Nation still reels from toppling of Kevin Rudd by his own party in 2010

Today in The Australian

When the voters of Bennelong turfed John Howard out exactly 10 years ago, “Kevin 07” seemed to offer a fresh alternative to a government that was scarred and wearied after four terms in office.

About Henry Ergas

Henry Ergas AO is a columnist for The Australian. From 2009 to 2015 he was Senior Economic Adviser to Deloitte Australia and from 2009 to 2017 was Professor of Infrastructure Economics at the University of Wollongong’s SMART Infrastructure Facility. He joined SMART and Deloitte after working as a consultant economist at NECG, CRA International and Concept Economics. Prior to that, he was an economist at the OECD in Paris from the late 1970s until the early 1990s. At the OECD, he headed the Secretary-General’s Task Force on Structural Adjustment (1984-1987), which concentrated on improving the efficiency of government policies in a wide range of areas, and was subsequently Counsellor for Structural Policy in the Economics Department. He has taught at a range of universities, undertaken a number of government inquiries and served as a Lay Member of the New Zealand High Court. In 2016, he was made an Officer in the Order of Australia.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

90 Responses to Nation still reels from toppling of Kevin Rudd by his own party in 2010

  1. Bruce of Newcastle

    Rudd has an article in the Oz today headlined “My top 10 triumphs as PM”.
    I can’t think of any myself, let alone 10 of them, but then I’m not him.

  2. H B Bear

    Bruce – as usual the comments are more informative and entertaining.

  3. Shy Ted

    When the voters of Wentworth turfed Michael Trumble out ASAP, a squashed dead cat seemed to offer a fresh alternative to a government that was just woeful in office. FIFY

  4. candy

    I think Kevin Rudd would have won the 2010 election if J. Gillard had not knifed him, and we would have been spared her PMship.

    She was definitely more of a socialist and set financial time bombs when she knew she was a goner. As time goes on, you can see the destruction she wrought, in debt, the education sector, open borders.

  5. Senile Old Guy

    Alas, Henry has lost it.

    Rudd was briefly popular because he pretended to be something he was not. Remember how he famously claimed to be a “fiscal conservative” then, once elected, went on a spending spree. Remember how, once elected, his government lurched from one crisis to the next, almost always choosing the wrong option.

    Henry writes:

    Together those two forces — a sullen electorate and a political system gripped by regicide’s ­momentum — have fed our ­vicious cycle: with disillusioned voters refusing to give new prime ministers the benefit of the doubt, their public support proves fleeting; and when the loss of support plunges the polls into negative territory, prime ministers find themselves under threat, undermining their capacity to govern and transforming leadership speculation into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    This reads like we, the voters, are the problem: we are “sullen”, “disillusioned”, “refusing” to support “new prime ministers”.

    There is a name missing from Henry’s article: Abbott*. There’s Gillard, Rudd, Turnbull, Howard and Shorten; but no Abbott! And when the piece is about leaders dumped before their time, this is more than a little odd. Especially since, as no-one seems to mention, Abbott won in the biggest landslide in recent history. Why was that? Well, that was because we, the “sullen” and “disillusioned”, decided that he was a better option than the alternatives on offer. Far from “refusing” to support “new prime ministers”, we put him into power with a large majority!

    This is, to some extent, consistent with Henry’s argument, so it is odd that Abbott is ignored. Remember, Abbott was dumped by the political class, not the voters.

    Memories have been blunted by the whirl of comings and ­goings; nonetheless, the fact ­remains that virtually up to the fateful evening of June 24, 2010, Kevin Rudd was extraordinarily popular, with net satisfaction ratings that trounced those of his ­predecessors.

    Rudd was popular with some until his shortcomings and blunders became to obvious to be ignored. He was dumped because he was useless (and he could not be controlled by the unions).

  6. Mother Lode

    Thanks for that Bruce.

    Sadly, I cannot read it because I don’t have a subscription, but I note the opening words where Rudd boasts of ‘blasting John Howard from office’ – does that delusional little twerp really think anyone is glad of that?

    Not everyone loved Howard, but I doubt there are many people who think Rudd was an improvement.

  7. DaveR

    John Howard is probably the best government leader I have experienced, but also the leader that made the biggest politcal mistake I have ever seen.

    I look back on his time in office as a great period of stability and balance in Australia’s history, when Australia caught up with the rest of the world in a measured and considered way. The introduction of the gun laws are one of the best achievements for a US-style community in the western world, and I have no doubt it has spared Australia many of the US-style problems.

    But Howard made the biggest political mistake I have seen in believing he was bigger than the party, and failed to handover to Costello at the right time. The result of this massive failure has been years of socialism and instability which is not over yet.

  8. Henry’s on point. He describes exactly what’s wrong with Australian politics: limited fiscal manoeuvring room due to unrealistic voter expectations and a complete lack of leadership on either side of politics.

  9. Senile Old Guy

    Henry’s on point. He describes exactly what’s wrong with Australian politics: limited fiscal manoeuvring room due to unrealistic voter expectations and a complete lack of leadership on either side of politics.

    Really? Abbott won in a landslide with a slogan of “it’s a spending problem, not a revenue problem”. He got done by the political class and the self-serving undermining of one M. Turnbull. How well did that go?

    Remember, Abbott got rid of Rudd and Gillard. He got drafted in as opposition leader because the leader at the time — one M. Turnbull — was utterly useless.

    Even now, Abbott has better traction in the media than Shorten or Turnbull. The problem is not the voters, or some of the potential leaders, it is the f*cking political class. Take a look at the situation in NSW where the factional chiefs and branch stackers have taken over.

  10. Leo G

    Rudd has an article in the Oz today headlined “My top 10 triumphs as PM”.

    Rudd’s “triumphs”:
    No 1: Defeating John Howard.
    No 2: Preventing Australia from falling into recession during the global financial crisis.
    No 3: Helping secure the establishment of the G20 as the pre-eminent economic decision-making body in the world
    No 4: Launching a new ­national productivity strategy based on skills, infrastructure and industry policy.
    No 5: Initiating a new period of foreign and security policy activism .
    No 6: Ratifying the Kyoto Protocol;
    No 7: Introducing major reforms and investments in the education system including new ­libraries
    No 8: Negotiating with the states the reform of the health and hospital system.
    No 9: In social justice, the biggest single adjustment in the aged pension; increasing the childcare rebate; introducing a paid parental leave scheme; launching the development of the NDIS; removing discrimination against same-sex couples in commonwealth statutes, from ­social security to inheritance law, as well as fighting for marriage equality.
    No 10: The national apology to Australia’s indigenous people and the national closing-the-gap targets.

  11. cynical1

    Only the blind believe this garbage.

    Rudd was a classic fuckwit.

    Born that way.

    Better if he had never left QLD health.

    Or even better, Nambour.

  12. Tim Neilson

    Abbott won in a landslide with a slogan of “it’s a spending problem, not a revenue problem”.

    Correct.

    And he won in a landslide despite the frenetic vilification from the MSM (including the taxpayer funded ABC all of whose “journalists” should be in jail for effective theft of public resources for their own political agendas).

    Then his problems really began when he and Hockey put out a budget with more Commonwealth spending than Goose Swansteen’s last budget and tried to claim that it was fiscally responsible.

    I accept that voters do tend to get what they ask for most of the time, but a lot of our problems now are exacerbated by Michael Trumble and ScoMo joining the high tax high spend cheer squad instead of even trying to persuade voters of the case for sanity.

  13. calli

    11. Inviting the Great and the Good to jot their ideas down for a Better Australia on butchers’ paper at the 2020 Summit.

  14. Senile Old Guy

    I accept that voters do tend to get what they ask for most of the time, but a lot of our problems now are exacerbated by Michael Trumble and ScoMo joining the high tax high spend cheer squad instead of even trying to persuade voters of the case for sanity.

    Yes. Turnbull promised no new taxes and especially no increase taxation of superannuation. Shortly after being elected, increased taxation of superannuation.

  15. Eyrie

    DaveR, Australia does not have the USA’s gun “problem” because we don’t have the ethnic inner city groups who are most of the problem (and largely killing each other – a good thing) although we are working on importing them from third world shitholes and they will simply ignore the gun laws. Our gun problem is how a large group of law abiding citizens have been demonised and oppressed by the government and that you aren’t allowed to use a gun for self defence.

  16. Eyrie

    Oh and Howard was and is a complete deadshit.

  17. Tim Neilson

    No 1: Defeating John Howard. True, but that was a disaster for Australia, not an achievement. (And, strictly, wasn’t done when KRudd was PM anyway so shouldn’t be on this list.)
    No 2: Preventing Australia from falling into recession during the global financial crisis. This is of course complete bullshit. Chinese iron ore and coal demand anyone? He and Goose Swansteen plunged the nation into debt with zero benefit to show for it.
    No 3: Helping secure the establishment of the G20 as the pre-eminent economic decision-making body in the world This is complete bullshit. It is based on the ghastly little fabulist’s claim that he urged George Bush to promote the G20, when the timeline shows that the White House had announced that weeks before the telephone call in which KRudd claims to have inflicted his views onto GWB .
    No 4: Launching a new ­national productivity strategy based on skills, infrastructure and industry policy. Strategy – i.e. not an achievement but an aspiration
    No 5: Initiating a new period of foreign and security policy activism . Same as 4 – not an achievement at all. Just typical KRudd, running around uselessly in a flap of self aggrandisement.
    No 6: Ratifying the Kyoto Protocol; Symbolic gesture of vast self adulation and moral preening potential, zero actually accomplished, and all too likely to be a catastrophe – maybe the signature KRudd exploit.
    No 7: Introducing major reforms and investments in the education system including new ­libraries i.e. more regulation and more spend – no actual achievement
    No 8: Negotiating with the states the reform of the health and hospital system. as for 7
    No 9: In social justice, the biggest single adjustment in the aged pension; increasing the childcare rebate; introducing a paid parental leave scheme; launching the development of the NDIS; removing discrimination against same-sex couples in commonwealth statutes, from ­social security to inheritance law, as well as fighting for marriage equality. spend spend spend. “Fighting for marriage equality” – what a disgracefully dishonest little turd.
    No 10: The national apology to Australia’s indigenous people and the national closing-the-gap targets. Words and aspirations – achievements zero.

  18. Tim Neilson

    Eyrie, I agree completely with your 10.38 post but not your 10.39. Howard did some stupid things, especially very late in his tenure when he was panicking and pandering for votes, but there are a hell of a lot of ordinary Australians who were able to build really good lives for themselves while he and Costello were keeping government out of the road, and they could have continued to do so if Howard and Costello’s surplus hadn’t been turned into a gargantuan deficit by his clown troupe of successors.

  19. Fitter

    Kevin Rudd invented the selfie, which gave birth to Instagram, Tumblr, Pinterest and others. If it weren’t for Kevin, the I-Phone would have flopped, superfluous school halls would not have been built, and we would never have heard the phrase “programmatic specificity”. Mind you , nominating Wayne Swan as his Treasurer when he could have had a Kardashian was a critical error. But thank the good Lord he freed the ALP from the yoke of the unions. Oh wait . . .

  20. Bruce of Newcastle

    Rudd’s “triumphs”:

    He has an odd definition of the word “triumph”.
    For the meaning he is applying it to I would use the word “disaster”.

  21. Eyrie

    Howard bears a lot of responsibility for what happened in 2007 and subsequently. He couldn’t be satisfied with 3 and a half terms then an orderly handover to new blood. No, he hung on until the bitter end and we got Rudd/Gillard and he encouraged Trumble to stay in the party with the current appalling results. He was and is a deadshit.

  22. anonandon

    Can you imagine the sense of self delusion and shame he suffered when putting that list together. Neither can I, because he wouldn’t have. This idiot actually believes it.

  23. Norman Church

    There are a lot of Cats that really hate Howard because of the gun laws. Fair enough. Personally, I don’t have a huge problem with the response to the Port Arthur massacre but respect the views of those that suggest that it was an over-reaction.

    It might also be said that Howard should have fought harder to return taxpayers’ money via tax cuts rather than the politically expedient method of family tax benefits. Fair criticism, I would have thought.

    However, IMHO, a lot of what is said about Howard is totally unhinged and smacks of leftist derangement syndrome.

    Compared to the premierships of those who preceded and followed him, Howard’s time as PM was a golden age of economic prosperity. The first budget he passed was tough and uncompromising. He also did a pretty good job of containing the divisive lunacy of identity politics.

    Rudd’s election was an unmitigated disaster. Those who were stupid enough to vote for him got what they deserved. Good and hard.

  24. .

    Howard’s stuff up was introducing Workchoices and not abolishing or severely cutting income taxes at the same time.

    If say, you saw a flat tax of 20% with a 40k threshold (just as an example), not many people would have complained; particularly low-income earners who no longer need to lodge a return.

    Few people would have bought the union crap about workers being shafted.

    Once he rolled Kevin Rudd; the ALP would not have had a popular candidate even to this day to contest elections against him.

    WorkChoices was actually his greatest success. It is what stopped the GFC causing mass unemployment in Australia, along with accommodative (but, over accommodative to be pedantic) monetary policy.

  25. Norman Church

    “Howard’s stuff up was introducing Workchoices and not abolishing or severely cutting income taxes at the same time. ”

    Tax cuts may well have help save Howard by ameliorating the abolition of the no-disadvantage test. The union funded advertisements of employees presented, in effect, with a massive pay cut had a powerful effect on voters frightened about their ability to meet the bills. It was political dynamite.

    I remember being warned that abolition of the no-disadvantage test would destroy Howard. It also had an utterly disastrous effect on IR in this country. The resulting slide in productivity has had the inevitable flow-on effect on wages and economic growth.

    Really dumb move. Although less ideologically pure, retaining the no-disadvantage test and allowing the benefits of Work Choices to accrue incrementally and over time was clearly the smart play.

    It is surprising that a clever politician like Howard made such an egregious error. Hubris, I suppose. Well, Nemesis so often follows hubris.

  26. Norman Church

    Just to be clear, I mean to say that Work Choices led to Rudd which led to the re-regulation of the IR system.

  27. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Howard bears a lot of responsibility for what happened in 2007 and subsequently. He couldn’t be satisfied with 3 and a half terms then an orderly handover to new blood.

    Always believed that he wanted to be second longest serving Prime Minister, after Bob Menzies.

  28. Fibro

    Rudd’s “triumphs”? The actual achievements:
    No 1: Confirmed Maxine was a completely impartial presenter on their ABC.
    No 2: Calculated that $750 was the price for a vote.
    No 3: Made sure the G20 stayed a yearly piss up event.
    No 4: Learnt new skills to bullshit about having and infrastructure or industry policy.
    No 5: Let every hate loving person into the country and made Gerry richer.
    No 6: Made sure you all pay 250% more to turn on the lights.
    No 7: Built a shit load of new school halls to have opening ceremonies at.
    No 8: Looked serious in camera and threaten to run health.
    No 9: Found another 300,000 voters to give more money to.
    No 10: Gave our first inhabitants something to do for the next 20 years, seek compo

  29. zyconoclast

    The only reason anyone can look back fondly at John Howard as PM is the absolute clown-fest that followed.

  30. .

    I remember being warned that abolition of the no-disadvantage test would destroy Howard. It also had an utterly disastrous effect on IR in this country. The resulting slide in productivity has had the inevitable flow-on effect on wages and economic growth.

    This is left wing garbage Norman.

    X efficiency and the productivity of capital rose. This increased the demand for labour and unemployment fell below 4% for the first time since the 1970s. As allocative efficiency increased, employers could fill more roles.

    Productivity went backward after Gillard was Prime Minister, we had engaged in tens of billions of Keynesian garbage and government spending to GDP hit 38%.

    If we didn’t have WorkChoices in the aftermath of the GFC, employers would not have been able to cut hours. We would have had mass unemployment. The changes in hours worked make this obvious.

  31. Neil

    Howard bears a lot of responsibility for what happened in 2007 and subsequently. He couldn’t be satisfied with 3 and a half terms then an orderly handover to new blood.

    Nobody would have defeated Rudd in 2007. Australia wanted socialism.

    And if he did hand over he would have been accused of lying. Most PMs never had over. And why should Howard hand over? He still had lots to give

  32. calli

    Excellent summary from outside the rabbit-hole, fibro.

  33. Mother Lode

    Better if he had never left QLD health.

    Best if he had had to be treated as a public patient under the system he had rutted.

  34. Leo G

    “Why is there such great idleness inside Senate house?
    ­Because the barbarians will arrive today.
    Why should the Senators still make laws?
    The barbarians, when they come, will legislate.”

    A pity that John Alexander didn’t wait a little longer- he would have found his own inner barbaroi had about as much reality as one of Rudd’s triumphs.

  35. H B Bear

    Nobody would have defeated Rudd in 2007. Australia wanted socialism.

    And if he did hand over he would have been accused of lying. Most PMs never had over. And why should Howard hand over? He still had lots to give

    Utter nonsense. Costello used to carve him up in Question Time. KRudd’s profile existed solely through the IQ wasteland of breakfast TV thanks to Sloppy Joe who never landed a punch on him or exposed him as the fraud he was shown to be (exactly like Waffles and Peanut Head). People were sick of the sight of Howard and simply stopped listening. Towards the end Howard became more panicked and reactive. He was done.

  36. Norman Church

    Dot – you misunderstand my point. Work Choices was good policy and indeed led to productivity improvements. And the re-regulation of the IR system has been disastrous. No argument from me on that score.

    My point is about the politics. Without a no disadvantage test, Work Choices was a “courageous” policy in the Yes Minister sense because it inevitably created a class of persons who were losers and who could be exploited by big spending unions to scare the pants off the public.
    Sometimes, it is better to achieve a reform that does not startle the horses but which bites over time rather than adopt a crash through or crash approach. Particularly in the IR space where the public will always be concerned about their ability to pay mortgages.

  37. Tim Neilson

    he encouraged Trumble to stay in the party with the current appalling results

    That’s a very good point Eyrie, to which I have no answer.

  38. Neil

    Utter nonsense

    U do not understand the Australian people. They wanted socialism. Rudd would have defeated Costello because they wanted benefits and not any more surplus budgets

  39. .

    Particularly in the IR space where the public will always be concerned about their ability to pay mortgages.

    Sorry Norman, I couldn’t tell. Written communication makes tone difficult to judge.

    4% unemployment. The union’s campaign was mostly bullshit on account of that alone.

    Self-interest could have defeated claims of a handful of workers losing their jobs. The unions are not interested in the massive pool of unemployed, only their membership base and maximising their revenue.

    We would have had hundreds of thousands more unemployed when the GFC hit.

    Howard also waited until late in his term to pass WorkChoices. Yes I know he didn’t control the Senate immediately. You want it implemented ASAP. A year or so more of the policy working would have given people a reality that would have stopped the union scare campaign short.

  40. Senile Old Guy

    U do not understand the Australian people. They wanted socialism. Rudd would have defeated Costello because they wanted benefits and not any more surplus budgets

    Yeah, sure. That’s why they voted for “It’s a spending problem, not a revenue problem” Abbott. There is no “the Australian people”. There are individuals: some always vote ALP; some always vote LNP; some always vote minor parties; and others switch. It’s those who switch, in marginal seats, who decide what happens.

  41. Neil

    Yeah, sure. That’s why they voted for “It’s a spending problem, not a revenue problem” Abbott.

    Is that why they voted for Abbott? Who knows. I think the 50,000 boat people in detention may have something to do with Australias rejection of Rudd/Gillard

    Australia has changed. They want socialism and enjoy deficit budgets

  42. egg_

    Abbott won in a landslide with a slogan of “it’s a spending problem, not a revenue problem”.

    Remember, Abbott got rid of Rudd and Gillard.

    Even now, Abbott has better traction in the media than Shorten or Turnbull. The problem is not the voters, or some of the potential leaders, it is the f*cking political class.

    +1

    Free stuff LIV voters only take hold when there’s a lack of leadership in Politics.

  43. egg_

    Australia has changed. They want socialism and enjoy deficit budgets

    A Hawke-Keating style Govt from the Left would soon sort things out.

  44. Tim Neilson

    they wanted benefits and not any more surplus budgets

    More like they wanted more benefits and, to the extent (if any) that they actually thought about the budgetary consequences, just took budget surpluses as a given like gravity or oxygen and willingly accepted the magic pudding financial fantasies of KRudd and Goose Swansteen.

  45. egg_

    Nobody would have defeated Rudd in 2007.

    He was posing as Howard Lite and the MSM whisked him into power.

  46. Mother Lode

    U do not understand the Australian people. They wanted socialism.

    Nah. Don’t see it.

    Rudd didn’t present himself as…ahem…a socialist alternative.

    He posed very deliberately as being a slightly cuddlier version of Howard. Remember how he was nicknamed ‘Me too’?

    Australians had grown complacent and believed the good times happened pretty much by themselves. Replacing Howard with KRudd did not seem likely to augur any change in economic matters.

    One of Howard’s strengths was that he didn’t give a shit what the press said. He spoke through them to the electorate – it didn’t matter how the press spun it, he still got his message through. He lost this at the end though, notably when the MSM and KRudd should have got a room.

    Australians wanted the best of everything. KRudd said that was exactly what he offered. He delivered exactly the opposite.

  47. Mother Lode

    He was posing as Howard Lite and the MSM whisked him into power.

    Presactly!

  48. Senile Old Guy

    Australia has changed. They want socialism and enjoy deficit budgets.

    Until we get a major party that actually runs on cutting the debt, we will never know. The last to vaguely try was Abbott, and he got savaged by the media and got spooked and folded. To be fair, the clowns in cabinet did not help. To be more fair, he chose them, so only has himself to blame. To be even more fair, a good proportion of the LNP have no backbone.

  49. Dr Faustus

    The attached graphs clearly show Rudd’s personal contribution to setting the Australian economy reeling via uncontrolled, unplanned spending in 2008/09. The ghastly little turd (and the Nambour TAFE zombie Treasurer) certainly stand out in the dross of the past 10/12 years.

    They also show that Howard was no slouch as a statist – as was Abbott – and that the Turnbull Election-winning Machine is setting new records for the size of government both in dollar terms and as a proportion of the Australian economy.

    The Shorten/DiNatale Government has both the starting point and precedent to destroy Australia as a functioning social economy in two to three terms.

  50. Real Deal

    Did Rudd really come out in favour of marriage equality while PM? I can’t recall that. Maybe it was in his short second regime. I thought he was in favour of traditional marriage for most of his time. Either way what a self-serving blancmange he is.

    The article is paywalled. Would love it if someone posted some of the comments.

  51. Dr Faustus

    Did Rudd really come out in favour of marriage equality while PM?

    Actually he did.
    He had a conversion during his second coming in 2013 – after voting against it in 2012.

    [Warning: the link above to ‘Kevin Connects’ would choke a brown dog.]

  52. Robber Baron

    My top 10 moments of the Rudd ClusterF$$K Regime in no particular order were:

    Sitting on his arse at the 2020 Ideas Fest looking befuddled
    Delivering a present to Cate Blanchet instead of going to John Button’s funeral
    Carrying and empty briefcase in the QLD floods
    Crying when he got shafted as PM
    Saluting GW Bush at an international leaders event and generally standing alone because no one had a clue who he was
    Making ambassadors line up to greet him
    Getting told off and scribbling some notes outside parliament by that stupid woman that lost money in the pink batts fiasco
    Calling the Chinese Ratf$$kers
    Making the RAAF stewardess cry
    His meeting with Kristina Kenneally where he completely ignored her

  53. Viva

    I well remember the tidal pull of the Rudd campaign: the appeal of “time for a change” and a dynamic “new broom” was something even I felt but managed to resist in anticipation of an early hand over to Costello. Costello’s abandonment of his post set Labor free to run amok and left the coalition rudderless.

  54. .

    Wow. Too awkard and funny for words.

    Kevin and Kristina: Ghosting, the COAG edition.

  55. manalive

    Rudd was such a bullshit artist, with his prissy punctilious voiceless plosives, I couldn’t stand him.
    Could the toad be on the comeback?

  56. Mother Lode

    This is probably one of my favourite Rudd moments.

    Reassuring himself (well, no one else was listening) that he was more popular than Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

    Petulant and demanding little shit.

    He will have so wanted to be feted by a personage as grand as a US President – as Howard was. You almost expect Obama to turn to him and say “Could you get me some water? My throat is dry.”

  57. Neil

    Nah. Don’t see it.

    Because U are stupid

    Rudd didn’t present himself as…ahem…a socialist alternative.

    But that is why people voted for him because they knew that is what he would do

  58. Dr Faustus

    Could the toad be on the comeback?

    Certainly looks like Kevni is polishing the bishop and waiting for the call.
    But:

    – The AWU/CFMEU has Shorten neatly set, and fully aware of his obligation.
    – The parliamentary ALP has at least two viable replacements for when Shorten passes his use by date – possibly three, if KKK gets up.
    – Rudd’s trademark “
    non-aligned, nerdy everyman” shtick has the all political value of an internet selfie of a dick dipped in a glass of wine.

    And he is loathed by all who know him.

  59. Mother Lode

    Because U are stupid

    A touch sensitive?

    So, Rudd was presenting himself as being Howard-lite intending yank the wheel hard left when he got in.

    The voters saw Rudd present himself as Howard-Lite, but knew he was going to yank the wheel hard left.

    So, in this remarkable subterfuge, astonishing for the scale of its deception and transparency…who was supposed to be fooled, and why?

  60. H B Bear

    U do not understand the Australian people. They wanted socialism. Rudd would have defeated Costello because they wanted benefits and not any more surplus budgets

    Also nonsense. As other commenters have observed KRudd masqueraded as an economic conservative and actually criticized Howard’s spending during the campaign. People were just sick of seeing Howard. A new PM and a decent cabinet reshuffle would have made all the difference.

  61. Neil

    A new PM and a decent cabinet reshuffle would have made all the difference.

    Also nonsense. Australia has changed. Who would have thought in 2007 Australia would have voted for SSM in 2017

    That vote shows we have changed.

  62. Mother Lode

    I would be surprised if the pasty, clammy, sweaty little polyp thought he could get back in. He really sees himself as a man of destiny – besides he will have a longer list of people to get revenge on now than when he got the boot.

    But Labor knows it won’t work, and he was never properly their man. He believed his own press. He is egotistical, ignorant, incompetent, malign, and with a capacity to humiliate the language in a way that would contravene umpteen UN conventions if it was a human.

    So I expect Mick Trumble to offer him a gig as Deputy PM.

  63. .

    Also nonsense. Australia has changed. Who would have thought in 2007 Australia would have voted for SSM in 2017

    That vote shows we have changed.

    Actual nonsense.

    From wiki…

    In June 2007, a Galaxy Research poll conducted for advocacy group GetUp! measured the opinions of 1,100 Australians aged 16 and over[4] and found that 57% of respondents supported same-sex marriage, 37% were opposed and 6% were unsure. The poll also found that 71% of respondents supported same-sex couples having the same legal entitlements as opposite-sex de facto couples.[5]

    References:

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/public-backs-gay-unions-equality/2007/06/20/1182019204491.html

    http://www.news.com.au/national/most-australians-back-same-sex-marriage/news-story/64b39e8a35ff9907394a0c8d1467fd0b

    As of 2009:

    ‘Most Australians back same-sex marriage’
    A MAJORITY of people support same-sex marriage and almost three in four back equal rights for gay couples, a poll finds, but legal changes have been ruled out.

    Considering the non-response vote, it could be roughly the same.

    It’s true – Rudd attacked Howard from the right.

  64. Neil

    OK. But my point was Australia has changed. U are right they wanted socialism and wanted SSM. That is why they voted for Rudd

  65. .

    No Neil, I do not agree with you. Rudd attacked Howard in economic terms from the right, barring WorkChoices.

  66. Snoopy

    No Neil, I do not agree with you. Rudd attacked Howard in economic terms from the right, barring WorkChoices.

    LOL! Guess who was young and naive?

  67. Eddystone

    And this.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6_k5C9VwII

    To think a lot of respectable commentators were taken in by this idiot!

  68. Eddystone

    Bloody hell! Poor fella my country.

  69. .

    Snoopy
    #2564634, posted on November 24, 2017 at 2:42 pm
    No Neil, I do not agree with you. Rudd attacked Howard in economic terms from the right, barring WorkChoices.

    LOL! Guess who was young and naive?

    Rudd attacked Howard for reckless spending. You will not lie about our history, gweilo.

  70. .

    Young and naive, Snoopy, or Rhodesian and senile?

    http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/rudd-warns-of-howards-reckless-spending/726844

    Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd attempted to set prove his fiscal restraint at his official campaign launch today by promising only a fraction of what Prime Minister John Howard pledged on Monday, but Mr Howard says the comparison is deceitful.

    No shit John!

  71. Snoopy

    Rudd attacked Howard for reckless spending. You will not lie about our history, gweilo.

    It’s called due diligence Dot. Rudd’s predilection for lying, his incompetence and his wife’s uncanny luck to predict a significant Queensland government decision to her advantage were all there for those that had a desire to look beyond puff pieces on Kochie’s Sunrise.

  72. Snoopy

    or Rhodesian and senile?

    Is Rhodesian supposed to be an insult, Dot?

  73. Boambee John

    Norman Church at 1116

    Those who were stupid enough to vote for him got what they deserved. Good and hard.

    Unfortunatley those of us who didn’t vote for him also got it good and hard!

  74. .

    Just admit you were wrong Snoopy. FFS.

  75. .

    …no. Zimbabwe is a shithole, Rhodesia wasn’t so bad.

  76. Snoopy

    Just admit you were wrong Snoopy. FFS.

    How can I be wrong, Dot? Historical facts and lived experience support me. Let’s face it. You were wittingly conned by a charlatan. Worse, you still can’t admit it.

    Sad.

  77. Dave in Marybrook

    The Labor government of 2007-13 does indeed have a formiddable record of spectacular spending and showboat politicking. But surely Kevin Rudd’s most crushing triumph is not that his Liberal successors cannot demonstrate any achievements to compare, but rather that they betrayed so much of their base and spent so much of their own political capital endorsing and upholding Rudd’s legacy because they wanted to inherit his popularity.

  78. .

    You are wrong Snoopy because you reckoned Rudd never criticised Howard from the right.

    This is important as Neil is defending Howard saying it was inevitable he lost, and pivoting rightwardly would not have helped.

    If you can’t remember stuff, use a diary.

    …and no I wasn’t “taken in” by Rudd, WorkChoices was poorly drafted but nevertheless very important. The only redeeming feature he had was he was gun friendly. By 2008 he was governing unconstitutionally – collecting taxes without the requisite law. The governor general ought to have sacked him and called for a general election.

  79. Snoopy

    You are wrong Snoopy because you reckoned Rudd never criticised Howard from the right.

    Dotty, please be kind and provide a link. I said you must have been young and naive to believe Rudd. I’m beginning to think I was far too generous.

  80. .

    I don’t know if you are being obtuse or mendacious Snoopy.

    Again, per above:

    http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/rudd-warns-of-howards-reckless-spending/726844

    Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd attempted to set prove his fiscal restraint at his official campaign launch today by promising only a fraction of what Prime Minister John Howard pledged on Monday, but Mr Howard says the comparison is deceitful.

  81. Snoopy

    No, no, Dotty. Don’t be stupid. Where did I say that Rudd didn’t attack Howard from the Right? You are verballing again. My point is that you must be wilfully stupid to believe anything he said. I no longer consider you were just young and naive.

  82. Snoopy

    I’m off to do stuff. Bye.

  83. .

    The thing is, I did not believe Rudd.

    You’re just pissed I didn’t lay down and take your insult willingly.

Comments are closed.