The Australian reports that Newspoll has produced its second successive result of 57-43 in Labor’s favour. The Prime Minister’s approval rating is up two points to 68 per cent, while Brendan Nelson’s preferred leader rating is down two points to 12 per cent. More to follow.
We also have the weekly Essential Research survey showing Labor’s lead steady on 58-42. Also featured are questions on issues deemed important in determining vote choice, economic conditions, interest rates and China’s human rights record. The first of these provides at least some good news for the Coalition if you know where to look: Labor’s core strengths of health and education are found to have fallen in importance since January, while economic management and taxation are up (though so is environment). There is also an echo of the Gippsland by-election in the substantial increase on “Australian jobs and the protection of local industries”.
UPDATE: Newspoll graphic here. Brendan Nelson’s disapproval rating up from 42 per cent to 48 per cent.
969 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 15 16 [17] 18 19 … 20 » Show All
Everyone’s been wondering about the OO relentless campaign to install Cossie as Lib leader, although it will guarantee another electoral defeat. Perhaps they have put money on him. These are the odds fro who will lead the LNP at the next Fed election. I’m stunned to see Tip so short.
Peter Costello 1.80
Malcolm Turnbull 2.20
Brendan Nelson 3.50
Julie Bishop 9.00
Joe Hockey 26.00
Tony Abbott 34.00
The libs are truly short on talent. Remember last year when the libs were telling us that the ALP is lacking in talent Ha ha ho ho haw haaaawww.
What is the topic, William?
Gusface 774
I too thought that piece on Howard in the SMH was amazing. The degree of self-deception on Howard’s part was incredible: he said it would be “cowardly” to stand down and admit you aren’t the best man to lead? I suppose then that Howard was “courageous” to cling to office and double-cross Costello on the leadership deal.
I might refer our former prime minister to Aristotle’s Nichomaen ethics for a more reliable definition of courage and cowardice.
Federal politics, Adam. Bit boring I’m afraid, but there it is.
Bill 797
Spot on. As I said earlier, Putin has called the west’s bluff and won. It was a bluff, because the US had no practical political, economic or military option to stop him. They should have tried to negotiate but instead they marginalised Russia and made it more of an enemy than it had to be. For all that some people fear Russia, they should realise that the most dangerous opponent is one who is themselves afraid. They are more likley to lash out. Everything that has been done to increase Russian insecurity has only increased the risk of conflict.
I also agree with your comments about the dangerous precedent’s set in recent years. When you rule with a “might is right” attitude (Bush) you should know what is coming when you are no longer the mightiest kid on the block.
Worse than that, I think Bush has been a poster boy for recruiting of all the crackpot extremist groups out there. He is effectively perpetuating conflict. How many suicide bombers will we be reading about in ten years time who grew up in a refugee camp full of displaced Iraqis? I wonder if any military intelligence types out there have accurate numbers on the strength of all the various al Quaida clones around the world. I wouldn’t mind betting that most of them have more active members now than they did in 2001.
806 Socrates - What federal seat is Putin in?
807 Gary, the Black Sea, I believe.
Thanks William
I did not want us to go into either Iraq and in fact demonstrated against it. I thought that it was wrong in terms of morality, didn’t believe the WMD story, and, on balance, thought that the war was not going to be worth the cost. With literally millions of (who was counting, exactly?) of the Iraqi civilian population driven out of their homes, or their country, or dead, I think in retrospect I was probably right. One of the reasons I am keen on us not getting into a war unless absolutely forced to, is, for example, seeing a 70 year old woman weep as she described, about forty years after the event, the results on her family of a stray shell in the basement of their house in Arnhem. We tend to forget that wars mainly happen to very ordinary people and that for many of the ordinary people the traumatic impact of the war lasts a lifetime.
We are ‘out’ of Iraq and I would like us to get out of Afghanistan, now.
1. I agree with Adam re: the professionalism of the ADF. The excellence of our soldiers is something that makes me proud to be an Australian; it also makes me somewhat angry when any of them cop it. What a waste of good people. However, the professionalism, or otherwise, of the ADF does not provide in itself a reason why they should be fighting someone in Afghanistan or anywhere else.
2. However good the Australian soldiers are, they are a pimple on the elephant’s bum, making a very small difference. So, in the grand scheme of things, they are essentially there for show. What have we got to show for our show? Mateship with the US pres? How far did that get Saakashvili?
3. Looking at the present, there is some degree of stability in Afghanistan but, realistically, will there be any substantial difference in Afghanistan for the forseeable future without long term propping up? Let’s take a ten year span, which is pretty short time if you are looking for genuine, substantial national reforms in a place like Afghanistan. That will be at least three US presidents’ worth of time. I would judge it very unlikely that the Americans are going to stick it out for that long. As US casualties are dropping in Iraq, they are increasing in Afghanistan. IED deployment in Afghanistan is getting more effective. Foreign jihadis now apparently choose Afghanisaton by way of Pakistan for their next trip abroad. When the US skedaddles, we will skedaddle.
4. The fundamental question for me is this: What are we trading for Australian casualties and for traumatized vets, which is what so many vets are? The main difference to date seems to have been a remarkable increase in the opium crop with some minor infrastructure improvements over small parts of the country. Some petty warlords/governors have been established with a nidnod deal with mission control in Kabul. There the governors are, lording over their bits, as per time immemorial. There is an Afghan ‘army’ that is not really fighting very much, and an Afghan police force which is mostly either useless, in cahoots with the enemy, or both.
5. Afghanistan and Pakistan are fundamentally bound together. Musharref, ex-despot and Bush’s pin up boy, is a goner. (BTW, was it really part of Australia’s foreign policy to not knock off a despot in Pakistan and to knock one off in Iraq - seems a bit inconsistent.) Pakistani governance is very fragile. The army cannot control the tribal regions. The secret service is riddled with the enemy. The madrassas are unrestrained and are going full tilt recruiting and training the next wave of jihadis. What, really, can extra US pressure fix here?
6. I also believe that one way to increase the number and ferocity of jihadis is to maintain foreign militaries in muslim countries, kill lots of muslim civilians, by mistake or not - does not matter, kidnapping muslims (extreme rendition), practising torture on muslims as normal policy (waterboarding etc), and to create martyrs by executing muslims - either by extra-judicial murdering missiles launched from drones or through ’special’ muslim-only legal systems. How on earth did we get to all this and how can it be anything other than a complete undermining of moderate muslims?
7. An entirely practical question for Australian foreign policy is this: ‘How many of the 2 million Iraqi boys, young men and older men who have been forced from their homes will become jihadis?’ Not addressed by Howard and, unless I wrong, not addressed by Rudd either.
i still stick to my theory that nelson will lead the libs to the next election.
Costello will leave as he knows he will never win an election ,his only chance was for howard to gift it to him and howard was never going to do that. plus the public rightly have him tagged now as no ticker.
Nelson is hated by so many people in the libs that they would happily lose rather than have him as leader. Public see him as rich toff.
The media will get behind brenda after costello quits as there is no one in the libs now who will win an election so may as well let brenda lose till someone winnable comes along. same as with the bomber till rudd put his hand up.
If you all think about it who else other than nelson would want the job knowing that they are going to get beaten at the election.
I’m not quite up with the lingo round here… what’s the OO?
Costello already the subject of so much derision for not challenging for the leadership, for having not guts and, for destablising Howard before the last election would not now want to be the losing leader at the next election which, would triple that scorn.
Sounds kind of funny but Cosetllo would be better served by getting out now and preserving what little reputation he has left.
OO = Opposition Orifice/Organ
The Australian in other words.
RE :
OO = Opposition Oracle = The Australian
TP. What reputation do you think Costello has other then with fuherbunker that is whats lefts of the lib party.
most people i here think he was a lucky guy to be treasuer at a time of unprecedented mining growth caused by china and india and my parrot could have had the same result with the people in treasury doing all the work.
Turnbull must be wondering where it all went wrong. Everyone hates him, except Ms Overington and look where it got her. Everyone wants him sidelined as someone pointed out earlier.
The Liberals don’t want him coz they’re still pining for the good old Howard days and Turnbull would get rid of the Howie hangers-on.
The OO and other MSM want Cossie, for reasons that escape me.
Labor doesn’t want Turnbull in because he’ll compete with Rudd for the centre.
The Greens don’t want Turnbull coz he’d make them less relevant as he’s less of an embarrassment on the environment than the other Libs.
Seems OO has evolved. Initially it referred to Opposition Orifice in these pages, then cleaned up to be Opposition Organ and another variation I haven’t seen yet Opposition Oracle. In anycase it is all the same - mouth piece of the LNP.
The LNP could be mercenary and promote Turnbull into the role 8 months out from an election with the intention of vanquishing him after - win or no win. Only problem, should they win, is what to do with Turnbull election promises.
Everyone knows that that labor will win the next election. So the libs would be completly stupid to do anyting else other than to sacrifice brenda .Good bloke but just a stop gap till 2013
Julia would rip Cossie a new one so he will slink off or slumber on backbench
Talcum Allbull hated by the Right
I have bet $10 that Julie Bishop will take Fibs to next election
$50 on nelson
madk
they cannot leave Horatio there, too much damage to Fiberal brand
jm . who else then??>
Bird of Paradise, some regulars at this forum have a tiresome and very elitist obsession with what appears in The Australian, a very bad newspaper read by very few people, and by no-one at all in the demographics that decide elections. Its total inability to influence election outcomes was decisively demonstrated last year, but people here continue to analyse its every word and come here to expostulate about its latest absurdities. I follow politics as closely as anyone, but I have not looked at The Australian since the start of last year and I have only profitted by its absence.
madk @ 824
OK, not a lot to choose from. They have a problem in that they think they represent some sort of normality. They have not quite realized that they slid off the norm slope a while ago.
Perhaps a left field young turk? Oops, make that a right field young turk. Oops, make that a right field has been.
Looks like the Messiah.
The Victorian ALP could lend them some Turks if they asked nicely.
Adam
Care to venture a guess as to who will lead the LNP to the next Fed election?
Not really. I still think Costello will leave, but I wouldn’t stake my cardbox box on it. If Nelson continues to flounder, then Turnbull is their only real aternative.
Adam
I agree, but Turnbull is unacceptable to many in his party. He will never have anything like 60% support which is probably necessary to put leadership speculation to bed.
When (not if) Costello calls it quits, my money is on Tony Abbott to be the next in line, he is already remaking his image.
McCain was unacceptable to many in his party, but if you want to win an election you need to find an electable candidate/leader. Turnbull is miles ahead of anyone else they have. Abbott is both a basically nasty man and an idiot, and everyone knows it.
Adam in Canberra @ 831
The personal qualities of Mr Abbot are succinctly and accurately summarized.
Thinking about Mr Counting House, if he is basically a slightly cooled-down version of the Chief Gubby, why would folk switch? It wouldn’t be about Mr T, it would presumably be about a series of labour stuff ups and a non-threatening alternative?
So was Howard.
Wow,
This could be a very expensive journalistic stuff up for Fairfax.
http://www.vexnews.com/news/282/run-fairfax-lies-may-spark-finance-crisis/
Boerwar, please talk English. Who is Mr Gubby?
ruawake, no I don’t think Howard is either a nasty man or stupid. There are not many people in politics I regard as genuinely nasty. Abbott is one of them. I thought his “aren’t there any *Australians* in the Australian Labor Party?” jibe was just about the lowest scrape of the racist barrel by a senior politician I’ve ever heard.
I keep my money in gold Napoleons hidden in my toilet cistern… oops
This seems to be the longest drawn-out “goodbye” in Australian politics … as well as the longest drawn-out non-story of all time …
Adam
I disagree, Howard (the PM not the person) was nasty. His actions were aimed at the party members of the party he lead.
Abbott is a similarly nasty piece of work, but he will appeal to members of his party as Howard did.
I am not saying he will ever become PM but I feel he will lead the Liberal Party.
I follow Malcolm F’s advice - I have $4 under my bed.
837
Rx from your link.
“He’s a great thinker. He’s more interested in ideas than money. His concerns are about ideas, debates and values. I know no more than what I’ve said which is he is going to leave sometime in this term of Parliament.”
That would be right laying in his hammock thinking thinking thinking. Oh what the heck I’ll just think some more.
Howard nasty? Depends on your definition, I guess. But he was certainly indifferent, even callous, towards the less fortunate, and, especially towards the end, an shamelessly unprincipled opportunist.
That’s it Muskiemp. All thought, no action. All Tip no Iceberg.
“especially towards the end, an shamelessly unprincipled opportunist.”
He was one from the very beginning.
Typical of Tip…he’s going to leave, he just hasn’t decided when’s the right time. Make a decision…manana.
In the hammock, endlessly rocking….
I watched the Brisbane Lions just win a come-from-behind match against the highly fancied Western Bulldogs in front of a rabid Brisbane crowd. And the Ruddmeister was watching it from the stands with his Brisbane scarf on and a huge smile on his face when they won. He looked like he was genuinely having a great time.
Whatever those horrible cynics say, he really is in touch with the common man.
And Diogenes, Mussolini had a candle burning in his office all night so when the common man walked past he was impressed that Il Duce was still at work.
Adam @ 835
Gubby= person working for the Government; also the word for a Government house.
Ergo, Chief Gubby=Rudd
BTW, not sure if it rates as nasty in the normal sense, but some folk hold the view that Howard generally behaved in a vindicative way towards those whom he (and/or the Missus) regarded as having crossed him/her. Perhaps this sort of nastiness is closer to the norm for politicians than for ordinary folk.
Hey ESJ. When you log off dont forget to blow out your candle too!
Kevin Rudd and Steve Smith face a FA dilemma over Georgia with 4 options Follow Bush rethoric no action line (as Howard did) , follow what I predict will be an increasing angry EU line , follow hesitant flimsy line (as Obama has , link below) or follow firm sanctions line (as McCain has , link below)
But update first to explain , ‘truce agreement ‘ has been further amended and gallingly delivered by Condi Rice herself to th Georgians , which has REMOVED a reference to Russian recognition of Georgia’s territorial integrity !! It simply generally uses words independence & sovereignty , two words which split by themselves mean zero
As forshadowed here , appeasement As forshadowed here it includes a 10KM strip of Georgian soveign teritory for Russia to ‘patrol’ , which is OUTSIDE of even Ossettia boundarys itself , this is a formal dismemberment of a democratic sovereign State
Kevin07 and middle ranking Countries ar left with a fait accompli
We know Bush’s stanse Lets examine two US candidates response as it WILL impact on RUDDS’s futre response
Quotes from link below ,
“ “ McCain accused Moscow of trying to strangle a new democracy , called for an emergency meeting of NATO’s executive council to deal with the invasion & then criticised Bush’s approach
McCain also wants a deployment of an international peacekeeping force to South Ossetia , and promised to punish Russia by expelling it from the Group of Eight and sinking its application to join the World Trade Organization Also promised humanitarian and economic assistance for Georgia
Obama, adopted a weaker , more measured tack , initially he hesitated to blame either side for the conflict while calling for a cease-fire
Then Obama offered a measured response that at first differed little from that of George Bush, the U. S. President.
As a foreign policy neophyte, he may have felt he had the luxury to wait on developments, while presenting himself as a man who deliberates before acting ” ” Still still waiting , weak http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=721543
Kevin Rudd I think should ignore Bush’s rethoric line , as its pre intelligence was terrible and post invasion Bush’s own SOS has delivered an appeasement agreement (a disgrace on democracy) Think he can easily ignore Obama’s typical p.ssweak no nothing & initially support both sides approach (Russia was th ‘reel’ ‘provocator’ & aggressor you fool) Think Kevin Rudd should privately support McCain’s approach as its both responsible , moral, and sends a ‘message’ to Russia of a penaly and ‘message’ to Ukraine and Baltic States However publicly Kevin07 cann’t be associated with that McCain ‘right’ guy But hope Rudd privately pressures EU diplomatically to follow that McCain tact
Suspect with this approach , Kevin07 will be ahead of game , as I do believe EU will harden up there approach significantly It is a pity EU is now constrained by relying on Russian gas , and by German & French Presidents now being from ‘right’
Kevin Rudd won’t get much other world wide support Believe Georgia is otherwise heading an effective ‘non State’ within Russian ‘orbit‘ , losing in reality its economic and FA independance , a shell of a ‘Country’ , Shame
last 1/2 page of link shows intell incompetence or ‘compliance’ , very disturbing , but not th issue of my post
834 Greensborough Growler
A very interesting article in deed.Maybe its the editors swan song.
The Age could face a major law suit for culperable damages. Anthony Building Society collapse in the making forced on by the Age.
http://www.vexnews.com/news/282/run-fairfax-lies-may-spark-finance-crisis/
Pages: « 1 … 15 16 [17] 18 19 … 20 » Show All