RichS

I know most of us won't be forced to vote in the upcoming federal election, but can you perhaps enlighten me on what or who you would vote for.

Personally I'm seeing John Howard as a safe, but sneaky pair of hands as far as things go, and I think Costello seems to have the economy under control.
I do find the taxation regime somewhat ot odds with Liberal philosophy, and another negative would be the inability of the federal govt to work with the state govts, as all the states are labour. So we get a lot of blame tennis there.

Latham though, whilst a good deal more human than Crean is anything but safe. In fact I'd say there's a fruitcake waiting to burst forth there.
He has moments of coherence and good sense, but he seems to make up policy on the fly every day and then back peddle. I think Dodgy John is going to eat him alive during campaigning, which is a bit of a shame, though will be quite entertaining.

jad n rich

I wont beat around the bush, Latham is a Lunatic.

Yes he backtracks and adjusts his policy to whatever group is whinging at the time that is bad enough, but what is he going to do to our Image overseas, finally we claw some credibility from our Hoges/Les patterson/shrimp on barbie image and now this clown. Hes not capable of the sort of diplomacy required to deal with our biggest neighbours/trade partners ASIA and hes already upset the USA. Too many rumours of wife smacking and thuggery not to have some truth in them.

Howard needed a contestor, someone to give us some choice of who to vote for instead we get Looney Latham.

Looks like its howard then.

bob and ginnie

Do you think that a man who calls George Bush the most incompetent and dagnerous president in living history is going to fare well in the Capitol?
Australia has tried since 1983, under the new incoming Hawke Labor gov't to 'cozy' up to our Asian neighbours. It was the brainchild of the then Australian gov't to form the "Asia Pacific Forum" to try to break Australia's isolation to Asia, yet Asians have repeatedly snubbed this country and one leader even called us "recalictrant" (ex Malaysian PM, who had a phobia about anything Australian!)
The Howard Liberal gov't, since coming to power in March '96, has told the Asians "enough is enough". We are now taking our bat and ball away, since no-one in Asia wanted to play with us, and we have headed across the Pacific to our old war time mates, the U.S.
You should have been around in '97 and '98 when the Asians began to wake up to the fact that we were seriously going ahead with plans to look into a Free Trade Agreement with the U.S.
They called us "racist", each in turn, because we were turning our backs on Asia.
Who are the real "racists" here? Who refused to play ball for 15 years? Us . . . or them?
This is the biggest (and in my opinion, the best) deal we are ever going to get since the 1930's with the British Preferential Trade Agreement.
John Howard has made it happen.
Would "motor mouth" Mark had done so???

Peter

Dunno, I vote National. I don't like either the Liberal or Labor party. One's all about corporate greed, the other is all about laziness and how to get paid for it.

http://www.nationals.org.au/

Only party worth voting for!

bondipom

Thats voting for John as the Nationals are in coalition with the libs.

Personally, if I could vote it would be for the most likely party to defeat a coalition or labour candidate. Man Boobs Mark Latham and John George Bush Howard need controlling as they both have a tendancy to make poor policy off the cuff.

That means Greens in this area. Anyone who has seen Bob Brown in action (I watched him in Parliament) will realise they have an excellent moderating capability. Their green policies may not be to everyones taste but it is hardly likely those will ever get to bill stage.

Nationals used to be known as the country party and lost their loony right wing to Hanson and company. Hence the coalition lost QLD to Labour. Not sure what they will do now One Nation is totally dysfunctional. Want greed and laziness look up Mal Colston.

Something else to consider is you vote in order of preference, not for the one candidate. Candidates will negotiate with each other on who to pass their preference votes to and set out a how to vote card for you at the polls.

Peter

At the federal level, this is true. They aren't in coalition everywhere and their policies don't always coincide, especially on family and regional issues. When it comes to regional Australia, the Liberal Party have no idea. The Labor Party have even less idea. Not back for a mob founded in Longreach, huh? To give a glib description, the Liberals favour the suits, Labor favours the lazy and the Nationals actually favour the people who make most of Australia's income, the farmers and the miners. Like I said, glib and not wholly accurate, but it serves its purpose.

Johnny is a survivor and a hard man. Latham is a neophyte, like John Hewson before him, who'll blow this election simply due to political inexperience.

The Greens, like everything else founded on naught but good intentions, lack depth. They're a moderator, like you say, and not leaders. They do provide an honest voice in the Senate, but they'll go nowhere from there. Their poster boy has deserted them to Laurie Brereton land anyway.

They renamed themselves to properly reflect their status as defenders of regional Australia and Australian families. They understood they were becoming a yokel anachronism amongst a lot of Australians.

The Nationals do have dirty laundry and the Queensland branch of them has sadly provided most of it. Bjelke-Petersen, Hinze and Brian Austin are bywords for corruption. The Fitzgerald enquiry was the best thing to ever happen to Queensland. Fogeyism and cronyism still exist, but the public of Queensland no longer accept it in their stride like they did under Joh and Queensland is a better and far more open place for it.

The Nationals are opposed to One Nation (in whatever shape it's in) and its policies, and have been from the get go. There's no place for ultra-nationalists in the National Party.

This is true. You gotta love preferential voting. Still, it beats bollocks electoral colleges where a guy can still get less votes but become President.

Boomerang

Hello,

Im not in Australia, but i do get the PM's press releases and radio interviews on my email and also listen to 2 Australians radio stations plus reading the SMH newspaper here in the UK. I think John Howard is a safe bet to continue in office, my only concern is that he ( John Howard ) wants Australia to be the US 53rd state... There's other policies that i do not agree but thats minor things. Now Lathan like someone said before he would be a danger in office, bit of a lunatic howard is doing a good job and i think he should continue.

Regards