The Australian politics thread

[Burgey]

I just wonder whether Nelson has forced Turnbull's hand earlier than the latter really wanted?
With NSW a basket case, we need to remember the voters there go to the Federal polls before the state polls. Although people aren't as stupid as we sometimes like to make out and can differentiate between state and federal issues, I'd expect a substantial backlash there unless Fatty O'Barrell implodes in the next 18 months.

[howardj]

With Turnbull, win or lose today, he emerges with clean hands in the sense that he didn't initiate the spill and has been disciplined with his comments on the leadership for the last couple of months. Thus, a loss today wouldn't be as much of a reversal as it would have been had he initiated the spill. That said, you wouldn't want to lose (as would be the case if things go south today) two ballots within the space of nine months.

[Johnners]

Turnbull it is

[social]

[QUOTE=howardj;1679090]

For mine, the bottom line is that the Liberals stand little chance of winning in 2010.

QUOTE]

Wait and see how the electorate responds to Turnbull

He is by faaaaaaaaar the most accomplished business person, a good speaker, a completely ruthless prick and, importantly, doesnt need to be there so he'll do what it takes - basically, he's an incredibly smart guy who is a winner at all costs type

Furthermore, by the time 2010 rolls around, the Australian economy will have been absolutely stuffed for a couple of years (I'm hearing that a large bank may need bailing out and even the resource sector is slowing down now) and Labor's blaming of the Libs for the economic woes will no longer be seen as credible

[vic_orthdox]

I hope Turnbull wins today.

For mine, the bottom line is that the Liberals stand little chance of winning in 2010.

But, under Nelson, they stand no chance.

Why would they want to prolong the leadership of someone who is unelectable?

Only reason could be that they'll have more momentum leading into an election if they delay it a bit?

EDIT: Obviously redundant now that I've read the last page here...

[Nnanden]

My Dad said in 1975 that one day Malcolm Turnbull will be Prime Minister.

That day just took a giant leap in the right direction.

[howardj]

Only reason could be that they'll have more momentum leading into an election if they delay it a bit?

...

That's a good point in the sense that, if you look at the last few people to become PM from Opposition, they only held the Opposition Leader post for a short period:

- Hawke took over from Hayden when the 1983 election was called.

- Howard took over from Downer only 14 months before the 1996 election.

- Rudd took over from Beazley only 11 months before the 2007 election.

So there probably is something to the theory that you're a better chance of becoming PM if you don't spend too long as Opposition leader. That said, I think because of his appalling ratings (not just bad ratings) Nelson was damaging the Liberal brand and just had to go no matter what.

[Burgey]

[QUOTE=social;1679208]

For mine, the bottom line is that the Liberals stand little chance of winning in 2010.

QUOTE]

Wait and see how the electorate responds to Turnbull

He is by faaaaaaaaar the most accomplished business person, a good speaker, a completely ruthless prick and, importantly, doesnt need to be there so he'll do what it takes - basically, he's an incredibly smart guy who is a winner at all costs type

Furthermore, by the time 2010 rolls around, the Australian economy will have been absolutely stuffed for a couple of years (I'm hearing that a large bank may need bailing out and even the resource sector is slowing down now) and Labor's blaming of the Libs for the economic woes will no longer be seen as credible

All that is true, but bare in mind his political antennae haven't always been well tuned.

[bryce]

Who sniffed who's seat?

[GotSpin]

[QUOTE=social;1679208]

For mine, the bottom line is that the Liberals stand little chance of winning in 2010.

QUOTE]

Wait and see how the electorate responds to Turnbull

He is by faaaaaaaaar the most accomplished business person, a good speaker, a completely ruthless prick and, importantly, doesnt need to be there so he'll do what it takes - basically, he's an incredibly smart guy who is a winner at all costs type

Furthermore, by the time 2010 rolls around, the Australian economy will have been absolutely stuffed for a couple of years (I'm hearing that a large bank may need bailing out and even the resource sector is slowing down now) and Labor's blaming of the Libs for the economic woes will no longer be seen as credible

Where did you hear this?

[howardj]

Wait and see how the electorate responds to Turnbull

He is by faaaaaaaaar the most accomplished business person, a good speaker, a completely ruthless prick and, importantly, doesnt need to be there so he'll do what it takes - basically, he's an incredibly smart guy who is a winner at all costs type

In terms of ruthlessness and determination though, I think he'll meet his match in Rudd. I really admire the way Rudd performed last year - he was a machine, absolutely focussed on becoming PM. Apparently, he hardly slept.

Furthermore, by the time 2010 rolls around, the Australian economy will have been absolutely stuffed for a couple of years (I'm hearing that a large bank may need bailing out and even the resource sector is slowing down now) and Labor's blaming of the Libs for the economic woes will no longer be seen as credible.

As in 1993, even a recession is no guarantee of a change in Government. Obviously there are exceptions, but I subscribe to the theory that the electorate needs a damn good reason before they'll kick out a young Government (there's only been one one-term Government Federally); whereas they need a damn good reason not to kick out an old (10 year plus) Government.

[social]

[QUOTE=Got_Spin;1680023]

Where did you hear this?

2 sources - a director of a European bank approached for funding and also a very senior guy in financial circles

Apparently, it's the usual story where the bank has borrowed short from international institutions and lent long on Australian mortgages

For example, let's say the bank has a 12-month facility and lends it out on 25 year mortgages in the belief that they can roll over the facility when it becomes due (sounds risky but, believe it or not, this is usual practice).

Unfortunately, the foreign banks need the cash and are refusing to roll over the facility.

Unless the situation changes, this bank (not one of the Big 4 but a dominant player in its home market) will be bust

[vic_orthdox]

As long as it isn't the Bendigo... they're putting in the money for the new scoreboard at our cricket ground.

[Burgey]

As long as it isn't the Bendigo... they're putting in the money for the new scoreboard at our cricket ground.

Don't worry mate, after bailing out AIG in the US by lending them a few billion, Malcolm Turnbull will no doubt pay for the scoreboard.

[Craig]

Not sure if I trust Turnbull anyway. He was sprouting some crap like how hard it was in his formative years when his old man struggled for money. Still sent the **** to a lot better school then what I went to! Yeah my parents wished they were struggling that bad