Quite apart from differences resulting from the gender make-up of the audience, it was clear that the line that averaged the responses gave the event to Gillard. Abbott is a politician who one finds it hard to feel for. Possibly down to the body language (he looks uncomfortable in any situation, it would seem) and appearance (which is quite dreadful -- he seems to be forever bursting out of his overly tight suits); both of which distract the viewer from Abbott's message, insofar as there is one except 'Labor bad, Coalition good'. Even his language is awkward ('fair dinkum' coming from him is as objectionable as it was coming from Rudd!). Was Gillard better? Not really, which makes it even more curious that Abbott should, to me, seem to be so profoundly unelectable. And we haven't had his well-known clangers and extreme examples of 'heart on sleeve' conservatism yet ....
2
Sunday, 25 July 2010 14:50
Frosty
The Australian public lost in this 'debate' which was a prime example of 'two party preferred' brainwashing BS that occurs in all of our media.
Democracy was not served in this debate as Bob Brown of the Greens, the 3rd party in Australian politics, was not allowed to appear.
Leading up to the UK national elections recently, the 'debate' was opened up to 3 party leaders and the leader of the Liberal Democrats, the 3rd party in UK politics, was allowed to join in.
Funny enough, the Liberal Democrats did quite well in the UK elections and actually formed government with the Tories/Conservatives.
Not that such a power-sharing arrangement would work here mind.
Advertising and brainwashing works. Our corporate controlled media knows it, Labor knows it and the Libs know it. That's why we're hammered constantly with 'two party preferred' BS!
Remember folks, you get the government you deserve - the Australian Federal Hollowmen - until you realise that we there are other political parties to vote for.
3
Sunday, 25 July 2010 22:41
Queenslanders to Rule the Universe
It says something about the standard of journalism in this country that our National Press Club created a backdrop announcing "Leaders Debate". There should have been an apostrophe after the 'S' in 'Leaders'
4
Sunday, 25 July 2010 23:34
Philip Machanick
The debate was rubbish. They should have had Bob Brown in there to challenge claims such as linking boat people to immigration, and the abject failure on both sides to show leadership in climate change. Then again we had people who were supposed to be top journalists asking the questions, and they also let them get away with it.
No wonder people who've voted for the same party for decades are switching: http://www.harryrclarke.com/2010/07/18/voting-green/
5
Monday, 26 July 2010 02:36
4Freedom
Australia lost if you ask me. We don't really have candidates that are capable of leading. They are only able to buy votes by promising more handouts which judging by past events will probably not eventuate and if they do they will be a complete botch up. Tony is falling for the same old trick of anything you can do I can do better I can do anything better than You. Yes I can . No you cant yes I can Noooooooh you can't
6
Monday, 26 July 2010 02:56
John Ward
The Liberals have the gall to add up deaths at sea under the ALP asylum seeker policies, while they want us to forget SIEV X4 ' a certain maritime incident' where 344 people died in one lost at sea event.
7
Monday, 26 July 2010 04:19
Disappointed
Last night's display was not a debate. A debate is supposed to be controlled argument, but last night was nothing more than a question/answer gab-fest. How disappointing. It also showed just how far the women of Australia haven't come when they clearly indicated a preference for the Prime Minister based on her gender rather than what she was actually saying. Maybe history got it wrong! If there is another debate, lets get somebody in the moderate who actualy knows what they are doing and get a real debate on some real issues going. Let Australia see the two leaders at their best (or worst). We know they can do better than last night afterall we've seen them in action in Parliament.
8
Monday, 26 July 2010 10:36
Dee
Disappointed
Yes, but whose fault is that? As the stratagists said. Pollies are hostage to the gotcha question & media saturation at the slightest gaff. That is why we get these stupid non events.
Top that off. Why did we spend so much time on asylum seekers & immigration? Surely, they could have covered much more policy ground than the dog whistling topics.
Again. The medias fault. Also,it was to Abbott's advantage to have a calm & controlled 'debate'. He does not fair well against Gillard during heated discussion. She gets him on fact all the time.
9
Tuesday, 27 July 2010 09:49
Arjay
Julia Gillard is not feeling all that confident.She has fallen into the Rudd trap of posing questions and answering them in the next sentence.
I do not want to see Labour win since the carbon tax will send us into poverty.On the other hand,can we trust the Coalition,particularly on the censorship of the web?
Julia Gillard in my view has fallen in line with large corporate interests.It is about lowering wages,creating more debt for ordinary Australians and attacking the few freedoms we have left.
Is there a Ron Paul in Australia who can stand up for the ideals of freedom and autonomy of the individual?
10
Wednesday, 28 July 2010 04:21
peter jones
What about all those of us who thought Bob Brown won because the others were scared of him offering a real difference in what was otherwise a very boring debate ?
Democracy was not served in this debate as Bob Brown of the Greens, the 3rd party in Australian politics, was not allowed to appear.
Leading up to the UK national elections recently, the 'debate' was opened up to 3 party leaders and the leader of the Liberal Democrats, the 3rd party in UK politics, was allowed to join in.
Funny enough, the Liberal Democrats did quite well in the UK elections and actually formed government with the Tories/Conservatives.
Not that such a power-sharing arrangement would work here mind.
Advertising and brainwashing works. Our corporate controlled media knows it, Labor knows it and the Libs know it. That's why we're hammered constantly with 'two party preferred' BS!
Remember folks, you get the government you deserve - the Australian Federal Hollowmen - until you realise that we there are other political parties to vote for.
No wonder people who've voted for the same party for decades are switching: http://www.harryrclarke.com/2010/07/18/voting-green/
Yes, but whose fault is that? As the stratagists said. Pollies are hostage to the gotcha question & media saturation at the slightest gaff. That is why we get these stupid non events.
Top that off. Why did we spend so much time on asylum seekers & immigration? Surely, they could have covered much more policy ground than the dog whistling topics.
Again. The medias fault. Also,it was to Abbott's advantage to have a calm & controlled 'debate'. He does not fair well against Gillard during heated discussion. She gets him on fact all the time.
I do not want to see Labour win since the carbon tax will send us into poverty.On the other hand,can we trust the Coalition,particularly on the censorship of the web?
Julia Gillard in my view has fallen in line with large corporate interests.It is about lowering wages,creating more debt for ordinary Australians and attacking the few freedoms we have left.
Is there a Ron Paul in Australia who can stand up for the ideals of freedom and autonomy of the individual?