If Abbott gets removed from the leadership of the Coalition who will replace him?

If the Coalition decide to remove Abbott who will most likely replace him?

  • Warren Truss

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Julie Bishop

    Votes: 16 43.2%
  • Joe Hockey

    Votes: 2 5.4%
  • Christopher Pyne

    Votes: 1 2.7%
  • Kevin Andrews

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Malcolm Turnbull

    Votes: 10 27.0%
  • Andrew Robb

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Greg Hunt

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Scott Morrison

    Votes: 4 10.8%
  • George Brandis

    Votes: 2 5.4%
  • Other - Please Specify

    Votes: 2 5.4%

  • Total voters
    37

Remove this Banner Ad

Just reading that Richard Flanagan shared the prize in the PMs literary award for fiction.

I thought Abbott would have won the award on his own. He has come up with the best fiction stories in the Country this year, by a bloody mile:p
 
The left would be oh so confused if, their darling in Govt, Turnbull was installed as leader. What to do, what to do...
 
The left would be oh so confused if, their darling in Govt, Turnbull was installed as leader. What to do, what to do...
The right would be oh so confused if, their darling in Govt, installed Turnbull as leader. What to do, what to do...


I know what to do - stop thinking of politics in right/left ways like most of the Internet and commentariat does. It's repetitive, boring and wrong.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The right would be oh so confused if, their darling in Govt, installed Turnbull as leader. What to do, what to do...


I know what to do - stop thinking of politics in right/left ways like most of the Internet and commentariat does. It's repetitive, boring and wrong.

Politics does boil down to left and right. Like it or not, that's how the cookie crumbles. The right may dabble in the left, and the left may dabble in the right, but at the end of the day the philosophical leanings are left and right. As can be seen with our current political climate. Problem is we have the greens and basic dimwits in the senate. Greens and dimwits are of the left.

The whole budget would have been passed already if this wasn't the case.
 
Politics does boil down to left and right. Like it or not, that's how the cookie crumbles. The right may dabble in the left, and the left may dabble in the right, but at the end of the day the philosophical leanings are left and right. As can be seen with our current political climate. Problem is we have the greens and basic dimwits in the senate. Greens and dimwits are of the left.

The whole budget would have been passed already if this wasn't the case.
YOu are damaged
 
Politics does boil down to left and right. Like it or not, that's how the cookie crumbles. The right may dabble in the left, and the left may dabble in the right, but at the end of the day the philosophical leanings are left and right. As can be seen with our current political climate. Problem is we have the greens and basic dimwits in the senate. Greens and dimwits are of the left.

The whole budget would have been passed already if this wasn't the case.
You are incredibly wrong, but it explains the commentary you have been making since becoming active on these pages.

I think this thread is old enough for a light hijacking - so how about you explain to us what left and right mean to you?
 
You are incredibly wrong, but it explains the commentary you have been making since becoming active on these pages.

I think this thread is old enough for a light hijacking - so how about you explain to us what left and right mean to you?

Boils down to fiscal responsibility vs fiscal irresponsibility.

The left gets in, spend like drunken sailors. The right get in, rectify the problem until the left gets in.

History repeats itself.
 
The evidence suggests otherwise.
No it doesn't.

There is no natural demarcation line between left and right, they are human constructs.

There is also far more to the faux political spectrum than "fiscal responsibility", which is very difficult to define.

But to completely rubbish your position, Bush was seen as more "right wing" than Clinton, but Clinton was more fiscally responsible and had a better economic track record.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

No it doesn't.

There is no natural demarcation line between left and right, they are human constructs.

There is also far more to the faux political spectrum than "fiscal responsibility", which is very difficult to define.

But to completely rubbish your position, Bush was seen as more "right wing" than Clinton, but Clinton was more fiscally responsible and had a better economic track record.
One example rubbishes my position :oops::oops::drunk: !
 
One example rubbishes my position :oops::oops::drunk: !
Thats how empiricism works.

Our politicians are far more "left wing", than their American counterparts, yet no labor leader going back to Hawk could be seen as as poor a money manager, or as fiscally irresponsible as US republican leaders going back to Reagan.

Their spending, waste and budget blowouts, have been truly awe inspiring, yet even Rudd's handouts are dwarfed by the largesse of Bush's tax cuts and military spending.

Abe, is a right wing nationalist, yet a huge proponent of QE. He has spent more money on Keynesian voodoo than any equivalent post bubble.

The impossible to define fiscal responsibility, is a very poor metric
 
No it doesn't.

There is no natural demarcation line between left and right, they are human constructs.

There is also far more to the faux political spectrum than "fiscal responsibility", which is very difficult to define.

But to completely rubbish your position, Bush was seen as more "right wing" than Clinton, but Clinton was more fiscally responsible and had a better economic track record.


The left tend to pursue 'social' policies. Which in itself isn't a bad thing. But they need to be paid for, which the left are notoriously bad at.
 
Playing the man seems to be a common trait around here - yeah, I'm a nutcase....you dill.
I'm not playing the man, you haven't really offered an argument worth rebutting.

Just stating facts, you are either a nutter or a troll, the only way one could hold such an absurd world view
 
I’m an Abbott fan, but also a realist. It has been ruthless and unwarranted but Abbott has been permanently stained by leftist character assassination over many years and as a result his political persona is beyond salvation among younger voters, the welfare dependent and the mindlessly stupid. If he is sacked in panic just before the next election the Conservatives will go down, and so will Australia’s chances of a decent economic future. If he willingly resigns in favour of Bishop now, the left will lose 90% of its attack ammo and focus can return to issues, and senate obstructionists. The country needs it, it would devastate Labor’s bitch-slap style, but Abbott would be a HUGE man to do it.
You have to be a parody account. You do a fine job Xsess.
 
I'm not playing the man, you haven't really offered an argument worth rebutting.

Just stating facts, you are either a nutter or a troll, the only way one could hold such an absurd world view

Yeah whatever. A question gets asked and a question gets answered and you trot out 'nutcase' and 'troll'. That places you in the irrelevant basket.
 
The left tend to pursue 'social' policies. Which in itself isn't a bad thing. But they need to be paid for, which the left are notoriously bad at.
So, then it is not simply fiscal responsibility, but whether a government perues social policies that defines left or right?

Never known a government not to perseu social policies, in fact it's the main area they truly have a handle on, as a large part of fiscal management is determined by central banks, via rates and controls on currency
 
So, then it is not simply fiscal responsibility, but whether a government perues social policies that defines left or right?

Never known a government not to perseu social policies, in fact it's the main area they truly have a handle on, as a large part of fiscal management is determined by central banks, via rates and controls on currency

You still talking.
 
Back
Top