are you worried about? You are not worried about the next budget and numbers that come in before the next election are you?

Would you be worried Australians might ask themselves if things are ticking over nicely and Scott Morrison seems like a decent bloke without any blood on his hands like so many others including the leader of the opposition, then why change government?

DD wrote: Oh you mean like those polls that showed your girl Hillary was a shoe in to become America's first female President? Haha. It's pre season Swannie if you want to brag about being April premiers you go girl. Why should the Prime Minister call an early election? What are you worried about? You are not worried about the next budget and numbers that come in before the next election are you?

Would you be worried Australians might ask themselves if things are ticking over nicely and Scott Morrison seems like a decent bloke without any blood on his hands like so many others including the leader of the opposition, then why change government?

DD your comments are quite amazing. I am far to the left of Hillary Clinton. I am not worried about the likely result of the next Federal election. There is a fundamental BUT HUGE difference between the methodology of electing the US Presidency and how an Australian Federal government is elected.

The polls pre-Victorian election UNDERSTATED the swing TO the Labor Party.

I will give you a tip that Paul Murray (Sky News) when talking about Julia Banks used an analogy of a suicide bomber will not sway people to vote for the Liberal Party.

Let me also talk about the special envoy for water who is on Paul Murray's programme irrationally say that he was wearing a Melbourne Demon's tie on tonight. If I pretended to be a North Melbourne or Collingwood supporter they would call me out. . . And actually I do support North Melbourne. Memo to Joyce if your party wants to support the rural communities, then support legislation that will reduce Australia's CO2 emissions.

It is becoming more accepted that Scott Morrison does have blood on his hands.

swan42 wrote:

DD wrote: How do you explain the PM has increased his lead as preferred Prime Minister after the Victorian election? Leading by about 10 percent from memory. That is the one you should be worrying about and your party is hamstrung by it's past too frightened of the backlash to replace it's unpopular leader.

Can your party come up with any other question than "Prime Minister, can you please explain why the former Prime Minister lost his job?" We've moved on, about time your party did too and got on with the job of PROVING it is capable of governing and managing a vibrant economy and that doesn't mean going on a debt fueled spending spree.

There are 150 electorates in the House of Reps; only one electorate get a chance to vote for Morrison. 149 other electorates don't vote for or against Morrison. So would I prefer Shorten to be preferred PM with the Liberals polling 55-45 or the reverse> I will take the reverse every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

What is quite amusing is that you think the ALP should "move on". Do you mean move on the way that Abbott moved on in 2010 by moving time after time after timea motion to suspend standing orders rather than ask questions in question time? By the way he lost everyone of those motions to suspend standing orders. He lost the move to suspend standing orders 84 times.

I again ask if you are aware of whether the debt has increased or decreased during the lifetime of the Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison governments?

If things are so rosy why doesn't Morrison call an election now?

With respect to changing Prime Ministers the Liberals saw what was the impact on Labor when they changed PMs and despite that they did it.

Not disagreeing with a range of things, merely observing that following Morrison's announcement to bring the budget forward means that in effect he has actually called an election. Sports bet et al won't be taking bats on either 11 or 18 May now.
Only thing is he has called what looms as the longest election campaign in history.

gtrxuone wrote:

Bazza wrote:

gtrxuone wrote:

Bazza wrote:

BC wrote:

gtrxuone wrote: Bazz a LNP MP Julia Banks just quit the government. Sitting as an independent. Not happy with the way Malcom was axed as Leader.The sensible centre has disappeared .Does Scmo have to call an election now.

He pretty much has gtr...it'll be April 11 or 18 next year.

Yep, its a dogs breakfast, its like the last days of Rome..lol

April /May Election BC - another strategic blunder SCO MO has given away the date meaning he has to fight it till then, remember when Gillard announced the date early..

Like the Democrats in the US Baz.Labour can buy and sell the LNP a few times over.Dont think Malcom will be opening his cheque book this time around,lol.

Agree mate, when they got rid of MT, they also got rid of about 2 Million in donations via him and Julie Bishop..

Lets see how much Abbott and Abetz can raise...

Big 4 Banks.MBA.Some Chinese donars.Some miners.Lucky to be 30% of what Labour have.

Mate I very much doubt the Banks will be donating to anyone at the moment or for a while as a result of their toxic PR from the RC.

But you are right, they will have stuff all compared to the ALP,

DD wrote: How do you explain the PM has increased his lead as preferred Prime Minister after the Victorian election? Leading by about 10 percent from memory. That is the one you should be worrying about and your party is hamstrung by it's past too frightened of the backlash to replace it's unpopular leader.

Can your party come up with any other question than "Prime Minister, can you please explain why the former Prime Minister lost his job?" We've moved on, about time your party did too and got on with the job of PROVING it is capable of governing and managing a vibrant economy and that doesn't mean going on a debt fueled spending spree.

DD, as much as I would love to see the Libs win, and keep Shorten and his leftwing nuts out, I think you are seriously misreading the situation, the results since SCMO took over have been catastrophic, to go from 2PP to 10PP and lose blue ribbon liberal seats for the first time in 100 years is shocking.
Turnbull was far more popular than both SC MO and Shorten as preferred leader as well.

Denis Shanahan sums it all up well today in the OZ

The time has come to concede the reality of an apocalyptic vision for the future of the Liberal Party and the Coalition government.

Until now, it has been possible for Liberals to grasp at straws, like Bill Shorten’s unpopularity, and point to undeniable positives, the strength of the economy, as Scott Morrison battles almost impossible odds to win the next election.

But after the Victorian Liberal rout, there is a stench of panic among federal MPs. The “departure lounge” is filling with those planning careers after politics; some ministers are so shell-shocked by the leadership fights they have been rendered useless.


Factional fighting has become an end in itself, ignoring election damage, and John Howard’s “broad church” appears split asunder, incapable of reconciliation.

There is also a palpable feeling that some are looking at becoming opposition leader.

Another one by RICHO today...


For many well-heeled Liberal voters in Victoria on Saturday, the habit of a lifetime was broken. If a 19-year-old kid who spent two bob on his campaign could come within a whisker of winning a seat such as Brighton, which is about as safe for the Liberals as Wentworth, then it is time for the Liberals to realise that their situation is almost hopeless.

I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall at the meeting of Victorian federal MPs in the aftermath of Saturday’s rout. If there was any honesty in that room, they must have acknowledged that Scott Morrison is leading them to their biggest defeat. That the government seems to carry on with a “steady as she goes” attitude is simply staggering.

Even in the Hawke years, Labor never recorded a really big win, but Bill Shorten looks like he will enter the record books with a victory to rival those of John Howard and Malcolm Fraser. The government has successfully managed to get everyone who wants a job into one, but has failed to grasp the disillusionment of the mob whose wages stay stagnant while the government claims the economy is in great shape. This is an incendiary dichotomy and the punters are becoming more sullen by the day.




When the Treasurer attacks Labor with the old line that they are spendthrifts, the attack falls on deaf ears. Out there in the suburbs, towns and villages, it is well known this government has more than doubled the debt Labor left it. The distrust in politicians so rife in our community means the punters wish a pox on both their houses. With all that ill-will permeating the electorate, the only thing the government can do is come up with a big and bold plan, but it does not seem to have the stomach for that.

The Opposition Leader is not trying to take too much of the spotlight. He is content to watch the government flounder, just prodding and poking when appropriate. When Newspoll was published on Monday morning, that 55-45 per cent result must have sent chills down many a Coalition spine. There is no sign the government is recovering its numbers and I can’t image how the future could look more bleak.

To try to paint the government malaise as a by-product of the ousting of Malcolm Turnbull ignores the fact that Turnbull lost 38 Newspolls in a row. The Coalition is not offering anything the electorate wants to buy.

As the mob sees the government as tired and pedestrian, you’d expect to see dynamic proposals from the government to get itself back in the race. Nothing like that is happening; it appears it is meekly accepting its fate.

When Labor dumped Bob Hawke in December 1991 and replaced him with Paul Keating, those of us involved did not really believe Labor would win the next election. What we wanted was at least to go out fighting. At the moment, the Coalition is not putting up much of a fight.