Why Abbott could lose the ‘unloseable’ election

[Crabnet]

There has been a bit of chatter lately about journalists taking Abbott's lines hook, line and sinker, and I think she didn't want to fall into that trap. Also, Chris Uhlmann normally takes the big political interviews, so I think she wanted to show she could be as tough as he is.

Did she go over the top? I think so, in a couple of parts, but I don't think it's bias. I think it was a combination of trying to be tough, and Abbott's answers, (or non-answers) which she was determined to challenge.

We have become accustomed to seeing political leaders get away with saying anything in interviews, and not being challenged. Challenging the alternative PM to actually answer truthfully is not a bad thing.

It's a pity it's become so rare.

Sales must have responded to something another ABC journalist wrote last week. Barrie Cassidy from Insiders.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-17/cassidy-a-rare-challenge-for-abbott/4203120

Insiders presenter Barrie Cassidy says the media has failed to hold Opposition Leader Tony Abbott to account for his prevarications on asylum seekers and the carbon tax.

When Jon Faine interviewed Tony Abbott on ABC's 774 on Tuesday, something unusual happened.

The Opposition Leader's careless use of words was actually challenged.
From the same article

Dennis Atkins wrote.
The Liberal leader is taking the demeaning tactic of not caring what he says to new depths.

Now Mark Latham has taken up the same issue in the Financial Review, writing that:
In 35 years studying Australian politics, I have never seen a political leader so vulnerable to criticism yet treated so lightly by the media.

Perhaps the Canberra press gallery has become so accustomed to finding fault in Julia Gillard it has forgotten how to hold her opposite number to account.

 

[Peter 14.7]

No evand, he actually did question Tony quite severely on the issue of the 'Direct Action' policy - if you ever bothered to watch.

Yeah I agree he gave it hard.

Bolt is very intelligent. Many on both sides fear him at the mic.

Where Janet Albrekson (?) the yummy, librarian type is straight from Fox New and just as smart. Saw here on Q & A and she was totally lost.

Peter

 

[evand]

In the 7.30 interview, when Abbott was asked if he has read the BHP report from yesterday, he said NO.

Now has backtracked and is saying he said no to the question before that one and did read it yesterday.......HAHAHAHA!!!!

The Opposition leader is asked why he didn't read the BHP statement.
Mr Abbott clarifies his remarks from last night.

He says he did in fact read the statement, at about 3.45pm yesterday.
So why did he say he hadn't read the statement?

I was responding to something Leigh had said about Marius Kloppers.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...ust-23-2012-20120823-24nfz.html#ixzz24KR9iwyR

Is this guy for real? How can any thinking person support a party with him as leader?

 

[Crabnet]

In the 7.30 interview, when Abbott was asked if he has read the BHP report from yesterday, he said NO.

Now has backtracked and is saying he said no to the question before that one and did read it yesterday.......HAHAHAHA!!!!

The Opposition leader is asked why he didn't read the BHP statement.
Mr Abbott clarifies his remarks from last night.

He says he did in fact read the statement, at about 3.45pm yesterday.
So why did he say he hadn't read the statement?

I was responding to something Leigh had said about Marius Kloppers.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...ust-23-2012-20120823-24nfz.html#ixzz24KR9iwyR

Is this guy for real? How can any thinking person support a party with him as leader?

To be fair he already pointed out to the general public that you should "only believe me when it's written down".

 

[evand]

Not sure if thats worse than Howards 'core promises and non core promises' line. Maybe a bit.

To be fair he already pointed out to the general public that you should "only believe me when it's written down".

 

[dan c]

The Opposition leader is asked why he didn't read the BHP statement.
Mr Abbott clarifies his remarks from last night.

He says he did in fact read the statement, at about 3.45pm yesterday.
So why did he say he hadn't read the statement?

I was responding to something Leigh had said about Marius Kloppers.

From memory she asked him more than once. He had ample time to clarify in the interview, but he didn't.

 

[Peter 14.7]

Now Mark Latham has taken up the same issue in the Financial Review, writing that:
In 35 years studying Australian politics, I have never seen a political leader so vulnerable to criticism yet treated so lightly by the media.

Perhaps the Canberra press gallery has become so accustomed to finding fault in Julia Gillard it has forgotten how to hold her opposite number to account.

Ok, firstly, using Mark Latham as reference is a bad start.

Latham must have made this statement whilst he was looking at a mirror. Honestly, the man was an embarrassment to all of us: lib and labour even a Republication Moderate would walk away.

This is the man who called the Gov a "congo line of suck holes" to the US.

On point no 2. You are probably right. Let hope they do hit him hard so the flaws can be polished before he take over.

Regards Peter 14.7

 

[Ideo]

Ok, firstly, using Mark Latham as reference is a bad start.

Latham must have made this statement whilst he was looking at a mirror. Honestly, the man was an embarrassment to all of us: lib and labour even a Republication Moderate would walk away.

This is the man who called the Gov a "congo line of suck holes" to the US.

On point no 2. You are probably right. Let hope they do hit him hard so the flaws can be polished before he take over.

Regards Peter 14.7

Fair points, especially re Latham. Lose cannon is an insult to cannons.

I, however, don't think Abbott has the right temperament. Hockey, Bishop, Turnball, yes. Abbott no.

I am quite confident in the libs winning the next election. I have no ties to labor except that they are more in line with my social left leaning aspect - but if a moderate liberal re-directs the party away from the hard, religious right aspect then I have no issue with that at all.

 

[evand]

No, hes lying. If he wasnt lying, he's stupid. Gotta be one or the other. Maybe both.

From memory she asked him more than once. He had ample time to clarify in the interview, but he didn't.

 

[evand]

That line was a classic from Latham, very Keatingesque. And it was true.

I couldnt find the interview with Bolt & Abbott you referred to on youtube. There are others but none where he is 'giving it to him'. Maybe you can help.

The flaws polished? Now thats funny.

Ok, firstly, using Mark Latham as reference is a bad start.

Latham must have made this statement whilst he was looking at a mirror. Honestly, the man was an embarrassment to all of us: lib and labour even a Republication Moderate would walk away.

This is the man who called the Gov a "congo line of suck holes" to the US.

On point no 2. You are probably right. Let hope they do hit him hard so the flaws can be polished before he take over.

Regards Peter 14.7

 

[HotRod]

I'm a big fan of Turnbull.

Investor, lawyer, boardmember/business owner. Just a shame he is a bit left in some of his thinking which caused his little hiccup, even if by one vote.

 

[Aaron Sice]

In the 7.30 interview, when Abbott was asked if he has read the BHP report from yesterday, he said NO.

Now has backtracked and is saying he said no to the question before that one and did read it yesterday.......HAHAHAHA!!!!

The Opposition leader is asked why he didn't read the BHP statement.
Mr Abbott clarifies his remarks from last night.

He says he did in fact read the statement, at about 3.45pm yesterday.
So why did he say he hadn't read the statement?

I was responding to something Leigh had said about Marius Kloppers.

Is this guy for real? How can any thinking person support a party with him as leader?

so.....what, exactly....?

 

[Sunfish]

I'm ashamed to admit that I used to vote labor when I see the ducking and weaving of the rusted-ons defending the indefensible and attacking Abbott so savagely.

He certainly isn't the hard as nails media performer Gillard is [she prolly has the higher sperm count] but he is a decent man and is tough in his own way.

But get used to it, in spite of the heading, he will be the next PM and he will do a better job than this bunch. You will find out how tough he is when he pushes through legislation that will make the left squeal like stuck pigs.

 

[evand]

More baseless speculation. Hows the crystal ball going?

I'm ashamed to admit that I used to vote labor when I see the ducking and weaving of the rusted-ons defending the indefensible and attacking Abbott so savagely.

He certainly isn't the hard as nails media performer Gillard is [she prolly has the higher sperm count] but he is a decent man and is tough in his own way.

But get used to it, in spite of the heading, he will be the next PM and he will do a better job than this bunch. You will find out how tough he is when he pushes through legislation that will make the left squeal like stuck pigs.

 

[Ideo]

I'm ashamed to admit that I used to vote labor when I see the ducking and weaving of the rusted-ons defending the indefensible and attacking Abbott so savagely.

He certainly isn't the hard as nails media performer Gillard is [she prolly has the higher sperm count] but he is a decent man and is tough in his own way.

But get used to it, in spite of the heading, he will be the next PM and he will do a better job than this bunch. You will find out how tough he is when he pushes through legislation that will make the left squeal like stuck pigs.

I'm ashamed to admit I voted liberal when I see the low gutter politics that he is using, and the lack of any vision, apart from constant negativity and attacks.

So swings and roundabouts.

I am also thoroughly fed up with the current lot for their poor policies and lack of any real vision.

 

[Tuppence]

Leigh Sales was apoplectic during that interview. Abbott was on a hiding to nothing: Cop it or feed the story that he hates women. You couldn't blame him after that disgraceful performance by Sales.

Lefties can no longer deny ABC bias.

It's funny how we see what we'd like to see. I saw a man I'll-prepared for a serious interview finally (finally!) get pulled up by a journo prepared to ask the tough questions.
Wrong on BHP's motivations, wrong on the repeated use of the word "illegal" regarding asylum seekers (and not even the first time this week he's been pulled up on that). I thought he looked shifty and wobbly - and note his back-tracking today.
I also note, with interest, the official apology to Gillard from The Oz.

Yes - I think, when you boil it all down, we really only see what we want to see, reinforcing opinions already held. And I think that applies to even the most avowedly unbiased of us, at least, IMHO .

 

[Dazz]

So.....has anyone changed their opinion after 156 posts ??

 

[Aaron Sice]

i have.

i may actually enrol to vote this election.

 

[HotRod]

So.....has anyone changed their opinion after 156 posts ??

Of what? What was the question?

 

[Hoffy]

It's funny how we see what we'd like to see. I saw a man I'll-prepared for a serious interview finally (finally!) get pulled up by a journo prepared to ask the tough questions.
Wrong on BHP's motivations,

I also note, with interest, the official apology to Gillard from The Oz.

D.

Maybe Tony was right after all. Seems that Marius, now that he has left the country, agrees with what Jack said months ago about the impact on investor sentiment caused by the legislative changes.
http://www.theage.com.au/business/t...s-investors-20120823-24oyp.html#ixzz24PSrzzIW
Wonder if the rabid Sales will offer an apology.

Also, what is it that you "note" with regard to the "official" apology from the Australian. Seems Julia's diversion nonsense has worked on some after all. How dare they say trust fund in error instead of slush fund