Midnight Oil

Subject: Re: [powderworks] NMOC: Gillard vs. Rudd
From: Chris
Date: 24/06/2010, 9:31 am
CC: powderworks

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Miron Mizrahi <mironmizrahi@yahoo.com> wrote:�

i find this situation a bit weird. unlike the US where the VP is on the ticket and is - effectively - elected, the deputy PM is not. deputies have changed mid term and the winner of a leadership spill may not always be the deputy. if Gillard replaces Rudd then IMO this should trigger immediate elections. i did not elect her as PM. didn't elect Rudd either, since we don't vote for a PM but we all knew it'd be him if Labour won and he won his seat. i am yet to form an opinion on Gillard as PM but the thought of having someone imposed upsets me. she can be the interim PM but IMO the system should be amended so that a leadership spill mid term in the governing party means we are going to the polls. i dont want Liberals in power. but if Abbott becomes PM it would be because the majority of Aussies wanted him, not because the majority of the party Caucus did


To be fair, the leadership spill is only happening now because there's an election coming up.

That said, Labor have a tough choice - they can field either:
All this against a ultra-conservative Catholic in spandex. And the "ooh, look at me, I voted green because I mean.....wait, whaddaya mean it'll just end up as a vote for Labor!" Wasted Vote Party.

For us, the people, it's lose/lose/lose/lose this time around.

- Chris