Month: September 2008

The Witch is dead (well almost)

Posted by Chief Blogger – 26 September, 2008

Looks like NZ National Party support is holding up for the upcoming election with Helen Clark likely on the way out. A poll taken before figures had been released showing the NZ economy had slipped into recession, had the NZ Nationals with over 50 per cent of the vote in NZ’s proportional voting system:

Support for National…has risen slightly, by 1.4 percentage points, to 51.4 per cent of decided voters. This would give it 68 seats in Parliament – enough for it to govern without a coalition partner.

The same poll listed the main issues voters consider as important election issues and global warming racked up only 6 per cent of the total, the economy and fiscal policy being by far and away the number one issue at 44.5 per cent.

Some damning evidence

Posted by Chief Blogger – 25 September, 2008

Evidence from Quadrant onhow the left try to suppress academic debate through legal and verbal intimidation, but at the same time try to promote ‘cultural diversity’:

Bendle’s article, Hijacking Terrorism Studies, examines courses and books taught at Australian universities, the Australian Defence Force Academy and other centres providing training in terrorism to our military forces, police, security, and diplomatic personnel. He found the field had been colonised by the postmodern Left, which was assimilating the study of terrorism to its prevailing ideological paradigm of radical multiculturalism, anti-Americanism and cultural relativism, often under the guise of the neo-Marxist “critical terror studies” approach.

Worth a full read.

MT: Conditions for a new Republican Referendum

Posted by Chief Blogger – 16 September, 2008

As outlined over at No Republic!

First, it cannot take place during the present reign.

Second there must be a consensus among republicans on the model.

Third the opposition must be minimal.

In response to point one, given the length that the Queen mother lived, HRH’s death could be up to twenty years away and she has no intention of standing down. Secondly, a consensus seems remote, which is why the Republicans simply want people to vote on if Australia should be a republic, not what type of Republic it should be. The last point seems ominous, and no doubt the media will do their part to ensure there is no opposition as they attempted to do during the 1999 vote. However, recent polling finds youth support for a republic has wained to only 23 per cent. And this was a result from a question which assumes there is an agreed model of an elected head of state, a model that MT does not support:

“In your opinion, should Australia remain a MONARCHY — or become a REPUBLIC with an elected President?”

Once people understand that electing our head of state would turn Australian democracy into some sort of Russian style system – PM battling with the President too see who is the strong man, Putin style – Australians will reject a Republic even more.

A time for some common sense

Posted by Chief Blogger – 16 September, 2008

There has been some speculation in the media that Obama may dump Biden as VP in favour of Clinton in a bid to win back female voters. That would make sense, especially after Biden admitted last week the Clinton would have been a better pick as VP than himself. That’s some admission. If things get that bad for Obama and it looks like he will lose, he may opt for Clinton because he would have nothing else too lose.

What about the Republicans then. Palin is there to win not govern, which is fine as long as the top guy knows what he is doing. McCain though, on the economy at least, does not. By his own admission earlier this year, he said he did not know much about economics or business generally. McCain does not exactly exude the type of competency the USA will need in these difficult economic times. Comments he made that, the fundamentals of the USA economy are fine, seem to ignore some basic fiscal facts, like the $5 trillion liability the US Budget just took on from Mae and Mac. Fundamentally the US Budget is a mess, does anyone argue otherwise? The economy is by far and away the number one issue for Americans. If they begin to doubt McCain just a little on this issue, it is game over for the election.

If that becomes the case, is there a chance that Romney might get a last minute shot at the Presidency? Unlikely I know, but of all the candidates that stood for election on both sides of politics, he is the on leader that could most effectively deal with the biggest financial mess since the great depression. It’s not panic stations yet, but when polling like this says:

If the election comes down to the economy, the Democrats may have the advantage, a recent poll by CNN/Opinion Research Corp. suggests.

The poll, conducted September 5-7, found that more than half, 56 percent, of the voters surveyed viewed the economy as the most important issue shaping their vote. Obama was viewed as the better candidate to handle the economy by 52 percent of those surveyed, compared with 44 percent who saw McCain as the better candidate on the issue. The poll’s margin of error was plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

As the situation in the markets gets worse, so too may McCain’s polling results.

Some MT positives

Posted by Chief Blogger – 16 September, 2008

A few brief thoughts. MT was not my first choice, but in politics winning is everything, so good luck to him. Instead of dwelling on all the negatives, here are some positives:

  1. MT is not a career politician and as a result he will bring new ideas and excitement to the leadership role, though hopefully with more political savy than that other investment banker come politician, John Hewson. The republican referendum probably gave MT the political experience he needs to be leader, more than when he was in government, because he was responsible for a defeat and some one of intelligence always learns from that.
  2. He, like Nelson, has an interesting story to tell, which is in stark contrast to the ALP leaders, who are all cut from the same mold – university student union activism – left wing social science degree – some type of union or industrial activism – political career. Whereas Turnbull (and Nelson) came from nothing to something through private means.
  3. He understands the economy from his investment banker experience - does anyone seriously doubt it?
  4. He should appeal to doctor’s wives with his advocacy of the environment and indigenous affairs.
  5. He understand the left wing dominated media and will probably do a better job at wooing them than Nelson did.

So in a nut shell MT may have a broader appeal than Nelson which hopefully will translate into good polling results and victory!

As a side note, on the 730 Report, MT had the good sense to say effecitvely that you don’t have a referendum on your constitution every time a new breeze comes in the room. He pretty much dismissed any hope of another referendum until QEII passes away, and even then, it is not as if he would have the vote the day after the funeral. It will be some time until another Republican vote is had again.

Winning by campaigning on principles

Posted by Chief Blogger – 16 September, 2008

MT has to right on this point, during his acceptance speech as leader:

Mr Turnbull gave a strong speech to the party room after his victory in which he made two main points, that the Liberal Party’s values of freedom, independence and self-reliance were both good and popular and in the Australian spirit, and that the next election was very winnable for a party with a positive agenda that was not prepared to wait for the government to lose.

He made it clear that the party will not adopt a “small target” strategy.

Another prediction bites the dust

Posted by Chief Blogger – 15 September, 2008

I should give up the prediction game, I’m not very good at it. Turnbull is no conservative, but it will be interesting to see how long he lasts as leader. The election is still over two years away. He needs to distinguish himself from the ALP on the following key issues to stand a chance of being PM:

  1. The nation is addicted to gov’t welfare – a strategy needs to be put into place to ween people of gov’t payments,
  2. Use the savings to offer aggressive tax relief,
  3. Provide transportation spending to link the central coast to Sydney with high speed rail,
  4. Avoid large commitments to cutting carbon emissions – global warming is just socialism dressed up as science, and
  5. Support the conservative societal values.

It seems unlikely though that MT would support the last two.

Nelson vs. Turnbull, go Nelson

Posted by Chief Blogger – 15 September, 2008

I’m predicting a significant Nelson victory in today’s leadership battle, as is another , who is less disposed to bloody political battles it seems. I don’t think Costello has done himself any favours since the last Federal election. If he really wanted to be PM, then he would be the leader now. It does not say much for his commitment and desire to lead. At least Nelson and Turnbull want it so badly that they are willing to slug it out, whereas Costello seems to have a left wing sense of entitlement, which won’t go down with voters anyway. He was never as popular as Howard, possibly for that reason:

Newspoll surveys of the comparative popularity of Costello and Howard, however, would leave one with the view that it may well have been political suicide for the Coalition, had Howard exited in favour of his treasurer.

In July 1998, 45 per cent preferred Howard as leader, with 26 per cent for Costello; in November 2002, Howard 66 per cent, Costello 16 per cent; in May 2003, Howard 68, Costello 18; in March 2004, Howard 63, Costello 20; in May 2005, Howard 61, Costello 23; in April 2006, Howard 62, Costello 24; and in July 2006, Howard 66, Costello 20.

Even Latham was viewed as a better possible PM than Costello in December 2003 (Latham 43 per cent, Costello 33) and in March 2004, (Latham 52 per cent, Costello 28).

John Howard in Utah

Posted by Chief Blogger – 10 September, 2008

Back in late May Howard made a trip to Utah to speak at a Zions Bank conference. It received no coverage in the Australian media, so I’m covering it now, albeit a little late. I’ll post an interview later, but a link to Howard’s speech is here. You’ll notice in the audio the lack of a teleprompter, a true professional.

There were no ‘zingers’, but Howard made a strong case for free trade and globalisation, against the protectionists in the USA (possibly referring to Obama), Japan and Europe. He also spoke of the use of bio-fuels and the impact this has had on world food prices and general inflation. And, of course, he spoke of the importance of flexible labour markets in harnessing technology/innovation and in reducing unemployment – referring to his policy legacy.

Howard spoke of China in positive terms, as an opportunity to be take, while also recognising that China needs to play by global rules and the importance of democracy and liberty. In this respect, he said that the Olympic torch protests were a good thing for China in helping to awaken people to the issues.

He also spoke of Zimbabwe’s failure, as a failure of African leadership. And that only nation-states acting together can solve the world’s big problems, not multi-lateral institutions.

Lastly, he rejected a primary electoral system for Australia, possibly the type that was proposed within Liberal Party circles a little while ago, certainly what takes place in the USA.

All round it was a solid representation of Australian conservative values.

Costello Games

Posted by Chief Blogger – 9 September, 2008

The Herald Sun is reporting on Costello’s new book, and its not good for conservatives. I’ve always regarded Costello as a lukewarm conservative, though not as bad as Turnbull. The reality is that Costello never had the numbers to be the leader, so Costello has resorted to blaming Howard for explaining why he is not the PM now. But what about the rest of the party? If Costello couldn’t win his own party room over how could he possibly win an election?

Mr Costello will controversially argue that he was given a “wink and a nod” on five or six occasions by either Mr Howard or his close allies on a succession plan.

Oh really? Hardly the basis of a succession plan.