Political leaders; who will triumph and what do they stand for? (1 Viewer)

[Serius]

So i find myself with a problem. Whilst i know the names of most of the big players, i dont know much about their policies rather than a few broad generalisations. A recent thread about Tony Abbot and how he might take over from KRudd highlighted this.

If anyone is interested, could you please list the main positives and negatives of your favourite political leaders as you see them.

For reference, i am mostly a lefty but with a handful of conservative views, and some even odder views that are unlikely to be supported by any political party in the next century or so.

 

[Slidey]

Abbott and Rudd are bother socially conservative dicks.

Rudd has some decent R&D policies - he's a massive proponent of communications, ITC and physical sciences research and technology. If Australia gets the Square Kilometre Array he'll be at least partially to thank.

Pity he wants to censor the internet.

Abbott on the other hand is pretty much rotten to the core in my books. I oppose almost every thing he stands for (and that seems to include internet censorship).

 

[BlackDragon]

They are both heaps conservative in what they do and their policies on alot of things would be much closer than either would admit. For instance, Rudd hasn't actually acted on climate change mainly because he doesn't want to marginalise those people that would be affected negatively by a carbon reduction scheme (i.e. industry). Abbott also seems to have these views but there is also the perception that he is a sceptic. That doesn't really matter too much because they both would do very little and have agreed on low emissions targets of 5 - 20%. It is a very populist thing to do to hedge your bets with policy, allowing the status quo and those that influence you to reign, whilst having really strong rhetoric for idealism and change. Its also a really populist thing to do to differentiate yourself wildly from your opponents, when there is little difference... They primarily just attack each other one issues that don't really count, like border security. I don't know it just doesn't seem like either would actually break away from a very unsatistfactory middle road, where those that influence politics get their way and they don't do anything memorable.

They have no content, vote away from these people.

 

[Slidey]

They are both heaps conservative in what they do and their policies on alot of things would be much closer than either would admit. For instance, Rudd hasn't actually acted on climate change mainly because he doesn't want to marginalise those people that would be affected negatively by a carbon reduction scheme (i.e. industry). Abbott also seems to have these views but there is also the perception that he is a sceptic. That doesn't really matter too much because they both would do very little and have agreed on low emissions targets of 5 - 20%. It is a very populist thing to do to hedge your bets with policy, allowing the status quo and those that influence you to reign, whilst having really strong rhetoric for idealism and change. Its also a really populist thing to do to differentiate yourself wildly from your opponents, when there is little difference... They primarily just attack each other one issues that don't really count, like border security. I don't know it just doesn't seem like either would actually break away from a very unsatistfactory middle road, where those that influence politics get their way and they don't do anything memorable.

They have no content, vote away from these people.

Excellent summary.

 

[kaz1]

It's a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.

 

[badquinton304]

It's a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.

 

[HumanDichotomy]

Vote the plank of wood! It'd be better than any of them.

[youtube]watch?v=4FN-wir_67s[/youtube]

 

[zaxmacks]

Pity he wants to censor the internet.

How much is that going to slow down the internet here?

 

[Slidey]

How much is that going to slow down the internet here?

The speed decrease will be probably negated by the NBN, but by between 10% and 90%, depending on the tolerance threshold they use.

 

[Wingstroke]

I don't understand why anyone cares about the internet cenorship thing..the myth that it will slow internet speeds was exploded months ago.
It will only bann child porn/rape sites..and why would you care if you lose access to these sorts of sites?
I will be voting for Rudd over Abbott

 

[Absolutezero]

It will only bann child porn/rape sites..and why would you care if you lose access to these sorts of sites?

Actually, it's so much more than this. Also, it raises issues of where will is stop, who will control it, what is morally bannable, and is it the governments right to decide this?

 

[badquinton304]

I don't understand why anyone cares about the internet cenorship thing..the myth that it will slow internet speeds was exploded months ago.
It will only bann child porn/rape sites..and why would you care if you lose access to these sorts of sites?
I will be voting for Rudd over Abbott

Some normal porn sites are banned as well.
I am probably going to vote labor in the reps at least, I am not voting to have Abbott as PM no fucking way.

 

[Phoenix Fury]

Also, it may just be those sites for now, but you can bet not long after they will be censoring every little thing that doesn't conform to their conservative, backwards beliefs.

 

[Absolutezero]

Apparently banned video games will be on the list, as well as movies like Ken Park.

 

[Phoenix Fury]

.....




Well some people are morons hey, and trust them to be the ones in charge.

 

[murphyad]

Rudd's becoming more of a weasel as the years go by, but fuck Tony Abbott.

And just for emphasis:
fuck Tony Abbott
fuck Tony Abbott
fuck Tony Abbott
fuck Tony Abbott

 

[BlackDragon]

It is always good for people to vote away from the major parties, especially in the senate.


I guess the next question is, what do the other parties/independents stand for?

 

[JonathanM]

It is always good for people to vote away from the major parties, especially in the senate.


I guess the next question is, what do the other parties/independents stand for?

Yeah, so we can have nutcases like Steven Fielding pushing their own agenda, representative of a minority view on all Australians. That works well.

It's Parliament by the people, for the people. You might not agree with all the major parties policies, but in the end remember that most Australians vote for them because they provide what most Australians want and need.

 

[TacoTerrorist]

^ Most Australians vote for major political parties because the other parties don't stand a chance. The parties push the corporate agenda, not look after the needs and wants of the average Australian.

 

[BlackDragon]

Yeah, so we can have nutcases like Steven Fielding pushing their own agenda, representative of a minority view on all Australians. That works well.

It's Parliament by the people, for the people. You might not agree with all the major parties policies, but in the end remember that most Australians vote for them because they provide what most Australians want and need.

It doesn't make sense to vote for parties because they are probably going to get in anyway. And it is much better that the balance of power is not held by the major parties in the senate. Besides, most independents are smart and reasonable people, certainly my independent in the house of reps is.