anyone saw the liberal "Rudd's Record" ad?

[vox nihili]

While we're a very happy nation, we seem to facilitate so much moaning about nothing I mean, there are legitimately people out there who think our economy is doing badly, or that our sovereign debt is an issue...

Exactly, which is absolutely ridiculous and a frustrating result of a completely ignorant populous. Though, if that's all people have to complain about, I guess we can be thankful for that!

[Mao]

While we're a very happy nation, we seem to facilitate so much moaning about nothing I mean, there are legitimately people out there who think our economy is doing badly, or that our sovereign debt is an issue...

Yes. I am one. Not only do I think our sovereign debt is an issue, I also think most of Labor's "nation building projects" are terrible investments. For example, the laptop scheme for high school students had to be one of the most stupid schemes I've ever seen. And the economical gains went straight into Japanese tech companies' pockets.

I find your false sense of security with the state of our economy to be totally ridiculous. Alarm bells should be ringing when taxation revenues continue to be below forecast, super-profits tax continue to not deliver significant revenue, and our interest rates has fallen to a point where we are now talking about deflationary risks.

But, we have had this disagreement so many times that I care not to recount. To each their own, my feet are firmly planted on the LNP side.

[Professor Polonsky]

Yes. I am one. Not only do I think our sovereign debt is an issue, I also think most of Labor's "nation building projects" are terrible investments. For example, the laptop scheme for high school students had to be one of the most stupid schemes I've ever seen. And the economical gains went straight into Japanese tech companies' pockets.

And I won't bother with citing yet another assessment by an international credit-rating agency (Moody's just issued a new yearly report into Australia, you might be interested) because apparently they do nothing to convince you. Our net debt now is lower than it was at several points in our past, and the fiscal gap is hardly a large one. Even if you are convinced that it needs to be closed (which it does in the long term, but it's hardly pressing) then there are so many different ways to do so in the medium-term (new taxes, cutting spending) that I'm not overly concerned by it.

I'm not going to defend specific hand-picked ALP initiatives, but regarding this specific one I will say that I always have advocated for protectionist economic policies - and finally I'm not completely alone, with the fall of our local manufacturing industry.

[slothpomba]

Can't believe a party can be dumb enough to waste tons of tax payers money, just for advertising how bad the other party is = =

Some of it may be tax money but a fair bit of it would be donations as well. Parties get funding based on how many votes they get (another reason to vote for minor parties). I believe its about $2 a vote.

I think it's unreasonable to stipulate what they should do with their money(within legal bounds) or expect them not to advertise in the advertising saturated world we have today.

browse through their channel suggested that they did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for the community, instead, they spend hours and hours of man power making and advertising how bad labor party is...

I don't think you can tell that looking at their youtube channel. They're a political party and if elected (even now) they actually intend to do things; they a long list (public or private, it certainly exists).

You're quite right there! With little more than a skerrick of intelligence in the LNP, it's not a hard choice.

I don't think thats fair, at all.

Disagreeing with their philosophy is one thing. That'll happen. Calling them 'dumb' or 'stupid' is another. Tony Abbott is a Rhodes Scholar, love him or loathe him, he is by almost any definition a very smart man.

Labeling Liberal voters as dumb is simply ignorant. It displays an ironic lack of understanding by people who level this criticism. Someone can believe a different philosophy from you without being mentally deficient, your way isn't the only way. They have a multitude of reasons for voting as they do, some might be philosophical or some might be purely pragmatic. It's no secret there are some interests that each party represents better than the other. It is no secret people act in their own interests and obviously vote in their own interests.

[vox nihili]

I don't think thats fair, at all.

Disagreeing with their philosophy is one thing. That'll happen. Calling them 'dumb' or 'stupid' is another. Tony Abbott is a Rhodes Scholar, love him or loathe him, he is by almost any definition a very smart man.

Labeling Liberal voters as dumb is simply ignorant. It displays an ironic lack of understanding by people who level this criticism. Someone can believe a different philosophy from you without being mentally deficient, your way isn't the only way. They have a multitude of reasons for voting as they do, some might be philosophical or some might be purely pragmatic. It's no secret there are some interests that each party represents better than the other. It is no secret people act in their own interests and obviously vote in their own interests.

Fair point, not going to disagree with you there. Saying there's not a skerrick of intelligence in the LNP is obviously gross hyperbole. Perhaps my issues are more about the lack of moral compass that seems to direct the LNP's policy.
As far as Tony Abbott being a Rhodes Scholar, these scholarships aren't academic. They're about leadership and participation in sport as well. I don't find Tony Abbott to be a particularly intelligent man though, to be honest. He certainly has particular strengths, that said, he is grossly inarticulate, unwilling to accept facts and, for such a sanctimonious twit, has a very disturbing moral outlook.
But again, I do accept what you say is right and I don't disagree with that at all. It was just lazy hyperbole to stir people up, as it did

[Russ]

Yeah, he got his Masters from Oxford by being unintelligent and inarticulate. Just because hes on the other end of the political spectrum, doesn't make him dumb.

[appianway]

I don't think it's fair to denigrate the leaders/ministers in the major parties on the basis of their intelligence. Most are highly intelligent and highly qualified, and on top of that, have a lot of experience in certain issues. My qualm with education/knowledge is that a huge proportion are law graduates (meaning that there's a deficit of knowledge in other areas), but that's a whole other story...

To the people who are inferring that there's not a shred of intelligence in the liberal party: I don't think that's true and it's not fair to say, irrespective of your political leanings. I wouldn't say it about either major party. The two parties are driven by entirely different political and economic philosophies. Getting a Rhodes scholarship does require academic excellence even though other factors are considered. And take a look at Malcolm Turnbull, who's part of the Liberal ministry: someone who works in journalism throughout university before founding a law firm, defending prominent cases and then becoming a partner in Goldman Sachs is pretty damn smart.

[vox nihili]

Yeah, he got his Masters from Oxford by being unintelligent and inarticulate. Just because hes on the other end of the political spectrum, doesn't make him dumb.

Being well versed in one area certainly doesn't make you intelligent. Tony Abbott has proved time and time again that he has very little mental flexibility and a complete disregard for facts and for evidence. It's fair enough to mention his academic achievements, and no doubt he has his areas of intellectual strength. But speaking broadly, he doesn't come across as a particularly intelligent man or a particularly flexible thinker. Particularly his comments about anything science related. A leader needs to be broadly intelligent, not just to the one area. My comments reflect his lack of breadth. It's all well and good to say that he's done really well in particular areas, but in others, he's woefully unintelligent. I know it's been done to death, but his contempt for the facts about climate change is a perfect example of this. Another particular good one was when a five year old had to explain to him what a bloody cloud was the other day. He has his intellectual strengths, but a Prime Minister needs to have intellectual breadth, something Tony Abbott is lacking.

That said as well, my comments were a bit lazy with hyperbole, something I've made reference to. It's no secret I don't like him, and to make a sweeping statement about a total lack of intellect is a reflection of that, as I've also said.

appianway, I completely agree with what you've said about a lack of representation of other areas. By nature politics is embedded in law and the arts, which is disappointing. A leader needs intellectual breadth, but so too does a party.

[appianway]

appianway, I completely agree with what you've said about a lack of representation of other areas. By nature politics is embedded in law and the arts, which is disappointing. A leader needs intellectual breadth, but so too does a party.

Politics doesn't have to be embedded in law and the arts! Politics affects policy in so many areas - healthcare, infrastructure, science, education, small businesses, large businesses... it goes on and on. I would much rather have more politicians who had the scientific literacy or engineering experience to understand a lot of proposals and critically analyze them than politicians which were appointed to technical cabinets as a reward for years of service after their Arts/Law degree.

[vox nihili]

Politics doesn't have to be embedded in law and the arts! Politics affects policy in so many areas - healthcare, infrastructure, science, education, small businesses, large businesses... it goes on and on. I would much rather have more politicians who had the scientific literacy or engineering experience to understand a lot of proposals and critically analyze them than politicians which were appointed to technical cabinets as a reward for years of service after their Arts/Law degree.

I completely agree! The broader range the better. Actually having people who know those areas, who know health, who know infrastructure, who know education...having experts in those fields, is far better than having a bunch of lawyers and arts graduates pretending to understand their portfolios.
As it stands at the moment though, politics tends to attract people from those areas, which is a great shame.

[Russ]

Do you really think he is not intellectually capable of understanding these things, rather than simply having politically charged motivations for disagreeing or opposing them?

[vox nihili]

Do you really think he is not intellectually capable of understanding these things, rather than simply having politically charged motivations for disagreeing or opposing them?

When he fails to explain to a five year old what a cloud is, I highly doubt he understands how climate change is working.

[alondouek]

That's kind of unfair, I'm a passionate advocate for climate change research and I'd probably struggle to give you an accurate explanation of a cloud. Even harder to do so for a 5-year-old, who I can't exactly talk serious science to.

[vox nihili]

That's kind of unfair, I'm a passionate advocate for climate change research and I'd probably struggle to give you an accurate explanation of a cloud. Even harder to do so for a 5-year-old, who I can't exactly talk serious science to.

Neither can scientists completely, that's fair. At the moment they're doing a lot of research to work out how clouds stick together. Different acids and stuff do it apparently. I can't remember the name of the things that do it, but it's pretty interesting! Anyway, I digress. What he was bumbling between was whether the cloud was a gas, or water, or God's tutu. He didn't have the slightest idea of even the very basics.

[alondouek]

I still don't think I could count that as a gaffe. Is a cloud gas, or water in a near-vapour state? Regardless, it's definitely very low on the scale of dumb things politicians have done in recent times.

e.g. Jaymes Diaz, Craig Thomson, the entire One Nation party.