KaiTakFan From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1588 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1208 times:
I would say Beasley. I just had a good feeling about him. I saw him at my hotel last sunday at The Sydney Renaissance hotel. He was being swarmed by reporters. It will be interesting to see who comes out on top.
Skystar From Australia, joined Jan 2000, 1363 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1206 times:
Both leaders haven't been the most inspiring, but the point that it comes down to me is this
* Who has a third term agenda?
All John Howard has done is talk about the need for stability with the current international situation. Beazley has some good ideas with the Knowledge Nation, etc. What we need is meat on the bones, and we're starting to get more detail with policy at the election continues.
How can you argue against such a policy (ok, I've got a vested interest starting uni - it's quite obvious that Australia needs to modernise & 'servicise' its economy more, we've been blessed with a plethora of resources for a long time, but the real economy is in the service industries. Look at Singapore for instance, jack all resources, but very economically successful overall (note that), with a hightech manufacturing industry and high value service industries a plenty. To top it off, a lot of smart kids as well.
In Australia we usually give government's two terms. They have a program, we give them enough time to implement it. My problem is at the moment is that Howard wants to win the election with nothing for the future, and I would see that 3 years later as a wasted opportunity. Frankly I think it would be a tragedy if Howard won, simply because of the war and the line of 'stability'. The irony is that the Defence Minister is leaving at this election. It's also good to see the ALP Opposition come out with positive material now, and I think that people should consider their policies - it would be sad if the ALP won just because of GST anger, and no policy.
Watched the debate, not a single smidgeon of an inkling of future policy direction, it was all about what had been done in the past - some good, some bad. As a young person, I think I'd like to see something positive.
Aussiemite From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1201 times:
I like pretty much everything Beasley has said except the GST roll back, I don't know where they plan to gain extra revenue from. labor also supports an educated society something liberal things theyve done enough of.
Howard seems to be going the emotioanl line with his war/terorist bullshit. he hasnt got much real substance.
It's going to be a long time until democrats get in so I would choose Beasley as PM
ADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1185 times:
They're all knobs.
However, John Howard is pro business and lifts his shirt to all big business, not always good ..
Beazley is anti business and pro union, to pander to the masses he simply promises more money to the dole bludgers. Not bad if you are a bludger, but if you are a worker it means higher taxes regardless of what Beazley says, it's the only way he can afford it.
As someone already stung for .47c in the dollar I won't be voting for him.
As for Natasha Bonk-me-stupid .. guess she's got the male vote.....