The state elections could be an albatross for Rudd’s neck

Nigel Catchlove says:

06:32am | 05/03/10

Nick, that’s a throw away line that is simply not true.  People who are politically connected, politically literate or even politically aware can generally distinguish between federal and state. A couple of years back one of my staff sheepishly asked me how there could be a Liberal PM and a Labor Premier, he simply didn’t understand.  Federal politicians of all persuasions will tell you that if a member of the general public has a gripe with some local government issue, they will raise it with any politician they can and complaints usually rise to the top, so federal ministers often blamed for state and local government’s failure to deliver services.

BigBob says:

07:45am | 05/03/10

Exactly!! Do you think Labor voters are silly? Don’t count on that we know the difference between Federal and State Elections. I am in New South Wales and Federally Labor will get my vote

Isaac says:

07:57am | 05/03/10

Good call Nigel. Many Australians don’t care to get educated about politics, and fail to distinguish the particulars of our system because of this.

jim says:

12:28pm | 05/03/10

You had better buy it. Fine for us political junkies but try knocking on an ordinary voter’s door (not too far away from the cbd) two nights before an election, when firstly they dont know there is an election, secondly clearly not knowing the difference between state issues and federal issues, and thirdly not knowing who their MP is.

Frankie V. says:

08:24pm | 05/03/10

Although I tend to agree with Nick, successive elections in New South Wales have proved beyond reasonable doubt that the electorate is clearly getting more ignorant, while in Britain, where the electorate is borderline retarded, the Labour Party took a beating at the last round of local government elections because of the unpopularity of the national government.

And yes Bob, I do think Labor voters are silly - that’s what makes them Labor voters.

Gerard says:

11:43am | 05/03/10

Why have preferences, dipstick?

iansand says:

08:41am | 05/03/10

I am going to vote Liberal at the next NSW election (my first vote for a major party in about 20 years), not because I approve of their policies (not that they seem to have many) but because it will maximise the chances of getting rid of a Labor government that demonstrates all the problems of having been in power too long.

Macon Paine says:

08:23am | 05/03/10

Well Daniel usually a vote for the Greens means their preferences flow to Labor and so in most cases that wont “shake up” anything, infact it will continue to support the status quo. In the end it’s the voters who will eventually cop another “shake down”.
The greens are for the most part a bunch of muppets, they should have kermit as their mascot and their theme song should be “It’s not easy being green”. Their tagline could be “Hey were not the only muppets in parliament!”
You want to send politicians a message vote independant or Libertarian via LDP.

Martin G says:

10:31am | 05/03/10

A vote for the Greens is a vote for Labor. The most ‘shaking’ they will do is to try push Australia further into socialism.

I wish Greens voters would all just go informal on their ballots, they seem to have no idea of what their party is *really* about.

Agreed with Macon Paine: ‘You want to send politicians a message vote independant or Libertarian via LDP’.

6c legs says:

01:32pm | 05/03/10

for clarity - I should have written: “in Tasmania”  - following; “sitting labor Members”.

(wish this site had an ~edit function~)

Rocket Surgeon says:

12:54pm | 05/03/10

Congratulations on the most insightful piece of the day. It is this level of analysis and thought that has our political discourse where it is today!

David B says:

12:57pm | 05/03/10

I agree.  the problem is labour have stitched up the vote of the vast majority of welfare recipients and Public servants.  This segment of the population alone is enough to get them accross the line.

John A Neve says:

03:52pm | 05/03/10

Wayne,

Well done and well researched I like a Liberal who is on the ball. You are a rare breed.

Now how do you think this will impact on the federal election?

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

08:03pm | 05/03/10

John , both of us are aware that in the past , when states fall to one major party , the federal arena will go to the other major party.
In these volatile times though , i am reluctant to expect the traditional
electoral overall view. John , the new Rudd hospital proposal could have a huge detrimental effect on Labor’s federal vote. To remove one third of a state’s G.S.T. revenue , federally fund 60% of hospital needs
and leave the staes to fund their 40% share from two thirds of G.S.T. revenue is a big ask. The states would have no other option but to raise taxes to pay for their responsibilities. Already , we have both N.S.W. & Victoria’s premiers expressing doubts on the viability of the proposal.
What are your thoughts on this matter John ?

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

08:42am | 06/03/10

Paul , the defacto Labor Greens , are they likely to be of benefit in any way to anybody. ?  Queensland Greens betrayed their own principles during the last election, when they allocated preferences to Labor, the party committed to the Traveston Dam Project . Ironically , their main election thrust was fighting to save the Mary Valley from flooding.
                As for your claim that the Libs are lightweight for failing to
KO Conroy , the failure of Rudd to sack irresponsible Ministers , including Garrett , is not the Opposition’s responsibility.

Marvin H says:

01:23am | 06/03/10

Who are you calling an imbecile, you bubblehead. Its my choice who I vote for not yours or anyone elses and I choose Labor. If you don’t like it stick it in ya left nostril. I could not really care. And its rude people like you who vote Liberal, thats why I will never vote for them

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

08:15am | 07/03/10

” any shift to the Greens unsettles both parties even Labor. Which is great for democracy ........”  Something wrong with this line of thought ,
Australia seems to be the victim. Hmmm , notice you have a Christian paranoia too.
” The Libs need some responsibility and balls to be in opposition…... “
Tell me , Paul , do you see the Greens ever getting past their three or four M.P.‘s and gaining the required numbers to attain opposition status. ?  Their role is tied to being a bloody nusiance without policy.
Like you said Paul , it takes balls and responsibility to be an opposition.
Clear your head of religious conspiracies , stop looking over your shoulder and shake the Green monkey off your back.