rudds gone
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: John_H on 21 Jun 2010 00:19 GrassyNoel wrote: >On Jun 20, 6:24�pm, John_H <john4...(a)inbox.com> wrote: > >> Is there any precedent for replacing an Australian PM part term for >> other than health reasons? > >Holt :) Hmmm... alive and well after being abducted by aliens more likely than drowned perhaps! However his successor (Gorton) was subsequently deposed around mid term IIRC. His party lost the next election. The other precedent might be Hawke, who reneged on a succession deal, threw a tantrum and resigned IIRC. His party barely won the next election. -- John H
From: Milton on 21 Jun 2010 00:49 "John_H" <john4721(a)inbox.com> wrote in message news:vdot16d3phv910j6mn4u61j9vhnn03ckt8(a)4ax.com... > GrassyNoel wrote: >>On Jun 20, 6:24 pm, John_H <john4...(a)inbox.com> wrote: >> >>> Is there any precedent for replacing an Australian PM part term for >>> other than health reasons? >> >>Holt :) > > Hmmm... alive and well after being abducted by aliens more likely than > drowned perhaps! However his successor (Gorton) was subsequently > deposed around mid term IIRC. His party lost the next election. > > The other precedent might be Hawke, who reneged on a succession deal, > threw a tantrum and resigned IIRC. His party barely won the next > election. > > -- > John H Oppositions don't win elections....Governments lose them. In otherwords, Rudd is so far out of reality with the Aussie voter, wouldn't matter who was the opposition leader, they will take the reigns.....unless Rudd allows the illegal immigrants a vote, there's enough of them to save him. Regards Milton
From: hippo on 21 Jun 2010 01:44 Milton wrote: > > > "John_H" <john4721(a)inbox.com> wrote in message > news:vdot16d3phv910j6mn4u61j9vhnn03ckt8(a)4ax.com... > > GrassyNoel wrote: > >>On Jun 20, 6:24 pm, John_H <john4...(a)inbox.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Is there any precedent for replacing an Australian PM part term for > >>> other than health reasons? > >> > >>Holt :) > > > > Hmmm... alive and well after being abducted by aliens more likely than > > drowned perhaps! However his successor (Gorton) was subsequently > > deposed around mid term IIRC. His party lost the next election. > > > > The other precedent might be Hawke, who reneged on a succession deal, > > threw a tantrum and resigned IIRC. His party barely won the next > > election. > > > > -- > > John H > > Oppositions don't win elections....Governments lose them. In otherwords, > Rudd is so far out of reality with the Aussie voter, wouldn't matter who was > the opposition leader, they will take the reigns.....unless Rudd allows the > illegal immigrants a vote, there's enough of them to save him. > > Regards > > Milton > > > but prisoners can't vote.... -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au
From: D Walford on 21 Jun 2010 05:52 On 20/06/2010 10:10 PM, hippo wrote: > D Walford wrote: >> >> On 20/06/2010 7:33 PM, atec7 7> wrote: >>> Blue Heeler wrote: >>>> D Walford wrote: >>>> >>>>> I suspect you are correct but IMO Labour's chances at the election >>>>> would greatly increase if Gillard was the leader. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Whilst it must be admitted that Rudd is on the nose, the really, scary, >>>> scary thing is that people are seriously contemplating electing the Mad >>>> Monk. >>>> >>> Wake up to your self >>> self admitted clueless megalomaniac or >>> >>> >>> tony an unknown quantity who is learning very very fast >> >> >> He'd need to increase his learning by 100 fold and denounce his religion >> to get my vote. >> He lost any of the small amount of cred he had with me when he started >> making policy on the run without consulting with his colleagues, not >> only does he worship an imaginary God he thinks of himself as one. >> Like Labour the Libs would dramatically increase their chances by >> getting a new leader, I disliked Abbott 10yrs before I had even heard of >> Rudd. >> >> >> Daryl >> >> > > You have a right to be an atheist or an agnostic. > Abbott has a right to follow the God in which he believes. Agree and I have no problem with his belief but I do have a problem when he or anyone else starts shoving his beliefs down our throats. My wife makes Abbott look like an atheist, she's a church elder and spends more time at church functions than she does at home but that's not entirely a bad thing:-) My 2 closest mates call themselves Christians and are regular church goers but they will be ex friends the moment they try preaching to me, fortunately in the approx 25yrs I've known them its never happened. Daryl Daryl
From: D Walford on 21 Jun 2010 05:58
On 21/06/2010 10:10 AM, John_H wrote: > D Walford wrote: >> On 20/06/2010 8:24 PM, John_H wrote: >>> D Walford wrote: >>>> On 20/06/2010 5:23 PM, John_H wrote: >>>>> atec7 7<""atec77\"@ hotmail.com"> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> the word is next week gilly takes over >>>>> >>>>> Straight from the mouth of a taxi diver... or was it a horse? :) >>>>> >>>>> Rudd is dead man walking (as was Turnbull after Grech) but my money's >>>>> on him staying there until after the election. >>>> >>>> I suspect you are correct but IMO Labour's chances at the election would >>>> greatly increase if Gillard was the leader. >>> >>> I seriously doubt it! >> >> I don't. > > As you'll realise, the Libs would have more to gain by replacing > Abbott than Labor would by axing Rudd! If they did Gillard would be > handed the same poison chalice Abbott accepted when no one else wanted > it (apart from Turnbull). None in their wildest dreams would've > imagined Labor subsequently coming unstuck in such a spectacular > fashion, very little of which is down to Abbott (apart from voting > down the ETS). > >>> Is there any precedent for replacing an Australian PM part term for >>> other than health reasons? >>> >> Rudd popularity isn't looking all that healthy at the moment so maybe >> you are onto something:-) > > I doubt they could get that lucky (even with a push). :) > > Actually I can't think of any instance where the governing party ever > gained any votes from a change in leadership (for whatever reason). > OTOH when the opposition does it they almost always gain (if only in > the short term). :) > Bob Hawke pushed out the previous leader (Hayden?) to get the top job and if I recall correctly won the election? Daryl |