Comments on: LP sets the media agenda on Turnbull!

By: media tracker

media tracker — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:28:56 +0000

Malcolm was in the West yesterday supposedly stirring the possum ahead of the COAG meeting. Whether the pivotal West Australian players in the new Great Game were listening intently or with bemusement to his suggestions of tactical moves to derail the process remains to be seen. Perhaps he has changed his modus operandi to a more backroom role but I doubt it. He loves to display his prosecutorial style in order for the voters to understand and learn what it “really really” means to be really really great.

By: Fine

Fine — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:56:05 +0000

I remember Bracks before the ’99 Victorian election had a policy of rarely attacking Kennett. He just kept pleasantly repeating what the Labor Party had to offer and after Kennett’s abrasiveness, it worked a treat. But I guess that’s a difference in personality between Turnbull and Bracks. Bracks must have a strong ego to become Premier, but he kept it tightly under wraps.

By: David Rubie

David Rubie — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:16:37 +0000

Nah Craig, Ruddock was simply unpleasant to look at, like any rotting corpse. Swan has an incredible gift for inducing drowsiness – he should probably come with a warning label about not using heavy machinery etc. after contact. It’s a pleasant change from the last lot however, who couldn’t do a press conference in their last year without getting the camera flecked with indignance powered spittle.

By: Craig Mc

Craig Mc — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:10:07 +0000

First Rudd’s either beaming/solemn but pleasant visage, followed by the instant soporific that is Wayne Swan with the details. It’s perfect, as nobody stays awake long enough to find out exactly what the initial pleasantries were softening us up for.

The old Phil Ruddock formula. Why not? It worked extremely well for him.

By: David Rubie

David Rubie — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:02:59 +0000

I think they should use the double team of Rudd followed by Swan far more. First Rudd’s either beaming/solemn but pleasant visage, followed by the instant soporific that is Wayne Swan with the details. It’s perfect, as nobody stays awake long enough to find out exactly what the initial pleasantries were softening us up for.

I think the Liberals could do something similar with Joe Hockey and Christopher Pyne.

By: kymbos

kymbos — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:51:31 +0000

Fair enough, Mark. There has been a lot written about Turnbull here recently. We shall see. I think he’s on a learning curve and has a chance to make the Libs a true ‘liberal’ party over time. Not a huge chance, but that’s primarily due to circumstance. They’ll be a while in the wilderness, and it’s unlikely any leader at this stage of the cycle will take them to victory. But I don’t think he’s the numpty he’s described as being here at LP.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:26:26 +0000

To clarify, Kymbos, I think Rudd is being more Prime Ministerial in the sense of the earlier Howard – so maybe we’re in agreement there. I think Howard began to lose it in the last term when he really started to seem alternatively shrill and confused.

I’m not a huge fan personally of Rudd’s public persona either.

I’m not sure I agree with you on Turnbull – I’d refer back to the thread we had earlier in the week on him and the polls. I think he’s played a poor innings so far, and I suspect Possum is right that he’s turned off some support that was potentially his for the taking. The problem with opposition leaders is that they really have to fill in their image early, and if a negative or an indifferent image takes hold in the public mind, it tends to stick. That’s not to say that he’s incapable of turning it around, but I do think he needs to take a very different tack.

By: kymbos

kymbos — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:17:28 +0000

Agreed, Mark, but you seem to be suggesting that Rudd is a different species to Howard, and he’s not. Rudd being everywhere is Prime Ministerial, but Howard doing the same was highly politicised? I’m sorry, but that doesn’t bear close scrutiny. Already, I can’t watch Rudd on telly, and I’m rusted on. It’s nauseating watching him, and I think his approach to the media has many similarities to Howard.

For mine, most people just don’t watch and they don’t care – as long as he doesn’t f*ck up too badly, they’ll not change their votes in a hurry. But stick around too long and they’ll get sick of the sight of you.

Meanwhile, Turnbull has to try to get noticed and he’s doing it the only way an opposition leader can. I maintain that you’re being harder on Turnbull than he deserves, and I reckon the electorate will give him more of a chance than you do.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:08:51 +0000

All that may be true, Kymbos, but I think we’re talking about the current political situation, not (reasonable) conjecture about what might happen in five or ten years or whenever.

By: kymbos

kymbos — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 01:56:45 +0000

Come on, Mark. Howard was being as ‘Prime Ministerial’ when he was Prime Minister as Rudd is now. People got sick of the sight and sound of Howard after 11 years, and they will do so with Rudd for the same reasons, given time – regardless of how Prime Ministerially he gets in their faces. Howard had good approval ratings early on as well. Over time, the 47% will grow to 51% and the Libs will get back in. Some balance, please.