Stephen Smith and Malcolm Turnbull.....

[TAITA]

....should be leading their respective parties.

Whilst the 'leader' role is one of having the popularity to lead your party to government as opposed to leading your party, we will continue to suffer fools like the 'Gillard and Abbott' show - give me people like Turnbull and Smith who have the true courage of their convictions to try and make the country a better place rather than worry about populist decisions based on a three year re-election cycle.

Some say we get the politicians we deserve - I have no idea what we did to deserve the two incumbents.

 

[42DM]

Whilst I think that we deserve better than the two in question I'm not quite sure that I agree totally with the two alternatives that you propose. I tend to favour Turnbull over Abbott but I'm not completely sold on Smith although I don't believe that there is much between him and Combet as regards being a future leader of the ALP.

 

[The Punter]

Smith benefits from having two portfolios (during his time in government) that are mainly areas of bipartisan agreement: Defence and Foreign Affairs.

If he had a contentious portfolio like Climate Change, it may be different.

Having said that, he has been a fine minister.

 

[cancat]

Turnbull was getting smashed in the polls after Utegate. He was also in support of Rudd's CPRS. The Libs turned to Abbott, who turned the polls around so much that Labor replaced Rudd.

If Turnbull had remained as Libs leader Rudd would still be PM after being re-elected with a large majority.

 

[42DM]

Turnbull was getting smashed in the polls after Utegate. He was also in support of Rudd's CPRS. The Libs turned to Abbott, who turned the polls around so much that Labor replaced Rudd.

If Turnbull had remained as Libs leader Rudd would still be PM after being re-elected with a large majority.

Don't think so, he would've self destructed because he's an ego tripping talking head. Still is and always will be.

 

[rayven]

Abbott is leader because he listens to who pays his bills, Turnbull was above that.

Remember it was only 1 vote that defeated Turnbull, so there is hope.

I don't know enough about Smith. I know that the hatred of Gillard is irrational and media driven.I know that with all the pressure on her we wont ever see the true potential of a goveremnet under her...a goveremnt that can do whats in our best interests long term and not worry about the vicous media wolf pack.

 

[The Punter]

Rudd's removal was not strongly related to the polls.

 

[pjcrows]

The severe lack of leadership on both sides as it stands is phenomenal.

Can't predict what's going to happen between now and the time, but I think Greg Combet will be the next Labor Prime Minister, with Stephen Smith and Mark Butler as key sidekicks.

 

[The_Reaper]

Abbott is leader because he listens to who pays his bills, Turnbull was above that.

Remember it was only 1 vote that defeated Turnbull, so there is hope.

I don't know enough about Smith. I know that the hatred of Gillard is irrational and media driven.I know that with all the pressure on her we wont ever see the true potential of a goveremnet under her...a goveremnt that can do whats in our best interests long term and not worry about the vicous media wolf pack.

Turnbull lost his position because he didn't listen to the people who vote for his party- who largely didn't want an ETS and don't want a Carbon Tax.

He also weakened his position with political misjudgements like utegate.

 

[King Elvis]

Abbott is leader because he listens to who pays his bills, Turnbull was above that.

Remember it was only 1 vote that defeated Turnbull, so there is hope.

I don't know enough about Smith. I know that the hatred of Gillard is irrational and media driven.I know that with all the pressure on her we wont ever see the true potential of a goveremnet under her...a goveremnt that can do whats in our best interests long term and not worry about the vicous media wolf pack.

All of that regarding Gillard is completely invalidated by everything she's done - everything she's done has either been populist, a deal or a payoff to somebody.

She's not disliked because of the media, she's disliked because she's hopelessly out of her depth.

The sooner people on the Left realise that, and stop blaming everybody else and assuming everybody else is a moron because they aren't in love with Gillard, the better we'll all be.

 

[tazzietiger]

All of that regarding Gillard is completely invalidated by everything she's done - everything she's done has either been populist, a deal or a payoff to somebody.

She's not disliked because of the media, she's disliked because she's hopelessly out of her depth.

The sooner people on the Left realise that, and stop blaming everybody else and assuming everybody else is a moron because they aren't in love with Gillard, the better we'll all be.

I agree. The media are only on her case because she's opened the door for them to be by making poor incorrect decision after decision.

Even old ALP heads like Richo and Keating are criticising them.
I think Tanya Plibersek shown just how much in the bubble and not willing to listen to anything else they are. When she tried to brush off Richo's comments on how much the ALP have changed from former successful ALP governments on fundamental policy (sticking to the left of the asylum issue not this far right Malaysia solution).

 

[pjcrows]

All of that regarding Gillard is completely invalidated by everything she's done - everything she's done has either been populist, a deal or a payoff to somebody.

She's not disliked because of the media, she's disliked because she's hopelessly out of her depth.

The sooner people on the Left realise that, and stop blaming everybody else and assuming everybody else is a moron because they aren't in love with Gillard, the better we'll all be.

I agree with the basis of what you're saying, but the hung parliament plays a huge part in this. It's an incredibly rare circumstance (not at the fault of anyone but the Government mind you - they had a massive seat buffer after 2007 which should have stitched up at least the following election).

But I'll say once again, Abbott was willing to do as much as Gillard to form Government. It's just that Abbott lost. It's not that he "wasn't willing to let go of his fundamental morals" - absolute hogwash. He tried just as hard as Gillard to get the support of the minorities, and didn't get it.

We voted for a minority government. One where the PM had to compromise. And that's what we got. Do I agree with much of what the Government have done in this term? No. But that doesn't mean WE NEED AN ELECTION NOW THIS ISN'T DEMOCRACY.

It's actually perfect democracy.

 

[noddy]

I agree. The media are on her case because she's opened the door for to them by making poor incorrect decision after decision.

Even old ALP heads like Richo and Keating are criticising them.
I think Tanya Plibersek shown just how much in the bubble and not willing to listen to anything else they are. When she tried to brush off Richo's comments on how much the ALP have changed from former successful ALP governments on fundamental policy (sticking to the left of the asylum issue not this far right Malaysia solution).

Richo is all about Richo always has been & always will be.

Libs will not replace Abbott so not worth bothering about, Labor unless some sort of political miracle occurs before the next election will sit on the opposition benches for at least the next two terms of parliament.

Unbelievable seeing as the Rudd government had the world at its feet.

 

[rayven]

God help us if your right Noddy.

 

[fairdinkum]

Rudd's removal was not strongly related to the polls.

6 what?s

 

[RUNVS]

It won't happen but i would love for the next election Abbott wins but the Australian Sex Party manages to get a few seats in the Senate and whenever Abbott wants to get something through the Senate he has to make deals with the Australian Sex Party

 

[Empire_Persian]

Smith benefits from having two portfolios (during his time in government) that are mainly areas of bipartisan agreement: Defence and Foreign Affairs.

If he had a contentious portfolio like Climate Change, it may be different.

Having said that, he has been a fine minister.

Good point. Although he has never been a combattant minister, he has served his ministries well.

Yet I will never forget the worm that he was as a shadow minister; though that is a required characteristic whilst in opposition.

 

[dr strange]

Combet has to survive the carbon tax and the pokies ,anti carbon tax ads still being screened here,also wanted black and white glossy terrible pictures of Combet by the clubs.Combet is not media friendly even ray hadley told him he needed a new haircut and glasses to progress.Fortunately for him the libs never have a strong local candidate that takes up the local issues in Charlton.

 

[Caesar]

I have a feeling that Smith and Turnbull as leaders would be a case of promoting two excellent ministers beyond their level of competence.

I don't think either has the political nous, ruthlessness or ideology to make them strong and effective leaders of their respective parties. Certainly past history appears to bear this out for Turnbull at least.

 

[fairdinkum]

I have a feeling that Smith and Turnbull as leaders would be a case of promoting two excellent ministers beyond their level of competence.

I don't think either has the political nous, ruthlessness or ideology to make them strong and effective leaders of their respective parties. Certainly past history appears to bear this out for Turnbull at least.

Ideology?

 

[Caesar]

Turnbull's beliefs are clearly in conflict with those of his party's base. Smith is more of an unknown quantity, but as a man in Keating's mould I suspect he wouldn't mesh too well with the current direction of the ALP.

 

[Inferno]

Turnbull's problem was that he centralised decision making even more than Rudd did. He didn't give a s**t what other people in the Coalition thought, it was Mal's way or the highway. Combine that with having the political nous of Gillard (see utegate epic fail) and he's a combination of the worst aspects of Rudd and Gillard, and was a highly ineffectual leader and this would be no different as PM.

Smith seems like the type that while making a good Minister (remember he hasn't been in a portfolio that attracts even a relatively moderate level of scrutiny) it doesn't necessarily mean that he'd make a good PM. Won't be sold on him at all until he succeeds in a tough portfolio.

The problem with the current political landscape is that we seem to have a fair few MPs who are pretty good Ministers/Shadow Ministers, but aren't anywhere near capable of being PM. Imo the only person who was really capable of it post-Howard was Lindsay Tanner, but the ALP Right would've preferred to elect an inanimate carbon rod as leader.

I have a feeling that Smith and Turnbull as leaders would be a case of promoting two excellent ministers beyond their level of competence.

I don't think either has the political nous, ruthlessness or ideology to make them strong and effective leaders of their respective parties. Certainly past history appears to bear this out for Turnbull at least.

We are talking about Turnbull here right? Probably one of the most ruthless people in Parliament.

 

[Caesar]

Compared to Abbott?

 

[fairdinkum]

Turnbull's beliefs are clearly in conflict with those of his party's base.

Which beliefs?

Smith is more of an unknown quantity, but as a man in Keating's mould I suspect he wouldn't mesh too well with the current direction of the ALP.

What about Smith makes him a 'man in Keating's mould'?

Smith is simply a machine man who does what he is told. Whatever the ALP's current direction, Smith is going in the exact same direction.

Also, Keating supposedly had this to say about Smith:

“How could he ever handle Packer? He's always been a s**t and a shiver.”
-Latham's Diaries, p103

 

[Caesar]

Which beliefs?

He's a wet. Do we really need to go into detail? Pretty well known that his positions in the past on stuff like a carbon tax, renewables, the apology to the stolen generation, gay rights, etc. haven't jived with more socially conservative elements of the party.

What about Smith makes him a 'man in Keating's mould'?

Smith is simply a machine man who does what he is told. Whatever the ALP's current direction, Smith is going in the exact same direction.

Also, Keating supposedly had this to say about Smith:

“How could he ever handle Packer? He's always been a s**t and a shiver.”
-Latham's Diaries, p103

I'd take anything Latham reported on Smith with a hefty grain of salt, given Smith's role in his downfall.

Smith's pretty generally acknowledged as a key player behind the scenes in Keating's takeover of the party. Certainly Keating's comments about him on-record are highly favourable, and PJK is hardly known for his lack of forthrightness.