Australia - 7 September 2013

[You kip if you want to...]

Hard to remember how popular KRudd actually was 2007-2009 at this point.

[Knives]

Bill Shorten would be a decent leader but would struggle to shake the dark clouds that loom over him.

[RogueBeaver]

NSW and Vic Right back Shorten.

[Smid]

Bill Shorten would be a decent leader but would struggle to shake the dark clouds that loom over him.

Which is precisely why Labor should pick him now and keep their powder dry for a leader with more gravitas after the honeymoon is over. Changing an Opposition Leader who fails to cut through is very different to knifing an incumbent PM. Shorten would be your Brendan Nelson.

Meanwhile very interesting article in the AFR today, the info in it, it seems to have been sourced from within Liberal CHQ, but I think it would make Gillard supporters rub their hands together, that an alternative narrative to Rudd saving the furniture is already being written.

I for one previously thought that Crean (hindsight, Albanese may also have fit the bill) would have been their best bet for the leadership going into the campaign, Rudd and Shorten the weaker option on the second-tier, and Gillard a poor third.After reading this article, I think much of Gillard's unpopularity was absorbed by the Labor brand, and if she had led Labor to the election, they would not have performed any worse... Perhaps Moreton and/or Petrie may have been different, but perhaps Barton would have been safer, possibly Eden-Monaro, too. Anyway, I am reaching the conclusion that her campaign would have been far stronger and that she would have possibly even performed better than Rudd, certainly he didn't help them much.

Anyway, interesting article if it's not geo-locked.

[RogueBeaver]

Smid, is the AFR article you're referring to?

Here's a look at Lab leadership prospects, but right now only Albo and Shorten are pinging caucus.

[RogueBeaver]

A long PVO article on the new Cabinet, which won't be entirely predictable. Truss probably won't press for the traditional Nat trade slot, instead keeping Transport/Infrastructure. Brandis will probably take over as Senate leader soon enough in addition to being AG. Two contenders for Speaker: Andrews and ... Bronwyn Bishop. But both want to be in Cabinet. Also lists some up-n'coming "middlebenchers", as I call parliamentary secretaries and junior ministers.

[Smid]

Indeed it is. Labor had it's flaws and it's unpopularity, but Rudd's personal faults, chaotic nature and undisciplined hijacking of the campaign, may have cost them seats. I think Crean - boring, sombre and tedious Crean, the opposite of the chaotic Rudd, would have given Labor the seriousness they needed.

[You kip if you want to...]

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/how-kevin-rudds-2013-election-campaign-imploded-20130908-2teb1.html

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'll probably do a write-up of my view of why things ended up the way they did... but as far as I'm concerned, it's pretty simple as Tanya Plibersek put it, 9/10 for governing the country and 0/10 for governing themselves.

I think Gillard could have pulled back 'some' of the vote, but I'm highly, highly skeptical that she would have performed better than Rudd. Firstly, I don't see her vote improving through the year - regardless of how good the campaign might have been, it strikes me as being a bit like a fantastic soprano singing to an empty opera house. The ALP also got a significant fundraising boost after Rudd came in, something that I don't see Gillard replicating.

It was ALP-fatigue, people were sick of melodrama and there was virtually no way, short of an EPIC cock-up from Abbott that would have led to their winning. When your utter best-case scenario is a Hung Parliament, you're screwed.

It was a perfect storm: internal fighting, instability and disorganisation against extreme discipline, external unity and very well-funded...

[RogueBeaver]

I agree with Polnut on Rudd/Gillard.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

BTW - if ANYONE points to a robopoll as a sign of anything, I have permission to shoot them... k?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

More of a contralto, I think.

[RogueBeaver]

Western Sydney was saved by localization and ethnic targeting. Plus respectable national poll numbers.

[morgieb]

RB, can you think of any way of getting around reading articles which are blocked for non-subscribers? I don't want to give my money to right-wing corporations

[RogueBeaver]

Hit and miss, but usually I get Oz articles from either Twitter or Google News since I follow PVO and a couple of other Oz journos.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Hit and miss, but usually I get Oz articles from either Twitter or Google News since I follow PVO and a couple of other Oz journos.

Calling PVO a journo is an insult to all journalists... he's an academic with aspirations...

[Platypus]

Indeed it is. Labor had it's flaws and it's unpopularity, but Rudd's personal faults, chaotic nature and undisciplined hijacking of the campaign, may have cost them seats. I think Crean - boring, sombre and tedious Crean, the opposite of the chaotic Rudd, would have given Labor the seriousness they needed.

I'm not going to disagree with this.

It's why I'm quite keen on the idea of whoever Labor choose being one of their calmer figures, and giving that person a full two terms to win back the lodge.

I choose Mark Dreyfus over the rest of the ministry, and while it'll never happen, I'm confident it would be the right way to go about it.

[RogueBeaver]

Opinions on presumptive Senator Howes? A Lab friend of mine isn't a fan of the not-so-faceless man, particularly after the belly-flopped attempt to collect GE funds from fellow unions in June.

[Smid]

Indeed it is. Labor had it's flaws and it's unpopularity, but Rudd's personal faults, chaotic nature and undisciplined hijacking of the campaign, may have cost them seats. I think Crean - boring, sombre and tedious Crean, the opposite of the chaotic Rudd, would have given Labor the seriousness they needed.

I'm not going to disagree with this.

It's why I'm quite keen on the idea of whoever Labor choose being one of their calmer figures, and giving that person a full two terms to win back the lodge.

I choose Mark Dreyfus over the rest of the ministry, and while it'll never happen, I'm confident it would be the right way to go about it.

I was referring to Crean in that post some months back, where I described the sort of leader Labor needed, but obviously didn't give a name. I won't make suggestions about who Labor should choose now for their leader, but I will say that I think Shorten is no messiah...

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think Shorten would be a terrible idea... he's got the pedigree for ALP leadership, but not the necessary temperament. Hugh knows my views of Dreyfus, he's one of the more consistent performers, but if anything he's too steady. You need to have a viable alternative, someone who is inherently measured, but capable of going on the attack if necessary... it's a tricky balance.

My vote is for Albanese...

[Knives]

Tanya or Albo thankyou.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Hugh - it turns out Latham agrees with you on Dreyfus ... wish to reconsider?

[Platypus]

Nope. Even Latham can be right sometimes

[Smid]

Nope. Even Latham can be right sometimes

I believe the saying is "a stopped clock is right twice a day."

[Mr. Morden]

Sounds like it'll most likely be Shorten if he wants it.

The thing is though, it sounds like with the newly reformed procedure that the ALP has in place for selecting its leadership, it's very difficult to depose a sitting leader except immediately after an election loss.  So whoever they pick as leader now is very likely to still be leader going into the 2016 election.....but will then surely be dumped for someone new if the party loses.  So whoever announces that they want to become leader now is making a bet that the 2016 election will be winnable.  Otherwise, it's better to wait, and set yourself up for 2019.