Maybe its country life, but it does seem rather quiet out there, electioneering wise, which leads me to wonder that the govt actually have no strategy. They’ve been caught on the backfoot by the Rudds’stars, which seem to be shining more favourably on he than they. And seem to have made no contingency plans for unforseen circumstances, ie, the ALP under Rudd, looking like it really has its shit together.

Things seem to be turning around for turnpike Howard, conditions acting unfavourably. Not like the good old days, not a bloody boat person in sight er. . . well there are actually, but Immigration and Detention (ahem), best not go there and now another interest rates squeeze. Hah!

Joe average Tarazan has woken up from his long slumber to find himself working three days a week for the man, who’s a greedy, self satisfied, alarmingly wealthy, prick. He knows now he has no recourse over nothin, and basically he’s a sort indentured slave and its all been on that little @#$% John Howard’s watch.

…and they become pegs for the nation

I also don’t imagine Howard will let Rudd off that lightly on the very selective merits of fighting terrorism in Afgansthan while pulling troops out of the terrorists playground that now is Iraq.

Much as I may disagree with and dislike Howard, I have always been impressed by his ability to turn a negative around to suit his political purposes. He may not push Iraq as a major election issue, but I can’t see him shying away from it either.

I therefore think that the thrust of this article – that the Government’s bad poll figures are happening because of some incompetence by their senior strategists – is dead wrong.

IMO, the same people who voted for the Goverment despite the GST, Children Overboard etc, have shifted – because even if they don’t like asylum seekers, they like WorkChoices even less. If that’s true, no spin by the Government could possibly change their minds.

Rudd will need to find an answer to this question because I

Also, Howard is already posing the question… Why is it okay to keep troops (or increase troops) fighting terrorism in Afganasthan, while it’s somehow wrong to keep troops fighting terrorism in Iraq?

Rudd will need to find an answer to this question because I’m sure Howard will keep on asking it.

Quite interesting that the punters who bet for the libs in lieu of Burkegate obviously had little quality polling to go on which is why they got it so wrong.

I’m just saying I’m gonna blow this month’s pay packet exclusively on CPI basket items. To make sure.

have a very good think about why an economic journalist may make such a statement.
It ain’t a guess in other words.
Glen is merely following Super Mac’s strategy!!

Peter Martin is tipping a rate rise in April.

And I am buying every banana I see to make sure your old mate is on the money, Homer.

I wouldn’t bet against that and that will prove troublesome as well.

The bottom line: do the Libs think Iraq is a vote changer? If so, whose vote? Guessing here that the votes Iraq has firmed would be those already against the Libs.

In that case the rationale would be that Howard loses very little by raising Iraq, and stands to centre the issue within the frame of character, (and possibly fear, but you’d think that’s a bit early). That’s where the Libs want Rudd for the next chapter of this, so it works for them.

The difference on the issue is whether Iraq has subsumed itself into a larger picture speaking of a government whose direction and policies are no longer wanted. In that case Howard will do himself no service at all, but couldn’t anyway.

Rudd has the difficulty of not aligning himself too strongly with Iraq because, as BBCL says, people will switch off. So the supposition there is he has to redirect that issue into the campaign strengths they regard, and that will give us all a bit of an insight into where Labor is at with regard its latest strategic decisions.

I find it interesting Howard will make a major speech on Iraq where all the polling shows the public have simply stopped listening to Howard.

There appears a disconnect between major liberal politicians and what their polling is telling them.

The important difference is that Rudd never supported the invasion of Iraq whatever his personal beliefs about the WMD lie.

Look at the US – most of the bastards in Congrees supported the invasion – but the Dems are still able to run on Iraq being George Bush’s problem. Which it is. His and Howards. (And the Iraqi peoples of course.)

But the Howard argument for invasion came with three other premises. First, that the WMD’s were supported by chemical and bilogical weapons. Second that these weapons posed an imminent danger and needed an immediate unilateral response without allowing the UN to finish its job. And thirdly that Saddam had close links to Al Quada (however that is spelt).

I think I am right in saying that the ALP rejected these last three premises and therefore argued (as Crean did in 2003) that Saddam needed to be disarmed but not by invasion.

Please correct me someone if I am wrong.

He

I thought Howard was wanting to reach through the lens and ask ABC’s Kerry O’Brien for a hug he looked so lonely and friendless. But you have to hand it to the guy: probably overtired and jet lagged and stepped up to the everloaded plate yet again with defiance and mustered-up energy and ne’er say die.

And a part of me says he loves it. All of it, including the pizzling in the polls and the party in peril. It’s the new challenges, the feeling of belonging and being needed – which he bestows upon himself – because he can. So long as there is something to do, anything, he’s politically alive. He’ll tear your heart out and grind it through a year-long mincer with slow monotonous daily callous grip, send you to your knees in despair for what could have been and what he did instead, and then he’ll put your heart back in and pat it all together and ask you for a bit of a go because he’s doing it tough. A rare monster indeed.

Really, what is best for him, personally, is that it gets so bad, the blows keep on coming, that he puts up a hand and says “Righto, righto. I get the message. I’ve had enough”, where he can walk off with closure and start the rest of his life afresh, but somehow we’ll deny him that. It’ll descend into half-baked misery for all of us, hiding the hellish truth for some of us while we turn away in disgust and dismay yet again. And over the airwaves comes the monotone drongling telling us what Australia is and who you ought to be.

How much did you get? Five hundred bucks? When do you get that? July? Gee, that’s worth it.

He wants to do us slowly, of course. We’re disgusting, despicable little creatures, or whatever it is. Lazarus become Icarus, with all our wings plucked.

What is for certain right now, if he wins or loses, either way it’ll be a fucking Barbecue Stopper.

Now, given a whole country in your hands, that’s an achievement.

I think that these are probably the peak polls for Labor. But 61% to 39% is a big gap and they have some lee way. These polls are just snap shots for voters today, but there is an air about, that Labor is being listen to and after the last month is applauded for the way they handled themselves.

With Howard set to make Iraq a centre piece, will only make more people look again at Iraq. I’m sure that we will hear more about Rudd agreeing with Howard at the time about WMD’s. But many people were fooled by the fool.

It has been 6 months since LNP have won a poll. That is a very big indication that Howard is doing something wrong. Labor have only lost 3 last year and were only behind for one poll.