PDA

View Full Version : The ALP Leadership



Goughfather
02-12-2006, 06:50 PM
So, who's going to win on Monday? What do you think will be the ramifications of the result?

Kevin Bonham
02-12-2006, 07:50 PM
I want Rudd to win because Beazley's a hack and Macklin even more so. As for who will win, I think Rudd may just have the numbers but I'm still not certain he will do it.

Until today I had been assuming Rudd would surely not run unless he knew he had the numbers - especially having ruled out a second challenge before the election. However today I realised there's a reason why Rudd might run without being sure he has the numbers, but thinking that he might, and that reason is ... Bill Shorten.

For some reason I can't entirely fathom Shorten is seen as a very likely future leader and he will be in parliament after this election. Assuming the ALP loses this election, the momentum to draft Shorten (compared with, for instance, the bumbling hack Beazley, the uncharismatic Rudd and the unelectable-as-PM Gillard) will build to such a stage that Shorten will probably be leader before the 2010 election.

As such Rudd may see that his best chance to become PM is to strike now, beat Beazley, then beat Howard. If he does not strike before the next election it is too late for him whether Labor wins or loses. Whoever is leader Labor still faces a tough task.

This is what I said on my other forum when asked why I had called Beazley a hack:


He's a "grey man" just like Simon Crean before him - he doesn't give out clear impressions of standing for or being passionate about anything.

He's a windbag. He uses far too many standard political/bureaucratic words to not say very much except populist waffle.

He's a follower, not a leader. Hawke, Keating, Howard, even Hewson and Latham had the ability to shape Australian attitudes through their public statements, and therefore fashion the political landscape in which they operated in. (Hawke and Howard were both brilliant at this whatever one thinks of their policies). Beazley lacks that ability and is poll-driven; he can only respond to moods in the electorate, not create them.

He's too much a factional creature, too orthodox, too boring. At least Latham was a breath of something different; pity he was a semi-lunatic boofhead.

He tries too hard to be one of the plebs on too many issues, but generally stuffs up to the point that even the plebs can see through it. Howard's approach is to sometimes appear to be one of the plebs and sometimes defend the unfashionable. That is a very effective strategy in keeping right-wing voters in the fold.

He's not all that good a debater either.

There is one exception. He is genuinely passionate about defence and comes across very differently on that issue to any other. He used to be a very good headkicker for Keating on that issue. But one issue doesn't make a PM in waiting.

I'm not saying he can't win, but he is a liability.

Goughfather
02-12-2006, 08:38 PM
Interesting analysis, Kevin.

I suspect that Rudd will get up, drawing his support from embittered Lathamites and past supporters of Beazley who have since lost confidence in his leadership.

I suggested on another forum that Rudd has taken on the role of de-facto Leader of the Opposition in recent months. Beazley only has himself to blame for this.

In my usual elitist manner, I also suggest that:


There will be some degree of fall-out from the leadership challenge and accusations that the ALP is not fit to govern the country since it can't govern itself, but since the general public have the attention span of a goldfish, this will be forgotten come early January, amid all the Christmas cheer and the New Year hangover.

MichaelBaron
03-12-2006, 12:08 AM
As a Liberal supporter, I hope that Beasley defends his leadership position successfully. As long as he continues to lead ALP, we (Liberals) are going to win every election comfortably :lol:

Kevin Bonham
03-12-2006, 03:38 AM
Goughfather - I do believe your "memory span of a goldfish" line and conclusions drawn from it to be entirely correct in this case. ;)

qpawn
04-12-2006, 06:53 PM
Is the lack of discussion a sign of indifference towards the new opposition leader? Is he seen as being a clone of JH? :(

Goughfather
04-12-2006, 07:23 PM
Are you kidding? I've heard talk of similarities with Keating and Costello, but Howard? What makes you suggest this?

I think that the convincing win of Rudd today was an excellent result for the ALP. At least on the surface, it shows that Labor is willing to give up their rather fatalistic "small target" strategy (although some may suggest that they were trying to do this with Latham, though even then, the ALP were keen to restrain Latham's natural personality) and wish to adopt a new approach.

Electorally, this move is a winner, since I believe that Rudd will be able to attract those who have become disillusioned with Labor in recent years and have voted for the minor parties. The ALP simply cannot rely upon preferences to get them over the line in the next election and beyond this, an increase in primary support for the ALP will be viewed as a greater mandate for government should they be able to win next year.

It shall be interesting to see the formation of Rudd's shadow ministry. I really do hope that Rudd and the party will resist the temptation to instate Julia Gillard in the position of shadow treasurer. While I'm unsure of whether or not she is capable of doing an effective job, I'm am sure that the Coalition would exploit the fact that Gillard belongs to the Left faction in Victoria, quite possibly to devastating effect.

qpawn
04-12-2006, 07:37 PM
I agree with you that the Labor party made the right decision for maximising its chances of electoral success.

In terms of comparing John Howard and Kevin Rudd, it isn't as facetious as it might seem to describe their likeness; both are religious/church-going in their political outlooks , and both take a philosophy of politics as a fair contest between two intellects rather than, say, Jeff Kennett's bearpit, head-kicker ethos. I agree that politically there are massive differences in policies on the environment and IR.

arosar
12-12-2006, 04:05 PM
Shocking!

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/students-lurch-to-the-left/2006/12/11/1165685615961.html

AR

pax
12-12-2006, 05:06 PM
For some reason I can't entirely fathom Shorten is seen as a very likely future leader and he will be in parliament after this election. Assuming the ALP loses this election, the momentum to draft Shorten (compared with, for instance, the bumbling hack Beazley, the uncharismatic Rudd and the unelectable-as-PM Gillard) will build to such a stage that Shorten will probably be leader before the 2010 election.


Shorten is an insincere creep. His involvement in the whole Beaconsfield thing just reeked of opportunism.

As far as Union hacks go, I would much rather see Greg Combet in the federal parliament. During the Workchoices debate, Combet was by far the most effective opposition voice - Beasley wasn't anywhere near as coherent, reasoned or persuasive.

Garvinator
12-12-2006, 05:11 PM
As far as Union hacks go, I would much rather see Greg Combet in the federal parliament. During the Workchoices debate, Combet was by far the most effective opposition voice - Beasley wasn't anywhere near as coherent, reasoned or persuasive.
First of all, I am not a Beazley fan.

That being said, I think it is a little unfair to criticize Beazley's performance during the WC's debate. I think he was in a very difficult position.

If he goes on the full attack over WC's and completely supports Greg Combet's stance, then he gets painted as a union follower and being beholdant to the union position in a time when union membership is at an all time low. This also makes him look anti-business. At least it gives the Coalition Government the easy opportunity to paint him as anti-business.

If he doesnt follow the union position, then he gets painted as anti-Labor.

Not an easy position to be in and we saw the end result.

Garvinator
12-12-2006, 05:14 PM
He's a "grey man" just like Simon Crean before him - he doesn't give out clear impressions of standing for or being passionate about anything.I thought Simon Crean did try and do one thing- to reduce factional control of the ALP. Now whether he was trying to do this out of good intentions or for his own self interest is another story and I dont know the answer.

I dont think Simon Crean was really ever given a true opportunity as leader because he was taking on the factional control. The factions that run the ALP behind the scenes were never going to tolerate having their control taken away.

My opinion on this- see line 1 of my signature.

Garvinator
13-01-2007, 03:38 PM
Just when you think things cant get much weirder in Aus politics:

Gillard polling strongly in 'babe' race

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=176093

antichrist
14-01-2007, 10:40 AM
I have heard Rudd make pro-Israeli statements that does not help international relations nor look good for appointments to ambassadors jobs etc.

Davidflude
14-01-2007, 02:18 PM
Well at least the Labour Leaders are not drongos like George Bush Junior, Alexander Downer or Amanda Panda.

Garvinator
14-01-2007, 02:23 PM
Well at least the Labour Leaders are not drongos like George Bush Junior, Alexander Downer or Amanda Panda.
Please dont reply to ac's comments about Israel. Just let them go.

antichrist
14-01-2007, 03:20 PM
Please dont reply to ac's comments about Israel. Just let them go.

EVerything should be out in the open, no matter what topic, no sacred cows, otherwise everything becomes like Qld was 40 years ago - and they obviously still have not recovered or caught up.

Basil
14-01-2007, 04:11 PM
otherwise everything becomes like Qld was 40 years ago - and they obviously still have not recovered or caught up.
*cough*