TOPIC:

Bazza wrote:

westaussieguy wrote: Don't normally watch that Q&A programme but old abbot's getting a caning on there tonight. No body has asked the obvious question. Not unless I missed it?

Yep watched it last night , 1st one for the year.

Lambie, wtf do you do with her, fair dinkum she is a moron, cheap shots and zero ideas.

The greens bird is a bit of a looker , but honestly she must hust bonged on before the show, Her big plan was to scrap fuel subs for mining and abolish coal mining , just when commodities are tanking, and investment is pulling out she comes up with that, brilliant thinking should help the balance of payments.

Swanny was there, still dreaming about a mining tax, how would that be going now?

Senator Maddigan seemed half normal and not a bad bloke, but if he honestly thinks we are going back to high tariffs and protectionism so we can buuld Astor TV;s here he needs a tardis machine. he then went on try and justify the Collins Class Subs project shambles as a minor hickup whilst admitting the Germany and Japan buuld better subs anyway.

You're spot on Bazza.
Lambie is a scary individual and it just shows to what depths and standards the parliament has sunk to.

The greeny looked good but yes she had a smiley glint in her eyes. Bonged up? Maybe. They talk so much crap it makes you often think that.

calling 42...come in 42...in answer to your question on the Swans thread...I'm not sure how you're thinking at the moment on the relative strengths and weaknesses of both sides of politics but I for one reckon Labor and the Libs are devoid of any real talent and I can't see an obvious choice other than say Turnbull on the right and Plibersek on the left as potential PM's. I'm very cautious of Turnbull as I think the only difference between Rudd and himself is the fact they both dress to opposite sides but other than that they're very philsophically similar..which is a worry.

...and my question to you 42...notwithstanding you're not a fan of Abbott or the Libs...would you be sacking an incumbent PM at this point given the chaos of the Gillard/Rudd era and how it came back to bite both on the ar$e?

BC wrote: ...and my question to you 42...notwithstanding you're not a fan of Abbott or the Libs...would you be sacking an incumbent PM at this point given the chaos of the Gillard/Rudd era and how it came back to bite both on the ar$e?

It is a moot point. One observation would be that if the Liberals had supported the mandate that the ALP received when they won the 2007 Federal election they would have passed the ETS legislation. If that have been done the replacing of Rudd would not have occurred. Apparently it is only a mandate if the Libs and Nats win government.

The second observation is that I like the cute gymnastics that some Liberals are indulging in when they talk about replacing a PM in his first term; the reality is that they replaced Gorton, a sitting PM, with silly Billy McMahon.

With respect to Turnbull, I can't see how they can elect him as leader without supporting an ETS. J Bishop has demonstrated her loyalty by being deputy to three different leaders. As for Morrison the perception, and I would argue the reality, about the 2014 budget was that it was singularly unfair and hurt lower income families compared to the well off in our society; the election of S Morrison would escalate that perception by a factor of 10.

J Hockey is damaged goods never to recover.

Your side could always select B Bishop, or get B Joyce to change camps.

I hope that helps.

the agreement given by Turnbull for an ETS when he was leader of the oppn was contrary to party policy...hence his demise...so don't think your point re Rudd is valid.

swan42 wrote:

BC wrote: ...and my question to you 42...notwithstanding you're not a fan of Abbott or the Libs...would you be sacking an incumbent PM at this point given the chaos of the Gillard/Rudd era and how it came back to bite both on the ar$e?

It is a moot point. One observation would be that if the Liberals had supported the mandate that the ALP received when they won the 2007 Federal election they would have passed the ETS legislation. If that have been done the replacing of Rudd would not have occurred. Apparently it is only a mandate if the Libs and Nats win government.

The second observation is that I like the cute gymnastics that some Liberals are indulging in when they talk about replacing a PM in his first term; the reality is that they replaced Gorton, a sitting PM, with silly Billy McMahon.

With respect to Turnbull, I can't see how they can elect him as leader without supporting an ETS. J Bishop has demonstrated her loyalty by being deputy to three different leaders. As for Morrison the perception, and I would argue the reality, about the 2014 budget was that it was singularly unfair and hurt lower income families compared to the well off in our society; the election of S Morrison would escalate that perception by a factor of 10.

J Hockey is damaged goods never to recover.

Your side could always select B Bishop, or get B Joyce to change camps.

I hope that helps.

Gorton wasnt unseated in the ballot, he resigned, no gymnsatics there.

Forget Morrison Hocket et all they are not even on the radar that is more than obvious.

It will be Bishop or Turnbull, Bishop for mine the most obvious, although if Turnbull gets in Shorten might as well give up now he will wipe the floor with him, such is his popularity in the middle ground.

ETS or no ETS. Theres bugger all votes in climate change , its all about the economy from here on in.

BC wrote: the agreement given by Turnbull for an ETS when he was leader of the oppn was contrary to party policy...hence his demise...so don't think your point re Rudd is valid.

whats the current ALP policy on climate change? do they even know?

BC wrote: calling 42...come in 42...in answer to your question on the Swans thread...I'm not sure how you're thinking at the moment on the relative strengths and weaknesses of both sides of politics but I for one reckon Labor and the Libs are devoid of any real talent and I can't see an obvious choice other than say Turnbull on the right and Plibersek on the left as potential PM's. I'm very cautious of Turnbull as I think the only difference between Rudd and himself is the fact they both dress to opposite sides but other than that they're very philsophically similar..which is a worry.

One point of difference is Turnballs spouse isnt a convicted Heroin trafficker, just a little thing to think about.

This is after they declared support for the pm. Reported on the news this morning that Abbot met with Julie Bishop. Asking her not to challenge for the Liberal leadership.
She did not give him that assurance according to the news article.

westaussieguy wrote: This is after they declared support for the pm. Reported on the news this morning that Abbot met with Julie Bishop. Asking her not to challenge for the Liberal leadership.
She did not give him that assurance according to the news article.

She's pretty ambitious and will give it a crack I reckon.