OUT: Abbott IN: Turnbull

[Soidee 1,496]

The next Dick Cheney. Very scary this man!

[Hannibal 5,814]

We have a fraud of a prime minister, who makes uncosted policy decisions on the run, believes in nothing accept seeming like he's doing something, has a plethora of his own cabinet ministers walk out once he wins back the leadership, blew a massive surplus with mindless over spending only to be saved by China and a mining boom, is responsible for changing a border policy that worked (only for a thousand lives to be lost at sea) that he's now trying to fix, and who'll go down as either the worst or second worst prime minister in history. And you're worried about Abbott ?

Left wing 101 for dunces.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

We have a fraud of a prime minister, who makes uncosted policy decisions on the run, believes in nothing accept seeming like he's doing something, has a plethora of his own cabinet ministers walk out once he wins back the leadership, blew a massive surplus with mindless over spending only to be saved by China and a mining boom, is responsible for changing a border policy that worked (only for a thousand lives to be lost at sea) that he's now trying to fix, and who'll go down as either the worst or second worst prime minister in history. And you're worried about Abbott ?

Left wing 101 for dunces.

Since Abbott is likely to win, yeah I'd worry about Abbott more than an incumbent who's on the way out.

TBH I think the real issue is that both parties are currently so awful I honestly can't bring myself to vote for either one. Smaller parties are no help either, The Greens' mix of good and crackpot policies worries me greatly - as does their support of this current government.

I wonder if Mercatroid the Grand Wizard is still around. Protest vote if ever there was one.

[praha 11,240]

I highly recommend reading any of the many Greens manifestos out there. Especially Adam Bandt's university thesis. Second coming of Stalin that guy. Disguises it as "progressive" thought. Pathetic.

Tony Abbott is the lesser of two evils. Hostility is there because some people have an inherent hatred for conservatism.

If only the Labor wasn't so dysfunctional, split and inept.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

I highly recommend reading any of the many Greens manifestos out there. Especially Adam Bandt's university thesis. Second coming of Stalin that guy. Disguises it as "progressive" thought. Pathetic.

Tony Abbott is the lesser of two evils. Hostility is there because some people have an inherent hatred for conservatism.

If only the Labor wasn't so dysfunctional, split and inept.

Yeah, that's what I mean. Wouldn't mind the whole 'free education thing' but most of their stuff is a little nuts.

Honestly if Abbott is actually the lesser of two evils, or if he just seems that way because he isn't scrutinised as much by the media.

Turnbull as leader would give me *just* enough incentive to vote for the libs, but it doesn't seem likely.

I think what I'd really like is an actual choice between two parties both presenting solid policies. I don't think I'll get it.

[nutbean 8,838]

The very sad state of Australian politics.

[low flying Robbo 979]

Not sure if i can cope with this guy in charge...

[Sir Why You Little 37,016]

Abbott is truly mad...and i have no time for Krudd either!!!

[Hannibal 5,814]

Abbott is truly mad...

Having read your posts over the years, I can't think of a better endorsement for Abbott.

[Sir Why You Little 37,016]

Having read your posts over the years, I can't think of a better endorsement for Abbott.

That's your best contribution for the day BH...you did well.

Carry on...

[Hannibal 5,814]

Wiped the floor with Rudd. What a dud.

[P-man 13,366]

Wiped the floor with Rudd. What a dud.

Oh dear.

Yeah, "wiped the floor". Abbott was the victor according to Channel Seven and its raft of Today Tonight viewers, News Corp (massive shock), and Laurie Oakes, who is frankly showing signs that he's lost the plot entirely. The only remotely credible source that awarded it to Abbott I think was Sky News. Just about every other news outlet including Nine, Ten and the ABC gave it to Rudd.

Abbott was a complete embarrassment. Just continued along the same path he has thus far, with all slogans and no substance. Granted, that approach appeals to simpletons, and those who said he won the debate justified it by saying Abbott kept his message simple. Yep, he kept it simple alright. Really, really, really, really simple..

I'm still none the wiser as to HOW he plans to strengthen the economy. and where he plans to find all these savings.

What are his real plans with Gonski, or just education in general?

What are his real plans for hospitals?

What are his plans in aged care? (Oh that's right, "less red tape". I can almost hear the nation's elderly scream their praises in unison)

How is he going to fund things like scrapping the price on carbon but keeping the assistance packages, and why does he keep giving the impression that its removal will have any meaningful impact to cost of living?

Why do he and Hockey keep stating that they can't increase the GST without the consent of every single state and territory when that is not the case? "We have no plans to increase.." I guess we can classify that promise as "non-core".

What are his plans at all, other than "stop the boats" and "no carbon tax"? Where are all these "real solutions" he keeps bullshitting on about? It's one week into the campaign and and already it's more spin, fluff and question dodging.

I can't say I'm blown away to discover that you're an Abbott fan Benny, but I find the thought of this snake oil salesman becoming Prime Minister, with a bible tucked under one arm and a pledge of allegiance to the IPA tucked under the other, genuinely concerning. As should most Aussies.

Edited August 12, 2013 by P_Man

[Hannibal 5,814]

Oh dear.

Yeah, "wiped the floor". Abbott was the victor according to Channel Seven and its raft of Today Tonight viewers, News Corp (massive shock), and Laurie Oakes, who is frankly showing signs that he's lost the plot entirely. The only remotely credible source that awarded it to Abbott I think was Sky News. Just about every other news outlet including Nine, Ten and the ABC gave it to Rudd.

Abbott was a complete embarrassment. Just continued along the same path he has thus far, with all slogans and no substance. Granted, that approach appeals to simpletons, and those who said he won the debate justified it by saying Abbott kept his message simple. Yep, he kept it simple alright. Really, really, really, really simple..

I'm still none the wiser as to HOW he plans to strengthen the economy. and where he plans to find all these savings.

What are his real plans with Gonski, or just education in general?

What are his real plans for hospitals?

What are his plans in aged care? (Oh that's right, "less red tape". I can almost hear the nation's elderly scream their praises in unison)

How is he going to fund things like scrapping the price on carbon but keeping the assistance packages, and why does he keep giving the impression that its removal will have any meaningful impact to cost of living?

Why do he and Hockey keep stating that they can't increase the GST without the consent of every single state and territory when that is not the case? "We have no plans to increase.." I guess we can classify that promise as "non-core".

What are his plans at all, other than "stop the boats" and "no carbon tax"? Where are all these "real solutions" he keeps bullshitting on about? It's one week into the campaign and and already it's more spin, fluff and question dodging.

I can't say I'm blown away to discover that you're an Abbott fan Benny, but I find the thought of this snake oil salesman becoming Prime Minister, with a bible tucked under one arm and a pledge of allegiance to the IPA tucked under the other, genuinely concerning. As should most Aussies.

Haha come in spinner.

You're just a [censored] stirring lefty that stoops to disingenuously use Abbott's religious beliefs as some sort of concern when those same beliefs don't have any control over his party or policy. And to think you thought you'd get an answer to all of your questions. Have you ever seen one of these "debates" before ?

YOU support a carbon dioxide tax that does nothing for the environment but needlessly taxes a nation. An impost for no gain.

YOU support a government that lied to the Australian people about a tax it said it would never have.

YOU support a government that needlessly encouraged people smugglers and caused deaths at sea.

YOU support a government that wasted billions on numerous costly failed projects.

YOU support a government that spent way too much to stave off a recession.

YOU support a government that has shambolically chopped and changed leaders such has been their policy failings.

YOU support a government that sold out its heartland to lie in bed with the nutty greens.

YOU support a government that won't be able to roll out its costly NBN in the next "how many" decades.

YOU support a government that promised a surplus, but never delivers.

YOU support a government whose deficit changed by the billions - weekly.

YOU support the most dysfunctional government since federation. Yet you say Abbott worries you ? It beggars belief. No wonder you have [censored] views on footy.

And Abbott is no more a church goer than your own fruitcake leader. His non threatening religious beliefs don't rule any policy within the party. To insinuate they do makes you either a fool or a liar.

Put your hand up to both.

Enjoy the defeat. At least you're a Melbourne supporter, so I dare say you'll cope.

Edited August 13, 2013 by Ben-Hur

[Hannibal 5,814]

Btw, hospitals are predominantly a state issue. Yet you want to hear Abbott's policies ? Good one.

[P-man 13,366]

Hahaha...release the attack dogs! Don't ever change Benny. Or should I call you Trav?

I could point out why most of that is a load of spin and nonsense but I know I'd be totally wasting my time.

Incidentally, I never stated my allegiance. You just presumed who I support. In fact you've made alot of baseless statements there but i realise that's kind of your "thing". I sure as hell don't support this lunatic being elected into office though, that's for sure.

Also, no [censored] it's predominantly a state issue. That doesn't mean the federal govt doesn't have a significant role to play in fixing the nation's health system including the state of its hospital care. Please.

"[censored] views on footy". Interesting, cause I agree with you on alot of subjects. The natural conclusion being..

[Hannibal 5,814]

Hahaha...release the attack dogs! Don't ever change Benny. Or should I call you Trav?

I could point out why most of that is a load of spin and nonsense but I know I'd be totally wasting my time.

Incidentally, I never stated my allegiance. You just presumed who I support. In fact you've made alot of baseless statements there but i realise that's kind of your "thing". I sure as hell don't support this lunatic being elected into office though, that's for sure.

Also, no [censored] it's predominantly a state issue. That doesn't mean the federal govt doesn't have a significant role to play in fixing the nation's health system including the state of its hospital care. Please.

"[censored] views on footy". Interesting, cause I agree with you on alot of subjects. The natural conclusion being..

Mate, I don't care who you support. My comments are directed at you, but moreso Labor fools. Try and counter any argument you like.

But it's funny that Abbott is hit with the Bible comments when he's no more or less religious than Rudd. Just more disingenuity from you.

As for referring to me as Trav ? Is that meant to be some point scoring win ? I've never hid any alias from anyone. The long-timers around here know what my first handle on Demonland was. I posted here under Trav 20 for years, so I can only assume you're referring to BF. Must be a newbie.

As for you agreeing with me on lots of footy matters ? My mistake. I rarely know where others posters stand on footy issues such is my care factor. So I assume you're as thick as the other 99% that post here.

Edited August 13, 2013 by Ben-Hur

[Biffen 12,940]

"Lame,Gay,Churchy,Loser"

You can't argue with that Ben-Hur.

Unless you know him better than his daughter.

Speaks in a stuttering monotone.

Has the intellectual clout of blowfly.

If he wins he will get shafted by Turnbull.

Murdoch may not even get him over the line.

That;s how bad.

[Hannibal 5,814]

"Lame,[censored],Churchy,Loser"

You can't argue with that Ben-Hur.

Unless you know him better than his daughter.

Speaks in a stuttering monotone.

Has the intellectual clout of blowfly.

If he wins he will get shafted by Turnbull.

Murdoch may not even get him over the line.

That;s how bad.

A Rhodes Scholar, who isn't a great orator, that gets demonised by left wing dolts. Left wing dolts, who if had their way, would bankrupt the country.

And are already ruining it.

[P-man 13,366]

I think we should all take a repository and calm down.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

Haha come in spinner.

You're just a [censored] stirring lefty that stoops to disingenuously use Abbott's religious beliefs as some sort of concern when those same beliefs don't have any control over his party or policy. And to think you thought you'd get an answer to all of your questions. Have you ever seen one of these "debates" before ?

YOU support a carbon dioxide tax that does nothing for the environment but needlessly taxes a nation. An impost for no gain.

YOU support a government that lied to the Australian people about a tax it said it would never have.

YOU support a government that needlessly encouraged people smugglers and caused deaths at sea.

YOU support a government that wasted billions on numerous costly failed projects.

YOU support a government that spent way too much to stave off a recession.

YOU support a government that has shambolically chopped and changed leaders such has been their policy failings.

YOU support a government that sold out its heartland to lie in bed with the nutty greens.

YOU support a government that won't be able to roll out its costly NBN in the next "how many" decades.

YOU support a government that promised a surplus, but never delivers.

YOU support a government whose deficit changed by the billions - weekly.

YOU support the most dysfunctional government since federation. Yet you say Abbott worries you ? It beggars belief. No wonder you have [censored] views on footy.

And Abbott is no more a church goer than your own fruitcake leader. His non threatening religious beliefs don't rule any policy within the party. To insinuate they do makes you either a fool or a liar.

Put your hand up to both.

Enjoy the defeat. At least you're a Melbourne supporter, so I dare say you'll cope.

Not agreeing with Abbott does not equate to agreeing with Rudd.

One can disagree with both of them. Personally, I disagree with both on their now very similar approaches to asylum seekers arriving by boat.

I wont be voting for either one of them. Neither men nor the parties they lead have shown any indication to me that they will lead the country well.

The last election showed the dangers of using the Greens as a 'protest vote', so even that option is a bad one. This forces me to vote informal.

If one of them (either one) lays out a plan for Australia that I can get behind, then I'll vote for that candidate. Unfortunately neither one is even close right now, and it's frustrating to say the least.

Abbott will win because we've had 2 terms of Labor incompetence. Even when they have the right idea they invariably screw up it's implementation.

Winning the Prime Ministership by default is not how I want the leader of my country to be chosen.

[MadAsHell 4,212]

Now now Tony Abbott and the Liberal party are a fantastic option.

Just in the last few days we've seen Tony Abbott describe one of his female candidates and another former MP (both female) as having sex appeal. Hmmm.. Wonder how many of his Male MP's he says that about? What was Julia Gillard said about you Tony? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0LFKwfvvNY Reckon she might have been on the money.

We've finally seen the Liberal party announce how they're going to cost promises and exactly what their policies are... Oh wait no we haven't... But we have heard a lot about their plan. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVuoEiD8dMo Yeah, that fills me with a lot of confidence.

And the best bit now is Tony Abbott challenging Kevin Rudd to preference the Greens last like he's instructing his MP'S to do. http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/kevin-rudd-follows-tony-abbott-in-ruling-out-deals-to-form-government-20130814-2rv6c.html

Yeah ok Tony, how about you worry who you're party preference last and let Labor worry about who they preference last. Oh wait, that's why. Because if the Liberal party get in and while the Greens have power of the senate then their first promise of scrapping the carbon tax/trading scheme will be broke because the Greens will bloke it. very clever Tony!

Oh but of course he won't also preference Bob Katter part or the Clive Palmer party under Labor like he will the Greens because they're completely different. Yes Clive Plamer, the man who thought Doug Hawkins would be a good candidate, wants to build a replica of the Titanic and locked supporters out of half empty stadiums for Gold Coast FC matches. Yeah that's a guy who shows good judgement.

Sadly I think there's a very good chance that the Liberal Party will form government, but I certainly wont be voting for my local candidate, thankfully I live in a safe Labor seat. We'll just have our own version of George W Bush, the GST will rise to about 20%, the Australian Navy will be asked to engage in acts of piracy and attempt to turn assylum seeker boats around (they're entitled to seek assylum by boat under international law by the way), we'll have another children overboard or tampa situation and cause an international incident. The rich will get richer while the poor get worse off as we see money taken out of education and health and we see further privatisation.

But end of the day everyones entitled to vote and support who they want and so they should. I just hope that when we see the next change of government occur, it's when the Liberal Party have someone who's a bit less of embarrassing as their leader. As one of his own daughters once said of Abbbott. He's just a dorky church looser!

[Biffen 12,940]

A Rhodes Scholar, who isn't a great orator, that gets demonised by left wing dolts. Left wing dolts, who if had their way, would bankrupt the country.

And are already ruining it.

A Rhodes Scholar, who isn't a great orator, that gets demonised by left wing dolts. Left wing dolts, who if had their way, would bankrupt the country.

And are already ruining it.

The Chief of Goldman Sachs says differently on the front page of Ginas rag.

Wayne Swan-Treasurer of the Century or what?

"Isn't a great orator " is an understatement.

Steven Hawking is the Rhodes Scholar you might be thinking of-it's easy to confuse the two because they have similar sounding voices.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

The Chief of Goldman Sachs says differently on the front page of Ginas rag.

Wayne Swan-Treasurer of the Century or what?

"Isn't a great orator " is an understatement.

Steven Hawking is the Rhodes Scholar you might be thinking of-it's easy to confuse the two because they have similar sounding voices.

lol.

But seriously, Abbott actually is a Rhodes Scholar.

[hardtack 10,534]

lol.

But seriously, Abbott actually is a Rhodes Scholar.

I was a Roads Scholar... spent a year putting gutters in Captain Cook Crescent in Canberra. I believe Abbott nominated the Island of Rhodes as his topic in Mastermind... Bob Hawke was a Rhodes Scholar, so I'm not sure too many Abbott fans would be waving that particular flag.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Bob Hawke was a Rhodes Scholar, so I'm not sure too many Abbott fans would be waving that particular flag.

Why not ?