Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 23, 2014, 04:27:25 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  International Elections (Moderator: PASOK Leader Hashemite)
| | |-+  Is Julia Gillard a dead woman walking?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print
Author Topic: Is Julia Gillard a dead woman walking?  (Read 4699 times)
Platypus
hughento
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21433
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: November 08, 2011, 07:28:20 am »
Ignore

PM JBish?



Hmmn, lemme think about it.





































HAHAHAHAHAHA no.

Wink
Logged

Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13734
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: November 08, 2011, 04:47:13 pm »
Ignore

Of course... but for me she seems to be a 'Jim Hacker-like' compromise candidate.
Logged


Dogma is a comfortable thing, it saves you from thought - Sir Robert Menzies
Peter the Lefty
Peternerdman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3439
United States


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: November 17, 2011, 03:48:11 pm »
Ignore

Sorry, another question from a clueless American: If the ALP is kicked out of power, would Penny Wong be considered a viable candidate to be the party's next leader, or are her approval ratings as bad as Gillard's?
Logged



-7.61 Economic
-7.48 Social
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8728
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: November 17, 2011, 04:05:28 pm »
Ignore

Sorry, another question from a clueless American: If the ALP is kicked out of power, would Penny Wong be considered a viable candidate to be the party's next leader, or are her approval ratings as bad as Gillard's?

Senators can't be PM, if Aus is anything like other Westminster model countries.
Logged

Platypus
hughento
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21433
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: November 18, 2011, 12:00:22 am »
Ignore

Senators can be PM, and it's happened before, with Gorton iirc. Or McEwen? One of the coalition 60s/70s gang.

Either way, it is highly, highly unlikely that she would be the leader. I haven't seen a specific poll on her favourability ratings, and I doubt one exists, but I'd expect the numbers would be very similar to the government's in general.

Logged

Smid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6030
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: November 18, 2011, 12:35:32 am »
Ignore

Senators can be PM, and it's happened before, with Gorton iirc. Or McEwen? One of the coalition 60s/70s gang.

Either way, it is highly, highly unlikely that she would be the leader. I haven't seen a specific poll on her favourability ratings, and I doubt one exists, but I'd expect the numbers would be very similar to the government's in general.



Gorton is the correct answer. He was only in the Senate for a brief while as PM, though... He became PM following Holt's disappearance, and then contested the Higgins by-election (which was Holt's seat). This was somewhat easier as he was already a Victorian Senator and therefore on the electoral roll in Victoria (I don't know if he would have been able to contest the seat if he was a Senator in another state, to be a candidate, you must be on the electoral roll and not necessarily in the electorate in which you are a candidate, however there may be a rule that requires you to be on the roll in the same state... probably not, but possibly, my knowledge of the relevant legislation is not that detailed).

Section 64 of the Constitution states that Ministers need not be a Senator or Member of the House of Representatives, and I believe this would extend to the Prime Minister. Okay, okay - I put that somewhat out of context to prove the point, what it specifically says is that if a Minister is not a Senator or Member of the House of Reps, he or she must become one within three months of taking office as a Minister, although the point remains that they could be a Minister for three months, while not serving in the Parliament.

Edit: Going back to the initial question, if Minister Wong seriously wanted to contest for leadership of her party, the indication would be her contesting a House of Reps seat at the next election. You often see Upper House Members with leadership potential be moved down, just as part of a succession plan (which could be ten years off). Bronwyn Bishop is an example - there was talk of her becoming Opposition Leader and she moved from the Senate to HoR, but it never panned out. There are other examples, too, but that's probably one of the more well-known ones.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2011, 12:46:33 am by Smid »Logged
BigSkyBob
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2269
View Profile
« Reply #56 on: January 21, 2012, 02:07:25 am »
Ignore

One big step closer:

http://www.news.com.au/national/andrew-wilkie-turns-back-on-julia-gillard/story-e6frfkvr-1226250097725
Logged

The real scandal in Washington is not the bribery, corruption, or sex. It is how poorly we are governed.
RogueBeaver
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14656
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: January 21, 2012, 12:46:28 pm »
Ignore

Give her credit. Instead of a series of combustions a la John Major, she's managing CFIT. Abbott should just keep downing the popcorn and let this play out.
Logged

7.35, 3.65

« Les plus nobles principes du monde ne valent que par l’action.  » - Charles de Gaulle



Is it excessive to hold a politician's feet to the fire for giving his base the run around at every turn?
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8728
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: January 21, 2012, 06:18:44 pm »
Ignore

So now the Speaker's the king maker? Does Aus have the convention that we do of the Speaker having to vote for the status quo (ergo, support the government in a confidence motion) should there be a tie on the floor of the House?
Logged

Smid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6030
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: January 25, 2012, 01:43:29 am »
Ignore

Interesting speech to the Press Club
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5372
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: January 25, 2012, 06:30:19 am »
Ignore

Right now she looks like it, but once people look at their records, Abbott will probably lose.

The trouble is, Labor just don't know how to communicate. It's astonishing that we've fallen from 60/40 to 45/55 (and for a while it was 40/60) despite there being no economic crash. Also, Gillard's just as unpopular as Abbott is.

Logged
Peter the Lefty
Peternerdman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3439
United States


View Profile
« Reply #61 on: February 22, 2012, 04:26:30 pm »
Ignore

I'm amazed that this thread isn't being swarmed with new posts after Rudd's resignation today.  He announced in a Washington DC hotel at a middle-of-the-night press conference that he's resigning as Foreign Minister over Gillard not rebuking Simon Crean's comment that he "wasn't a team player.". And Gillard's throwing open her leadership.  Rudd's now going back to Australia.  It's on. 
Logged



-7.61 Economic
-7.48 Social
RogueBeaver
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14656
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #62 on: February 22, 2012, 05:00:40 pm »
Ignore

Hell yeah.
Logged

7.35, 3.65

« Les plus nobles principes du monde ne valent que par l’action.  » - Charles de Gaulle



Is it excessive to hold a politician's feet to the fire for giving his base the run around at every turn?
Michaelf7777777
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 76
New Zealand


P

View Profile
« Reply #63 on: February 26, 2012, 01:36:15 am »
Ignore

I don't think Labour are dead and buried for the next election as I think that Tony Abbott (similar to Don Brash in New Zealand circa 2004/2005) appeals to the lowest common denominater well but annoys enough people with his hardline stances that he'll find it very difficult to win an election (by my distant viewer understanding 2010 was close due to the recent sacking of Rudd and unpopular Labour State Governments in New South Wales and Queensland). I'm not sure who the better leader is between Rudd and Gillard for Labour as Rudd is more charismatic although Gillard has 'Home State Advantage' in 2 States (South Australia and Victoria) as well as possibly winning more votes among female voters.
Logged
lilTommy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 940


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -5.04

View Profile
« Reply #64 on: February 29, 2012, 09:31:22 am »
Ignore

Gillard won, convincingly 71-31

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-27/live-blog-monday/3853898

Logged
Peter the Lefty
Peternerdman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3439
United States


View Profile
« Reply #65 on: March 01, 2012, 09:29:24 am »
Ignore

I don't think Labour are dead and buried for the next election as I think that Tony Abbott (similar to Don Brash in New Zealand circa 2004/2005) appeals to the lowest common denominater well but annoys enough people with his hardline stances that he'll find it very difficult to win an election (by my distant viewer understanding 2010 was close due to the recent sacking of Rudd and unpopular Labour State Governments in New South Wales and Queensland). I'm not sure who the better leader is between Rudd and Gillard for Labour as Rudd is more charismatic although Gillard has 'Home State Advantage' in 2 States (South Australia and Victoria) as well as possibly winning more votes among female voters.
I have a feeling Abbot will win, but by a much narrower margin than what current polls would suggest.  I'm not in Australia and have never been there, but I'm just guessing.  And he'll probably be a very unpopular PM who will easily be beaten by Labor in 2016.  Just a (probably wrong) prediction.
Logged



-7.61 Economic
-7.48 Social
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8728
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #66 on: March 01, 2012, 12:10:58 pm »
Ignore

I don't think Labour are dead and buried for the next election as I think that Tony Abbott (similar to Don Brash in New Zealand circa 2004/2005) appeals to the lowest common denominater well but annoys enough people with his hardline stances that he'll find it very difficult to win an election (by my distant viewer understanding 2010 was close due to the recent sacking of Rudd and unpopular Labour State Governments in New South Wales and Queensland). I'm not sure who the better leader is between Rudd and Gillard for Labour as Rudd is more charismatic although Gillard has 'Home State Advantage' in 2 States (South Australia and Victoria) as well as possibly winning more votes among female voters.
I have a feeling Abbot will win, but by a much narrower margin than what current polls would suggest.  I'm not in Australia and have never been there, but I'm just guessing.  And he'll probably be a very unpopular PM who will easily be beaten by Labor in 2016.  Just a (probably wrong) prediction.

I'd be shocked if Tony lasted a whole term as PM without being knifed, but then again, he's been underestimated before.
Logged

redcommander
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3833
View Profile
« Reply #67 on: March 03, 2012, 04:38:02 am »
Ignore

Why is Abbott viewed so unfavorably, and yet leading Gillard? Is it his social conservatism that turns people off?
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8728
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #68 on: March 03, 2012, 05:40:42 pm »
Ignore

Why is Abbott viewed so unfavorably, and yet leading Gillard? Is it his social conservatism that turns people off?

His social conservatism is by-far out of step with Australia.
He was a pretty controversial Health Minister until Howard, from what I gather.
He's pretty gaffe prone.
He's not seen to have a plan.
Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines