Gillard vs Abbott - Who will you vote for? POLL

[Twenty10]

id vote for Shane Warne over any of the party's

I AGREE fuck sake rudd may be a dudd but at least he had glasses and was ready to use them (makes no sense whatsoever but perhaps it does ?? mystery ??) and seriously who wants that racoon looking ferral thing governing our country if i was a leader of another country and met gillard i'd literally puke and swallow for the entire conversation. shes probly going to start a world war 3 with her looks.

Nice, base your entire argument on her looks. Hilarious.

He didn't deserve the knife in the back, he was a decent prime minister and at least deserved to see out his term. I hate how the f***cking corporates have been able to kick someone who we voted for out of office overnight. If this is a precedent for things to come then our democracy is screwed.

We never voted for the Prime Minister, we voted for the party. The leader of the party with the majority is merely offered the position of PM by the Governor General.
(The office of Prime Minister isn't even mentioned in the Constitution.)

well we do kinda vote for the PM coz thats the face we see spewed all over our television sets. It wasnt Labour 07 it was Kevin 07. etc etc ultimately the leader of the party persuades us to vote for him.... /her.

[ninwa]

well we do kinda vote for the PM coz thats the face we see spewed all over our television sets. It wasnt Labour 07 it was Kevin 07. etc etc ultimately the leader of the party persuades us to vote for him.... /her.

So answer this q:

We voted for a party lead by Kevin Rudd and his deputy Julia Gillard, who would have succeeded him had anything happened to him. Would you have the same issue with this if Rudd had, say, passed away instead or for whatever reason stepped down of his own free will?

(unless there's some law governing what happens in this case, in which case ignore me)

[Noblesse]

i dont know how to  trust labour if they can stab one of their own in the back, crucify him and then have the guys to stab him on a back bench seat. absolutely disgraceful. i know rudd wasn't the best made some dumb  decisions but did not deserve this. liberal for me.

Although they were in opposition, the Liberal party did something similar only in December last year...

[Twenty10]

well we do kinda vote for the PM coz thats the face we see spewed all over our television sets. It wasnt Labour 07 it was Kevin 07. etc etc ultimately the leader of the party persuades us to vote for him.... /her.

So answer this q:

We voted for a party lead by Kevin Rudd and his deputy Julia Gillard, who would have succeeded him had anything happened to him. Would you have the same issue with this if Rudd had, say, passed away instead or for whatever reason stepped down of his own free will?

(unless there's some law governing what happens in this case, in which case ignore me)

no

[TrueLight]

i almost forgot...Labour continues its power next election... internet filter and censorship yay!

[ninwa]

no

What's the difference then? Either way, you get a PM you supposedly didn't vote for. I think the real issue you, and people with your views, have is the method with which she obtained power, rather than the fact itself.

[Noblesse]

i almost forgot...Labour continues its power next election... internet filter and censorship yay!

True, I also find that very disturbing (it should be noted, there is a *small* chance that the policy may change, especially if Kate Lundy replaces Conroy, when Gillard makes her changes). No guarantee the Coalition won't do the same, as the opposition hasn't officially opposed the filter (only concerns from Abbott about its effectiveness), and indeed Howard also had plans for a filter.

[Twenty10]

no

What's the difference then? Either way, you get a PM you supposedly didn't vote for. I think the real issue you, and people with your views, have is the method with which she obtained power, rather than the fact itself.

wat views? i just said The leader of the party is the one ppl vote for because most ppl vote for a party based on the leader and how they present themselves to the  ppl of Australua. so really we vote for a PM not a party.

[Russ]

no

What's the difference then? Either way, you get a PM you supposedly didn't vote for. I think the real issue you, and people with your views, have is the method with which she obtained power, rather than the fact itself.

The difference is that if the PM passes away there's no alternative, somebody has to replace him. But otherwise, the PM should retain power for his full term.

That's by the by, Gillard replacing Rudd isn't going to significantly alter anything

e,

so really we vote for a PM not a party

YOU may vote based on which individual you prefer, but the voting system doesn't take that into account (ie even if labour win 90% of the vote with Rudd leading, he still might not be eligible to be PM)

[lolbox]

YOU may vote based on which individual you prefer, but the voting system doesn't take that into account (ie even if labour win 90% of the vote with Rudd leading, he still might not be eligible to be PM)

I agree with this. I personally support the Liberal party and always will, no matter who leads it. I'd be extremely suprised if the average Australian voted on the basis of a party, rather then who was leading it.
If you think about it, it is the leader who is advertised, scrutinised and praised by the media/public, not the party. But yea I agree with Russ, whatever reason (party or leader) you vote, the voting system doesn't care. As long as you vote.

[Noblesse]

I personally support the Liberal party and always will, no matter who leads it.

Why?

[lolbox]

I personally support the Liberal party and always will, no matter who leads it.

Why?

good question homeboy
Family influence mainly. We have always been liberal supporters.
The liberal party is more business-minded/looking after the economy, whereas Labor primarily works for the working class families. My family/my Dads business is more suited to Liberals (tax-wise and other).

The introduction of the stimulus package wasn't looked at too fondly in my house.

[iffets12345]

If anyone wants a good definition of irony, it's this:

Considering Tony Abott's no sex before marriage in teenagers and then taking a look at his daughters:
http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2010/01/23/1225822/870061-dtstory-tony-abbott.jpg

[stonecold]

If anyone wants a good definition of irony, it's this:

Considering Tony Abott's no sex before marriage in teenagers and then taking a look at his daughters:
http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2010/01/23/1225822/870061-dtstory-tony-abbott.jpg

That was the biggest Media bash up over nothing I've ever seen.  And Gillard's comments on the matter also pissed me off.  I don't really follow politics, so I don't know what other stupid things Abbott may have said regarding abortion, feminism and religion, but he got crucified over nothing on that one.

[iffets12345]

lol stonecold, I have no opinion about it, I just think its amusing he has this belief while his daughters are actually quite attractive...