John Brumby and Ted Baillieu went head-to-head on Friday for a low-rating and soon-to-be-forgotten leaders debate. Milanda Rout of The Australia wrote approvingly that Ted Baillieu “took a risk and showed he had some political backbone”, by “throwing insults and delivering the best and funniest lines of the debate”. John Ferguson of the Herald Sun thought Baillieu’s dithering over preferences meant he “won the theatre, but lost the politics”. Shaun Carney of The Age believed Brumby suffered from lack of experience – this was his first leaders debate, as there wasn’t one when he ran against Jeff Kennett in 1996 – while James Campbell of the Sunday Herald Sun faulted Brumby for “staring statesmanlike into the distance and talking about the future”. If you’d prefer to make up your own mind, you can watch it on iView.
Elsewhere:
• Tim Colebatch of The Age makes the unarguable assertion that Ted Baillieu’s efforts to get his message out have been “drowned out by factional opponents beating their drum to insist that the Liberals should not direct preferences to the Greens”. He also casts an eye over the Liberals’ recent record in Tasmania, the only case study where the Liberals have pursued the strategy of privileging Labor over the Greens advocated by John Howard and Helen Kroger:
Tasmania went to the polls in March. The Liberals topped the vote, but both sides ended up with 10 seats and the Greens with five. Liberal leader Will Hodgman had first rights but, under pressure from right-wing powerbroker Senator Eric Abetz, refused to negotiate with the Greens. Labor leader David Bartlett went ahead and did so. So Labor and the Greens now have a coalition government, and it’s working well. The federal election saw the Liberal vote in Tasmania slump to 39 per cent after preferences — the party’s lowest vote in any state since World War II. Opinion polls show a collapse in Liberal support at state level. And The Mercury reports that Hodgman has now taken on Abetz for control of the party, declaring: “We cannot give away the middle ground. I will fight to make sure that doesn’t happen, even if it costs me my job.”
• Former federal Wills independent Phil Cleary has confirmed he will run in the seat of Brunswick. This further complicates the contest between Labor candidate Jane Garrett and Cyndi Dawes of the Greens, with Cleary making no secret of his intention to direct preferences to the latter. The seat is being vacated by the retirement of Labor member Carlo Carli.
• David Rood of The Age tells of “secret party research” from the ALP telling a familiar tale of ongoing inner-city drift to the Greens. The report found the most potent campaign remedy would be pamphlets trumpeting the fact that the Greens had voted with the Liberals 69 per cent of the time in parliament, as distinct from an existing strategy of “promoting the party’s stance on climate change and other progressive issues like social housing”.
[to say he’s not planning to change what’s there.]
I mean just for the sake of appealling to a voter.
[margPosted Wednesday, November 10, 2010 at 8:08 pm | PermalinkRod,
Any one can judge the Greens how they like,
if you choose to judge them as purer i’m sure they will be very happy.
]
As pure as Adele Carles 🙂
gold from Twitter
[Yes we established it was the birds. Prob being strangled by Brumby’s spin doctors.]
[
I’m loving that Brumby is prepared to stand by what his govt has done, and have the courage to say he’s not planning to change what’s there. A leader prepared to go hard on his record! Surely a novelty these days.
]
Damn straight. Didn’t shirk the increased electricity bills. Just said its a reality that we all face in the modern world.
and more from Twitter
[Birds in mass protest against “loss of habitat” at leaders debate]
Brumby makes fun of Bailliue’s hands up!
Baillieu’s
[Damn straight.]
Should be an example to leaders who are running for theor party to be re-elected (even if they came to the job between elections!)
Wow!
He wants the job. The other bloke seemed a bit ambivalent, like his heart ain’t in it. Wonder what the audience will say.
In 1996 Bob Dole shook a few hands after the “Town Hall Forum” and then left – Clinton stayed behind for hours talkng to people (and probably getting a few phone numbers!!)
Bolt “I think John Brumby would think of that as a win” – couldn’t quite say himself that Brumby won!
[Rocket RocketPosted Wednesday, November 10, 2010 at 8:16 pm | PermalinkIn 1996 Bob Dole shook a few hands after the “Town Hall Forum” and then left – Clinton stayed behind for hours talkng to people (and probably getting a few phone numbers!!)
]
Liked Bruby’s offer of inviting people to koin him at the bar for a beer – proves he wants to talk to the punters and not run away.
Nick ??? gives it to John Brumby
Don’t think Bolt really likes Baillieu
Both Bolt and the other guy seem to be giving it to Brumby
Bolt: John Brumby the best conservative you could vote for out of the two.
OMG
Bruby – Brumby.
Blergh 🙂
Brumby easily.
[Don’t think Bolt really likes Baillieu]
Baillieu seems insipid. What does he stand for apart from raising hands? I got no clues from this forum.
Bolt likes Brumby, even though he gives it to him regularly
Bolt’s trying to turn it in to a platform of the issues he’s interested in.
The punters spoke pretty clearly.
Brumby wiped Baillieu’s clock.
Yep Brumby smashed it. That was the best performance I’ve seen in any of the Sky forums, state or federal
It’s always better to go second in these things, but Brumby wiped the floor.
Didn’t even walk away from “moral” questions.
So Turnbull and Hockey have been campaigning in Vic. No Tone? Gee, wonder why. 😆
I’m guessing the ‘nic’ guy might have been Nic Economou, a political scientist. Haven’t seen the program.
No, not Nick Economou
http://www.google.com.au/images?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=FfS&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=nick%20economou&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=1920&bih=1048
Bolt hates Baillieu. He’s always saying he isn’t combative enough.
confessions,
Somebody has to campaign for the Libs. The Shadow Ministers are all lost in inaction.
Do the Libs even have a Shadow Treasurer.
So did they declare a “winner” from the public votes?
The results are in from the Burvale
[
UPDATE 8.36pm: CRIME, stamp duty, the troubled myki system and the record of an 11-year Brumby Government dominated tonight’s Herald Sun/Sky News People’s Forum.
Premier John Brumby and Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu were both at ease in answering questions posed by undecided voters at the forum.
Mr Baillieu was the most successful with 52 of the 140 voters giving him the nod, while Mr Brumby took 43 votes. A significant 45 voters were undecided.
Mr Brumby was more passionate and assertive than last week’s debate and personalised many of his answers, referring to his sister-in-law’s battle with MS in answer to a question on services for sufferers.
The Premier even invited the audience to join him for “a hard earned beer” at the end of the night.
Mr Baillieu hinted at a possible cut to stamp duty but failed to offer much else, preferring to focus on Government failings with an appeal to voters “not to accept more of the same”.
]
Thanks for posting, madcyril.
Very indecisive result, it seems.
45 undecided? How can they be undecided after what they saw?
confessions
I was waiting for your reaction, after your comments earlier. I think there’s a lot of background ‘noise’ on different local issues that might not be obvious to an interstater.
But I’m surprised it was so inconclusive. There are some around Vic who are prophesying a hung parliament.
[45 undecided? How can they be undecided after what they saw?]
Because they are non-partisan swing voters 🙂
lizzie:
I gather there are issues with the train ticketing system – my key? But really, it’s not as if the Vic govt is as bad as other state governments out there.
lizzie, yes probably about what I expected. From memory there was a reasonable number of undecided’s in the Federal versions.
[45 undecided? How can they be undecided after what they saw?]
Perhaps they’d nodded off.
[
Perhaps they’d nodded off.
]
Or made an early exit for the bar
[Perhaps they’d nodded off.]
Tired from continually having to give a show of hands?
November 10, 2010 at 02:16 AM
Gee I miss D@W and those boldened headlines.
Yeah me too… But I thought this headline was of interest..
Pollster
Hadn’t seen Antony’s Upper House site. Interesting that he predicts very little change. He doesn’t give the Greens much chance of two elected in Northern Metro – I am sticking my neck out and predicting they will get there, just.
GG
D@W is still pestering Antony!
[Yeah me too… But I thought this headline was of interest..]
Anthony, I made the effort to contact the person whose identity you appropriated for your “fjms” sock puppet, using the email address you signed on with. I was in no way surprised when she got back to me saying she had never left a comment on a blog in her life.
[William BowePosted Wednesday, November 10, 2010 at 11:01 pm | PermalinkYeah me too… But I thought this headline was of interest..
Anthony, I made the effort to contact the person whose identity you appropriated for your “fjms” sock puppet, using the email address you signed on with. I was in no way surprised when she got back to me saying she had never left a comment on a blog in her life
]
Was the email address an isp based one ? If not, wouldn’t be a good policy to only allow registrations using a person’s ISP base email address so you can then cross match the IP of bost the poster and the email address they registered with.
whats a ‘fjms”?
Bolt hates Baillieu because Baillieu is a genuine small-l-liberal.and far from Bolt’s hard- line “Tea Party ” style of operation. Baillieu is no Kennet or in any way like Abbott or Howard…which makes him a difficult opponent.
Bolt is one of the worst of the Murdoch wolf-pack,though some like the awful Albrecthson are almost as bad. Murdoch seems to foster the worst of the rabid far-right.wolf pack..here and in the US,…where a variety of journals spew out his message…like Beck and the half-mad O’Reilly,who have created the Tea Party Movement,and the scary Joshua Goldberg and his ally Joshua Friedmann.,who want endless war with the islamic world.
Costello in todayAge seems to support Kennet in his view that the Libs must preference the Greens,and scoff as the Kroger view that the Greens are the enemy ! No way says Costello !
[GusfacePosted Wednesday, November 10, 2010 at 11:12 pm | Permalinkwhats a ‘fjms”?
]
Go back a couple of pages – Sock Puppet 🙁
methinks Bilbo should ban people from using hotmail/gmail for registering.
TSOP
At start of Thread you made a totally unsolicited cheap shot at both me and Frank
I replied saying you should hav directed your coments to Frank when he was “around”
Regarding me , I said your coment “and I have gotten on their wrong sides too.“
could ONLY refer to a SINGLE case
(where you you voluntarily chose to coment on an unaddressed post by me about gay marriage) saying it as slippery slope to which I demonstrated in effect your point was a straw man arguement
IE our above prevous xchange was a NON earth shattering ! And certain hardly meriting of your coment “I have gotten on their wrong sides too.“
You could hav left it at that , but no , you replied palying th “victum”
You’ve proved you aint perfect
” the Kroger view that the Greens are the enemy ”
Kroger is correct on 3 grounds , Greens is to Liberals what One Nation was to Labor ,
th very radical extreme oposite of there Partys views
secondley , any assistanse by Libs to Greens in influencing a Govt results in disaster Govt outcomes
third , there own Liberal suporters wuld be horrified that there own vote following a Liberal HTV card delivered 2nd prefs and electon of a Green whose actual polisys would be regarded as poinson by such voters (had they been aware actualy of specific Greens polisys)
(Ditto would apply in reverses had Labor 2nd pref One Nation on a HTV card to elct a One Nation candidate , w/o labor voters knowing One Nations actual polisys)
Liberals dilema is despite abov logic , is Labor is seen as Lib Partys natural enemy and bringin themselves to publicly actualy 2nd pref Labor seems a bridge to long to cross ,
and so cop out easiest Libs couse is to 2nd pref Greens & hoping its not highlited two much , & that Lib voters dont twigg to Greens rdical extremisims is there almost pref certain course , on th lame excuse it weakens Labor But lame bcause it defys Krogers 3 logic points above , and lame becuase it still means th same no of anti Liberal lower House Vic seats result
(it certain wastes Labor attention , and may cause some internal ALP problams , and may be 2 upper House seats in Merop but that will not be a decisive factor to Libs , hate of Labor will b , so Libs to 2nd pref Greens
Yet when Labor faced this same dilema of Liberals vs radical One Nation as a 2nd pref choise , Labor gave Liberals there 2nd pref over One Nation and in blair alone from memorys that elected a Liberol on Labors prefs I expect nothing from Libs
(BTW reality tho is Greens is also Labors enemy in Vic Election as well as th Libs , its quite naeve to think othrwise seeing Greens is trying to pinch Labor seats , and with stealth BS & distorts to those seats voters Labor wants a majoity Labor govt retrened)