SA Footy

Turnbull wins the leadership spill vote 48 to 35.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/25/2753116.htm

Hopefully this can be a turning point of the Liberals, a changing of the guard from the remants of Howard'e empire perhaps?

If he can only win a spill motion by 48 to 35, he's history.

redandblack wrote:If he can only win a spill motion by 48 to 35, he's history.

Only rigged votes are declared won be huge margins - democracy brings about free voting and closer calls.
That's actually why I joined the Liberal Party rather than another back in the days when I though all our major parties were moving too far to the right.
You get to express your opinion without being suppressed. Even if the majority disagree with you at the time, you can try again later.
And you can be involved in debate that may change your own mind about issues, rather than be told to toe the line or get ejected.
[I argued not a few issues with the Members for electorates I lived in, Mayo, Higgins, La Trobe, without any animosity arising.]

Psyber wrote:

redandblack wrote:If he can only win a spill motion by 48 to 35, he's history.

Only rigged votes are declared won be huge margins - democracy brings about free voting and closer calls.
That's actually why I joined the Liberal Party rather than another back in the days when I though all our major parties were moving to far to the right.
You get to express your opinion without being suppressed. Even if the majority disagree with you at the time, you can try again later.
And you can be involved in debate that may change your own mind about issues, rather than be told to toe the line or get ejected.
[I argued not a few issues with the Members for electorates I lived in, Mayo, Higgins, La Trobe, without any animosity arising.]

An open minded and amacable debate without personal attacks or animosity based on assumptions about each other. Now there's a fine concept.

LOL, I could have won that vote ... if it was a serious challenge to spill then Kevin (useless as tits on a bull) Andrews wouldn't have been put up.

The real challengers (Abbott and Hockey) didn't have the balls to front up.

Good on Turnbull I say ... at least he fights for what he thinks is right and will defend his position, not like some of his spineless mates.

And what else can you say about Ironbar Tuckey ... how can anyone so irrelevant to public office still manage to make so much noise.

Psyber wrote:

redandblack wrote:If he can only win a spill motion by 48 to 35, he's history.

Only rigged votes are declared won be huge margins - democracy brings about free voting and closer calls.
That's actually why I joined the Liberal Party rather than another back in the days when I though all our major parties were moving too far to the right.
You get to express your opinion without being suppressed. Even if the majority disagree with you at the time, you can try again later.
And you can be involved in debate that may change your own mind about issues, rather than be told to toe the line or get ejected.
[I argued not a few issues with the Members for electorates I lived in, Mayo, Higgins, La Trobe, without any animosity arising.]

Once again I have no problem with any of that, Psyber. The realpolitik of this, though, is that a successful spill motion where the opposing candidate would be Kevin Andrews should have been laughed down with him having trouble finding a seconder. The result shows a deep and serious divide. I haven't commented on Turnbull's leadership until now (as far as I can remember), but this spells huge trouble for him, especially when the real candidates (Hockey in particular) are keeping their powder dry until better times arrive.

Calling for unity now is a plaintive cry.

They're out to get him and they will.

With that result, he actually would have been better to not call any motion.

http://au.biz.yahoo.com/091125/31/29yez.html

The Government estimates that by 2012 the average cost of the scheme for households will be $624 a year.

I'm disappointed Turnbull is going along with this token scheme, but perhaps he is right that it is better to be "cooperative" until the tide of public opinion turns a little more.
I think the above quote is is the only change the scheme will achieve anyway - we will pay more, but emissions will not be reduced, and some trees may get planted as "Offsets".
I'd be happier if the extra money out of my pocket were going to something more substantial like our first clean power source [a Thorium reactor] rather than a scheme whose administration will eat the extra money we pay anyway.

Psyber, seeing that you're always talking about paying the lowest possible tax, please don't say these schemes are coming out of your pocket.

It's more likely coming out of ours

redandblack wrote:Psyber, seeing that you're always talking about paying the lowest possible tax, please don't say these schemes are coming out of your pocket.

It's more likely coming out of ours

Got him

I am a great believer in the philosophy of Kerry Packer's comments to the Parlimentary Committee regarding tax

Pay as much as you legally have to - they dont deserve anymore

I dont think Turnbull is working out so well for the Liberal Party and maybe there is some merit in a change, if Turnbull is not going to win the next election, then maybe its worth taking a punt on someone who may be able to get some new interest in the party.

BUT Tony Abbott resigns from the Liberal front bench

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html

redandblack wrote:

Psyber wrote:

redandblack wrote:If he can only win a spill motion by 48 to 35, he's history.

Only rigged votes are declared won be huge margins - democracy brings about free voting and closer calls.
That's actually why I joined the Liberal Party rather than another back in the days when I though all our major parties were moving too far to the right.
You get to express your opinion without being suppressed. Even if the majority disagree with you at the time, you can try again later.
And you can be involved in debate that may change your own mind about issues, rather than be told to toe the line or get ejected.
[I argued not a few issues with the Members for electorates I lived in, Mayo, Higgins, La Trobe, without any animosity arising.]

Once again I have no problem with any of that, Psyber. The realpolitik of this, though, is that a successful spill motion where the opposing candidate would be Kevin Andrews should have been laughed down with him having trouble finding a seconder. The result shows a deep and serious divide. I haven't commented on Turnbull's leadership until now (as far as I can remember), but this spells huge trouble for him, especially when the real candidates (Hockey in particular) are keeping their powder dry until better times arrive.

Calling for unity now is a plaintive cry.

They're out to get him and they will.

And they have.

redandblack wrote:Psyber, seeing that you're always talking about paying the lowest possible tax, please don't say these schemes are coming out of your pocket.
It's more likely coming out of ours

I pay the lowest possible [legally] tax - not none at all...
But I did have a patch where carried over losses from another investments, as the economy collapsed in Paul Keating's last years, meant I had no taxable income for 2 years.

Are you sure about that, Psyber?

Unless all your income was from capital gains, that's not possible, as capital losses can only be applied against capital profits.

redandblack wrote:Are you sure about that, Psyber?
Unless all your income was from capital gains, that's not possible, as capital losses can only be applied against capital profits.

They were trading losses from an Art Gallery - it had done well for several years prior to the inflationary spiral really biting.
I hung on to the premises and sold them a bit later. Fortunately I'd bought them late in the pre-CGT days..

That's fine,mate, I just accepted your statement that they were from other investments, not trading losses.

Turnbull took a massive stand against the 'old guard' on Sunrise this morning. Accused them of taking the party backwards with their stance on climate change and committing electoral suicide by not supporting the current ETS bill.

I've actually been reasonably impressed with the way he is handling this. As dedja mentioned earlier, at least he's taking a stand on something unlike some of his colleagues.

Gingernuts wrote:Turnbull took a massive stand against the 'old guard' on Sunrise this morning. Accused them of taking the party backwards with their stance on climate change and committing electoral suicide by not supporting the current ETS bill.

I've actually been reasonably impressed with the way he is handling this. As dedja mentioned earlier, at least he's taking a stand on something unlike some of his colleagues.

I tend to agree with you there Gingernuts. To me he is clearly the best leader they have but the bookies and punters don't - here are the latest odds for Coalition Leader at the next Australian Federal Election:

HOCKEY, Joe 1.80
TURNBULL, Malcolm 3.00
ABBOTT, Tony 3.10
ANY OTHER CANDIDATE 8.00
PYNE, Christopher 15.00
ROBB, Andrew 18.00
BISHOP, Julie 21.00
DUTTON, Peter 26.00

Interesting that people are writing Tony Abbott off. Most people wrote Peter Costello off and then annointed him as the great white hope

To me, Abbott has a similar demeanour to Paul Keating and might just surprise everyone

Shame about Turnbull - I thought he was the real deal

Who'd go into politics (other than to get a few easy shags )