View Full Version : My analysis of next weeks election
BUBBALOUIS
3 Nov 2001, 08:23
It pains me to say i think John Howard will still be Prime Minister after the election:
Labor should hold there own in Victoria, with a few gains.
Qld should also be a good State for Bbeazley, although they will lose Cheryl Kernot seat
Tassie at the present has all Labor representation and the Libs would be confident of taking at least one seat away from them
This leaves us with the two redneck States NSW and WA, i fear the Coalition will do extremely well in these States and hence win the election. WA is very focused on the 'boat people' as an issue and we all know how expertly the Coalition have scaremongered that .... NSW also seems to be focused on the immigration debate, fueled by radio perfprmers such as Alan Jones ....
So my tip is a Coalition win with an increased majority ....
:( :o :mad:
I'm afraid you're right. :(
Not to mention the millions who think Howard has done a great job and Labour are a pathetic rabble full of ex ACTU leaders who would lead the country down the gurgler!
And of course a LABOUR vote is a vote for 97% of the GST they bagged so much...........jokers!
Dippers Donuts
3 Nov 2001, 17:58
and of course a coalition vote is for 100% of the gst and all its attendant problems...
clown.
i also think that Howard may be re-elected, sad as it may be :(
NICK THE PIE MAN
3 Nov 2001, 20:13
I bet Beazley is cursing the WTC incident and the boat people fiasco. He was kicking little Johnny's arse in the polls before those two incidents erupted.
Originally posted by NICK THE PIE MAN
I bet Beazley is cursing the WTC incident and the boat people fiasco. He was kicking little Johnny's arse in the polls before those two incidents erupted.
In fact the results would be better without WTC or boat people incidents. Beasley had only one argument...GST. Liberal had the perfect answer. Reverse it. Which Beasley knew would prove stupid......so Labours main argumet would fail. Add that to a simple "Vote Labour vote ACTU" campaign and by now it would all have been over. So Beazley can thank the recent incidents as potential saviours.
Dippers Donuts
3 Nov 2001, 23:13
Originally posted by Frodo
In fact the results would be better without WTC or boat people incidents. Beasley had only one argument...GST. Liberal had the perfect answer. Reverse it. Which Beasley knew would prove stupid......so Labours main argumet would fail. Add that to a simple "Vote Labour vote ACTU" campaign and by now it would all have been over. So Beazley can thank the recent incidents as potential saviours.
i sometimes wonder if you have delusions of adequacy...
Originally posted by Dippers Donuts
i sometimes wonder if you have delusions of adequacy...
It seems broadly symptomatic of labour supporters that they have to resort to personal abuse when losing any debate.
Dippers Donuts
4 Nov 2001, 13:19
Originally posted by Frodo
It seems broadly symptomatic of labour supporters that they have to resort to personal abuse when losing any debate.
Personal abuse?
Boo hoo hooooo....poor delicate boy...
Oh, I haven't been debating you, I was educating you....;)
Joe Mama
4 Nov 2001, 13:34
I'll make the prediction that the Coalition will win by 5-7 seats, the National Party will become an irrelevance (as well as One Nation), the Labor Party will gain votes in thier safe seats, but fail to make any headway in the marginal electorates, the Democrates and the Greens will have the balance of power in the senate.
John Howard is a crafty little ****, but he knows that with any heated (and racial) election, the Coalition will win every time because they have the ALP over a barrel, and Kim Beazley's political career will end virtually because of September 11 and Howard's sudden tough stand (a few months before an election) on Asylum Seekers, how unlucky can he get.:(
Originally posted by Wayde Petersen
Kim Beazley's political career will end virtually because of September 11 and Howard's sudden tough stand (a few months before an election) on Asylum Seekers
Not to mention his incompetence, lack of coherent policy, negativity and dull persona.
Joe Mama
4 Nov 2001, 14:07
Yeah, and John Howard doesn't share those same qualities:rolleyes: , for christ sake, it's not as if honest John has charisma like Paul Keating or Tony Blair:rolleyes:
Originally posted by Wayde Petersen
for christ sake, it's not as if honest John has charisma like Paul Keating or Tony Blair:rolleyes:
Keating had the charisma of a sewer rat and was named overseas the 'Lizard of Oz'. Blair is an idiot, talk about using September 11 for political reasons:rolleyes: and setting his country up for a terrorist attack in the bargain :rolleyes:
John Howard is not a great leader or a person with huge charisma but he is honest, strong, had the guts to do something about a woeful tax system, has handled the economy very well indeed and a far better leader than Beasley.
Originally posted by Frodo
John Howard is not a great leader or a person with huge charisma but he is honest, strong, had the guts to do something about a woeful tax system, has handled the economy very well indeed and a far better leader than Beasley.
Yes, and hes also sent our troops to a war we should not be involved in - by doing that he hasnt set up this country for terrorist attacks has he??
Shinboners
4 Nov 2001, 17:37
Originally posted by Wayde Petersen
Yeah, and John Howard doesn't share those same qualities:rolleyes: , for christ sake, it's not as if honest John has charisma like Paul Keating or Tony Blair:rolleyes:
Whether or not John Howard is charismatic or not, what cannot be disputed is that we know where Howard stands on most issues. He's a social conservative and an economic dry....have there been any issues where he's taken a stand that has been unexpected by us? Pro monarchy, pro GST, anti-Reconciliation, anti-refugee, looks towards the US and Europe instead of Asia.
In regards to Beazley, what does he really stand for apart from wanting to be Prime Minister?
Dippers Donuts
4 Nov 2001, 22:29
Originally posted by Shinboners
Whether or not John Howard is charismatic or not, what cannot be disputed is that we know where Howard stands on most issues. He's a social conservative and an economic dry....have there been any issues where he's taken a stand that has been unexpected by us? Pro monarchy, pro GST, anti-Reconciliation, anti-refugee, looks towards the US and Europe instead of Asia.
In regards to Beazley, what does he really stand for apart from wanting to be Prime Minister?
Yes, the same John Howard who was sprung by his own Treasurer when it came to the sell off of the rest of Telstra!!
Well done Costello, at least you have some sort of honesty, not like the spineless Howard, who continues to deny his own policy.
The emperor has no clothes...
London Dave
5 Nov 2001, 06:03
Originally posted by Frodo
We also have the strongest leader seen for many a decade who is respected throughout the western world and many other countries too.
Originally posted by Frodo
John Howard is not a great leader or a person with huge charisma but he is honest, strong, had the guts to ...
Whats it to be..a leader or not?????? One moment he is, one moment he isnt. Bit like yourself Frodo, a mass of contadictions. cmon, on minute he's a great, inspirational leader, respected on the international stage, the the next he's just a honest hardworking family values type of guy. You may claim shades of grey here, but it looks pretty black and white to me.
Don't think you know a lot about Tony Blair either. The same 'overseas' that called Keating the Lizard of Oz (ie, one UK tabloid)...is strangely the same 'overseas' congratulating Blair on how he is handling the situation at present. If he is, as you suggest, setting up the country for a terrorist attack, your logic follows that John Howard must be doing the same. But again, following your logic, you are someone "lives on the other side of the planet yet professes knowledge about our politics and politicians" unquote, words of Frodo. Whats it to be Frodo? Do you have to live in a country to know about it, or not???
Still waiting for the numbers to back up your claims in the thread started by joffa, or perhaps you can pull them out of your sphincter, exactly the same method you used to presume to know exactly how, why, where etc I invest my money. How do your businesses get into trouble, as you stated, when you can know exactly someone on the otherside of the world is doing with their money. You have even less idea on my motives/financial decisions than you do on economics, which is remarkable in itself! (the numbers are to do with the balance of payments, amongst other things if you cant remember. Go back and look at your post to see what your thoughts were that day.)
Perhaps if you were able to desist from recycling true or otherwise anecdotes about your business career, and got onhto a few hard facts we may, as you so generously offered, get to 'explore this issue'.
Even though I live on 'the other side of the planet' I read the aussie papers via the internet. I dont have a new country, I am Australian, its on the passport.
I await your pithy put downs, and will be always awaiting the day you actually come up with the numbers...cos people like you never seem to...petty schoolyard sniping (which is probably always started by Labour supporters, right) seems the order of the day.
On the topic at hand, Howard will probably get back, Australia has always been a very conservative country, always will be probably too.
Originally posted by Frodo
John Howard is not a great leader or a person with huge charisma but he is honest, strong, had the guts to do something about a woeful tax system, has handled the economy very well indeed and a far better leader than Beasley.
HONEST?
Is that some kind of joke?
To label ANY polititian honest is an absolute joke?
Hey Frodo ... are you John Howard? You're the only one that seems to give him such a absolute wrap on here....
I mean we all know you love your sports, you appear at every bloody sporting event :rolleyes:
Originally posted by TheMase
I mean we all know you love your sports, you appear at every bloody sporting event :rolleyes:
Ive noticed hes a big fan of cricket ;)
Originally posted by London Dave
Originally posted by Frodo
We also have the strongest leader seen for many a decade who is respected throughout the western world and many other countries too.
Originally posted by Frodo
John Howard is not a great leader or a person with huge charisma but he is honest, strong, had the guts to ...
Whats it to be..a leader or not?????? One moment he is, one moment he isnt.
I'll answer this point but not the rest as I have clearly touched a raw nerve about your loyalties with the resultant serve of such a defensive and unreasoned response.
IMO Howard is by far and away the best PM I have seen in Australia although I accept that there may be better that I never heard or saw. He is IMO the strongest leader seen for many a decade who is respected throughout the western world and many other countries too. However I could hardly call him great or a person with huge charisma.
There is nothing contradictory about my statements in the least. He is a top leader but not a great leader. He will not go down in history as being a great leader.
I also accept that my knowledge of what goes on in England is not as good as that of Australia but I do speak to English people on a daily basis and their opinion supports my comment that Blair has taken on a greater profile in the war on terrorism than any leader in the world including Bush whilst Howards comments are hardly heard on the subject outside of Australia.
So please don't throw stones just for the enjoyment.
Politics doesnt interest very much, but i would love to be prime minister just for the chance to pick my own XI to play against a touring side.
Dippers Donuts
5 Nov 2001, 20:24
Originally posted by Frodo
but I do speak to English people on a daily basis
ha ha!!
your missus?
London Dave
5 Nov 2001, 22:50
Frodo, you only answer one point because by answering the rest, you are admitting you contradict yourself.
If you think you hit a raw nerve, you are using it as an excuse to avoid answerinbg my question....where is the evidence that Howard is a well respected leader around the world, as you declared in an earlier post, and show me the numbers on the economy, as I keep asking for. You can argue any position you want, you're to think what you want, but don't be selective on what you answer.
What exactly is the difference between a top leader and a great leader??...pretty much one and the same thing. I have no problem if you think Howard is a top leader or a great leader, you are entitled to your opinion. Back it up with some facts mate!
Your quote
"I also accept that my knowledge of what goes on in England is not as good as that of Australia but I do speak to English people on a daily basis and their opinion supports my comment that Blair has taken on a greater profile in the war on terrorism than any leader in the world including Bush whilst Howards comments are hardly heard on the subject outside of Australia. "
Now, where exactly does this allow you to draw the conclusion that Blair is an idiot?
Maybe you should find a transcript of Blairs press conference with Arafat last week. You'll find the man is no idiot, in fact, quite the reverse. I saw it on CNN in its entirety and Blair handled questions from all sections of the media brilliantly.
Or perhaps stick to the rash generalisations and personal put downs you accuse others of, it seems to be the limit of your 'exploration of issues'
Beazley will be our new Prime Minister and Labour will have a majority of possibly 10 seats but more like 7 or 8.
Why??
Because when election day comes, most Australians will put aside the larger International Issues, and think about their own futures, and the their families future. Employment, Education and Health will as always dominate Australians thoughts on election day and next Saturday will be no different, and Howard has promised $hit for the majority of the middle class, and even less for the lower class, when it comes to these issues.
I also think Democrats and Green preferences may play a bigger part in helping Labour than most people think. Democrats have been making inroads this campaign, especially in areas they haven't had success before, and the Greens scoring well in quite a few of the Liberal held marginals.
Thanks to the Democrats and the Greens, Labour will win more marginals than they lose, and therfore Labour will be in power Federally and in all States except SA. And that could change in the next three or four months as well.
The Coalition have lost power in:
WA
QLD
VIC
TAS
NSW
NT (first time ever)
and soon SA
GET THE HINT ????????
Having lived thru' the 1950's - when sectarianism and benign racism were rife and we lost an opportunity to become a really interesting place by being ' relaxed and comfortable' in our WASPish and sycophantic ways - I know EXACTLY where Howard's coming from. His body language shows it all, when he's outside his cultural comfort zone - he really just wants to hang out with Bob Menzies and the cricketers in the Old Country, and reintroduce Blue Hills and Sunday roasts.
My only hope is that, after the 50's came the 60's ( inevitably ! ) as a massive reaction against greyness and boredom, and this will happen again. And we'll all look back to this time and think, as we did before, what a waste that was. We could have actually been doing something with this place.
Originally posted by 1AD
The Coalition have lost power in:
WA
QLD
VIC
TAS
NSW
NT (first time ever)
and soon SA
GET THE HINT ????????
They lost power in the ACT last week. Nice to see everybody has forgotten already. We Have.
Dogs_R_Us
6 Nov 2001, 14:25
Originally posted by Frodo
Not to mention his incompetence, lack of coherent policy, negativity and dull persona.
... and that whining, hectoring voice.
I'm no great fan of the current Libs but the thought of Labor with their paws in the public purse makes my blood run cold. The last time I voted Labor was in Bob Hawke's first term. 12 months later I realised my mistake.
Beazley goes on about Costello, but I worry more about those old comrades Crean and Brereton.
If only Labor would promise everyone a job they might win me over.