Should Howard Stay?? (1 Viewer)

[premer]

Excuse me for those of you who are sick to death of this topic, but I am really into your opinions, however short or slanted they may be.

What do you think, should he stay for the next term, or should he quit while he is ahead? He has been here for over 10 years, and we still seem to 'like him'.

I think it is time for him to leave, he may start to do some damage to our country, such as his snuffing out of enterprise, entrepreneurialism, creative arts and the australian film and television industry, ohh and the Iraq situation, both the war and the AWB.

What are your thoughts??




Good Night Irene.......

[H ward]

 

[withoutaface]

He should stay until the next election, then shortly after cede power to Costello.

 

[erawamai]

In terms of the best interests of the Liberal Party - he should stay as long as possible.

For the ALP - Howard should go asap. Costello is percieved as smug. He is also very poor with the media. He is an anti intellectual (like the majority of Australia) Costello is an intellectual of the neoliberal type.

Abbot is too extreme for Australia.

 

[Iron]

In terms of the best interests of the Liberal Party - he should stay as long as possible.

Even though 'Stello's beating Kim in the polls.

 

[dandel26]

Howard will more than likely kill the ALP once again in the next election. It would be in the best interest of the liberal party to maintain him as their leader. He is far more politically intelligent than costello. If Costello takes over before the next election he has a good chance of losing to the ALP

 

[withoutaface]

Costello won't take over before the next election, that'd be the dumbest move the Liberal party could possibly make.

 

[Iron]

There seems to be no personal reason for him to step down. He's healthy, on top of his game and widely supported. Further, he's comfortabley lined up for achieving mythical status, surpassing the God of Menzies.

 

[frog12986]

Definitely, Howard has absolutely no reason to depart at this point in time. I just don't think that Costello has what it takes to lead the party, let alone the country. When taking the best interests of the Party and the country into account, there is no possible way that Howard will hand over leadership. There's a similarity between the leadership candidates in the Labor Party. Although intelligent, they breathe a smug arrogance that does not appeal to the average voter...

It's amazing the conundrums that can arise due to the lack of complete leadership material in federal politics..

 

[wheredanton]

Definitely, Howard has absolutely no reason to depart at this point in time. I just don't think that Costello has what it takes to lead the party, let alone the country. When taking the best interests of the Party and the country into account, there is no possible way that Howard will hand over leadership. There's a similarity between the leadership candidates in the Labor Party. Although intelligent, they breathe a smug arrogance that does not appeal to the average voter...

Costello has what it takes. Economically he is correct to assert that he almost already running the country. The average voter would not really be aware or care about this.

The difference between Costello and Howard is their media perception. Howard is media savvy and anti intellectual, very common. very good at portraying himself as anti elite when he, well um, is. He doesn't tell the Australian public what to do, he simply tells them they want. Costello is intellectual (of the neo liberal type, but still an intellectul), he is poor with the media. Very poor at time.

On the arrogance front the general public often doesn't get to see Howard arrogantly refuse to answer questions asked in good faith by the media. Much like Keating after too much time in power the head gets too big and they suddently believe they have the right to refuse to answer questions that are difficult.

 

[wheredanton]

Definitely, Howard has absolutely no reason to depart at this point in time. I just don't think that Costello has what it takes to lead the party, let alone the country. When taking the best interests of the Party and the country into account, there is no possible way that Howard will hand over leadership. There's a similarity between the leadership candidates in the Labor Party. Although intelligent, they breathe a smug arrogance that does not appeal to the average voter...

Costello has what it takes. Economically he is correct to assert that he almost already running the country. The average voter would not really be aware or care about this.

The difference between Costello and Howard is their media perception. Howard is media savvy and anti intellectual, very common. very good at portraying himself as anti elite when he, well um, is. He doesn't tell the Australian public what to do, he simply tells them they want. Costello is intellectual (of the neo liberal type, but still an intellectul), he is poor with the media. Very poor at times.

On the arrogance front the general public often doesn't get to see Howard arrogantly refuse to answer questions asked in good faith by the media. Much like Keating after too much time in power the head gets too big and they suddently believe they have the right to refuse to answer questions that are difficult.

 

[bshoc]

With all the useless ideology pushing such as the workplace reforms, vsu etc. its quite obvious Howard has run out of legitimate ideas, why keep a bored man in power?

 

[transcendent]

Yeah, I think Howard will stay then let Costello take over or stay another term.

 

[spell check]

i think malcolm turnbull will be howard's successor

watch this space

 

[frog12986]

Costello has what it takes. Economically he is correct to assert that he almost already running the country. The average voter would not really be aware or care about this.

The difference between Costello and Howard is their media perception. Howard is media savvy and anti intellectual, very common. very good at portraying himself as anti elite when he, well um, is. He doesn't tell the Australian public what to do, he simply tells them they want. Costello is intellectual (of the neo liberal type, but still an intellectul), he is poor with the media. Very poor at times.

On the arrogance front the general public often doesn't get to see Howard arrogantly refuse to answer questions asked in good faith by the media. Much like Keating after too much time in power the head gets too big and they suddently believe they have the right to refuse to answer questions that are difficult.

Leadership is not merely about policy or any particular achievements that that individual may have accrued. It's about personality and as you quite rightly pointed out, perception. Two key areas which are not strong points for Peter Costello; he may be a key contributor in the governments success however that does not necessarily inspire the electorate or establish himself as a figurehead.

John Howard has played the political game for years, and through lessons learnt previously realised that neither intellectualism or elitism will translate into political success. Aiming towards the 'mainstream' and not attempting to divide this cross section has been paramount for the success that he and his colleagues have attained.

Treating the media with a sense of arrogance or disdain is something that does not matter politically, and an issue that most people would do when confronted by some of those individuals. The arrogance I refer to, is interrelated to the point about intellectualism. Those such as Beazely, Rudd and even Malcolm Turnbull ooze an intellectual streak that portays a sense of arrogance. Now this does not mean in any way that as leader they would not be capable, but rather, it removes the figurehead characteristic that is a necessary leadership quality. The electorate just simply does not respond to such personalities. Keating only served one term as Prime Minister due to this, and partially due to weak opposition at the time. If the same short term thinking is taken by the Coalition, and Labor get their party into order, then a similar result will unfold..

Many underestimate the power of leadership..
- Menzies
- Fraser (to an extent)
- Hawke and
- Howard

 

[gnrlies]

Well the answer to this question depends on your perspective.

The only way John Howard will leave (in the forseeable future at least) is on his own terms. Costello does not have anywhere near the numbers to launch a formiddable challenge. Howard is a political master. His party recognises this, and even those who for factional reasons would prefer costello, would probably prefer howards leadership to run its natural course so as not to disrupt their government.

If the question is asked as to when Howard should go, I think this depends on a few factors. I have the belief that Howard will stand at the next election. He is still passionate for the job, and would not want to leave unless he had to (say there was mounting pressure for a costello challenge). There is nothing stopping him from contesting the next election, and I believe he will. Probably then the most relevant question is how far into that term and beyond would he go. I dont think he is playing games with us. He is not trying to become the longest serving prime minister or any of that, so he wont be here for another 10 years.

I feel he will go when he becomes tired of his job, or feels that he is happy with his political legacy. Perhaps he will want to fight the next election in order to see the IR reforms firmly in place (to prevent labor from shredding it up). Maybe once the election is won, he will begin to plan his succession.

The other option of course is that the liberals lose the next election. The fact is that this is a less than even chance. There is still a chance, and this of course would see Howard quit politics.

As for costello, I dont think he would be any better from a labor party's perspective. He is the preferred prime minister to kim beasley, and he has 10 years of sound economic management behind him. If the economy is a key issue like it always is, he will be the most popular choice. He has also been detached from most of the recent events such as AWB and IR reforms (even though he was one of the founding members of the HR nicholls society which is synonomous with promoting labour market reforms that go a lot further than workchoices). So costello may give the liberal party a clean slate.

On the other hand Howard is immensely popular, and the liberal party will want to capitalise on that as much as possible.

Howard to stay, Costello to wait a few more years....

 

[Gangels]

Well i think he should because he is the best thing the country has got right now. He's made his mistakes and he's learnt from them, even if he does stick by a few, but Costello is an idiot, he cant talk to media, he uses rumours and makes his own and he's not the smartest man in the Liberal party.

I think that if costello takes over, which its highly likely he wont, that will be the end of both major parties and we'll be over fucked and rooted.

 

[*Minka*]

Most people don't like Howard. They merely seem to hate him less than Beazley, Crean and Latham.

 

[_dhj_]

Most people don't like Howard. They merely seem to hate him less than Beazley, Crean and Latham.

No it's because most people are apathetic and don't care when their government repeated lies to them. People care about the economy and border protection (and Howard plays on the xenophobic notion of Fortress Australia). I think there are more people who actually hate Howard than people who hate Beazley, Crean or Latham.

 

[bassguy]

ok
i dont like howard because he appears to be doing a whole lot of things that should be affecting his popularity but arent
and thats mainly because beazley sucks
he's ineffective and his policies are basically the same as the liberals

 

[*Minka*]

No it's because most people are apathetic and don't care when their government repeated lies to them. People care about the economy and border protection (and Howard plays on the xenophobic notion of Fortress Australia). I think there are more people who actually hate Howard than people who hate Beazley, Crean or Latham.

Oh I agree that Howard has his haters but I think in the last election, a lot of people seemed to view him as the lesser of the two evils considering that Latham was painted by many as a woman basher and shit. It makes sense in my head anyway.

Coming from the Balkans, I have always found the apathetic views of Australians to politics really interesting. I kinda find it hard to grasp so so many people really don't care, but I guess sometimes you have to lose that political freedom to realise how precious it is.