Kevin Rudd vs Julia Gillard

Discussion in 'Australia, NZ, Pacific' started by Makedde, Jun 22, 2011.

?

Who Do You Prefer As Prime Minister?

  1. Kevin Rudd

    91.7%
  2. Julia Gillard

    8.3%
  1. Makedde

    Makedde New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    66,166
    Likes Received:
    349
    Trophy Points:
    0
    With Gillards popularity on the downslide, who would you prefer to have as Prime Minister now? Keep Gillard, or bring back Rudd?

    Liberals, you don't have the option of voting 'neither', just pick whichever PM you'd prefer.
     
  2. dumbanddumber

    dumbanddumber New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2011
    Messages:
    2,212
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I love Kevin Rud because he gave $45 billion dollars to the people of Australia instead of those greedy FARK**G BANKERS.

    Then again he is in favour of the CARBON TAX which I am NOT.

    Rud Or Gillard the CARBON TAx IS COMING.

    NONE OF THEM.
     
  3. Makedde

    Makedde New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    66,166
    Likes Received:
    349
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Kevin Rudd saved us from a recession. That alone should have been enough for the people to want to keep him.
     
  4. dumbanddumber

    dumbanddumber New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2011
    Messages:
    2,212
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well when you put it that way and i have to cast my vote.

    RUDD
     
  5. Panzerkampfwagen

    Panzerkampfwagen New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2010
    Messages:
    11,570
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Rudd - Left wing authoritarian Christian whack job who thinks that religion has a place in how the country is run.

    Gillard - Left wing authoritarian atheist who is too scared to (*)(*)(*)(*) off the Christian right.


    Yeah, they may as well be the same person.
     
  6. Gwendoline

    Gwendoline Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,938
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Not just Liberals, many Laborites want "neither", also.

    I consider them both useless. Rudd a smidgen less useless than Gillard.

    Labor glory days? Long, long, long lost...
     
  7. Oxyboy

    Oxyboy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Messages:
    2,779
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    LOL neither.

    Like picking between a kick in the balls and a kick in the balls.

    Both will see to it that the ALP brand goes into mothballs for many many years.

    YAY :sun:
     
  8. Makedde

    Makedde New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    66,166
    Likes Received:
    349
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gillard recently met with the homophobes because they were oh so concerned about all the support for gay marriage. I wish Gillard would just suck it up and tell them to (*)(*)(*)(*) off and give the people what they want.
     
  9. MegadethFan

    MegadethFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2010
    Messages:
    17,385
    Likes Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    63
    (*)(*)(*)(*) Gillard. I want Rudd back. Although that being said, I'd prefer Malcolm now.
     
  10. MegadethFan

    MegadethFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2010
    Messages:
    17,385
    Likes Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    63
    One correction - they are both right wing/centralist by way of economics and Rudd actually encouraged Howard's centralization policies within government management - Cabinet meetings shortened etc, more centralization of policy making and decision taking.
     
  11. Uncle Meat

    Uncle Meat Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    Messages:
    7,948
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    0
    He couldn't do any worse.

    [​IMG]
     
  12. robot

    robot Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2010
    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    28
    The only things that will save Gillard at the next election are
    1. The next election is two years away.
    2. The alternatives are just as bad.

    It could be a chance for the Greens to show they are a good alternative party.
     
  13. concetta

    concetta New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    IM IN SUPPORT OF KEVIN RUDD REPLACING, JULIA GILLARD.
    Its only my opinion, but one of the reasons Kevin Rudd failed as PM was, because of the incompetence and the mouthpieces, that now are running the labor government, after rolling an elected governmet, many were prepared to give Julia Gillard a go, I knew at hearing the news, that Julia gillard was to replace Kevin Rudd, She was not PM material,

    One of Wilkileaks cables stated that, Arbid had been in talks with America a year ahead of the coup, that Kevin Rudd was going to be replaced as PM. So they had a whole year to plot and discredit him to the max.
    Iv voted labor all my life, but stopped when Julia Gillard became PM, and will continue to vote for the green until she gets replaced.

    I don't like her personality, but really I wont vote for her cause, I think the malaysian asylum seekers solution is pathetic. Also I belive we should do something about pollution, but I feel this is carbon tax is just another money tax grab from this government. Also I feel the NBN will give gov power to control the internet, which frightens me.
     
  14. Oxyboy

    Oxyboy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Messages:
    2,779
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    LOL

    Drag your arses out of the past people Rudd is poison.

    He has no numbers in the party and that's what counts.

    They hate Kevin O'Lemon.

    :):)
     
  15. Oxyboy

    Oxyboy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Messages:
    2,779
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Delusional!

    Rudd WAS the MOUTH PIECE!

    He only ever trotted out a minister when his next great failure blew up in his face.

    :omg:
     
  16. cods

    cods New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0


    if Mickey Mouse was running he would get my vote anything but this mob.

    they are treating Australians like mugs its disgraceful
     
  17. Uncle Meat

    Uncle Meat Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    Messages:
    7,948
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Regrettably, you couldn't actually vote for him (as PM).

    Australians don't elect their PM.

    We only have the power to elect our local representatives.

    [​IMG]
     
  18. Gwendoline

    Gwendoline Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,938
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Agree.

    The Labor Party is a disgrace, has lost all credibility and is sinking in its own crap. Never thought I'd see the day the Labor Party would sink so low.

    The dumbest line-up of politicians I can remember in ages. Don't bring Rudd back, he's as useless as Gillard.

    Hard to believe that Gillard and Rudd belong to the same party.. after the leadership of quite extraordinary statesmen like Whitlam and Keating.

    Someone put the Labor Party out of its misery. Kick the lot out and start again.
     
  19. concetta

    concetta New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I disagree with this repetitive argument that We don't elect a PM.
    Yeah but if we want to get rid of a PM, we vote against the PMs local representatives
    Which has the same effect as voting against the PM.
    I think you are underestimating the power of a PM to draw the voters in.
     
  20. cods

    cods New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0


    of course you are right..we do elect the PM.. we dont choose him/her thats the difference.. but if we dont like their chosen leader.. then theres not much chance we will vote in their representative no matter how much good he/she does, its that simple.

    how many of us remember who we actually voted for when, say for arguments sake we voted in Whitlam or Howard??.. I wouldnt have a clue but I do know I voted for Howard and not for Whitlam.

    I find it easier not to split hairs over this type of thing.

    as for rudd v gillard..its a non event I couldnt for the life of me see either of them being elected by a sane country ever again.
     
  21. concetta

    concetta New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  22. Panzerkampfwagen

    Panzerkampfwagen New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2010
    Messages:
    11,570
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In Australia we vote for people to represent us in our electorate. These people may or may not belong to a party. In Australia we do not vote for the position of Prime Minister. The constitution gives the power of appointing ministers to the Governor General. By convention the GG appoints the PM from the party that is able to obtain the most support in the lower house, but is not required to do so by the constitution. Usually the PM is the leader of the party with the most support and if the leader changes then the GG will usually appoint that person as PM.

    This is how it works no matter how many people think they are directly voting for a party or directly voting for the PM. Kevin Rudd kept his seat in parliament as the only positions he lost was that of the leader of the ALP and by convention, not law, lost his assignment as Prime Minister. He remained in his seat in the lower house exactly where the voters of his electorate had put him.
     
  23. cods

    cods New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0


    of course constitutionally that is correct, however I would be most surprised to learn most people voted only for the name on their voting form..you see most of us dont even know what that person looks like as they do not get the media exposure the leader of the party does.

    most people vote for a Party and the person leading that Party to become PM.

    if they become horrified by the actions of the PM then the party suffers.. why do you think the backbenchers are up in arms.. because they know that gillard can lose them their seats.. it wont just be gillard that goes. in fact she could be popular in her electorate and still remain like rudd did... but quite a few didnt survive..Tanner one of them his seat went.
     
  24. MegadethFan

    MegadethFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2010
    Messages:
    17,385
    Likes Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I disagree. People generally liked Rudd. He seemed too scripted as his time in office wound on. I do believe that was apart of his own personal character, I agree with you there, but there is not reason they could have been remedied. Tony Abbott is far worse in regards to this characteristic - he cant talk straight, let alone relevantly. Gillard is no different in that respect. We are deprived of any capable leaders with support within their parties.
     
  25. Ziggy Stardust

    Ziggy Stardust Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2008
    Messages:
    2,801
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The reason that Rudd was rolled was because he ignored his cabinet and ministers and alienated the public service. He was not a good leader, he was not democratic, he did not treat his ministry with any kind of respect. He was worse even than Howard in this regard. It's no ones fault but his own. He failed to get the ETS through, he failed to get the mining tax through. Yes he gave us the stimulus package, but so what? That's not exactly amazing, it's not like it was some sort of bold reform. He burnt out his department and he lost the confidence of his party. Rudd had to go, you do not roll an incumbent PM without good reason. Gillard is a capable leader, she's not particularly inspiring or charismatic, but she is pragmatic and competent. If it's a choice between Abbott and Gillard, I choose Gillard every time. Rudd is undermining the government atm, very annoying to watch. He needs to either get behind Julia or get out altogether. And my God, Abbott is a bloody disgrace to the Liberals. He's turning them into the frickin' GOP. Although I would like to see Malcolm back I don't think that is going to happen, but please for God's sake get rid of bloody Abbott! Even Joe Hockey would be better than Abbott.
     

Share This Page