Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,975
In view of the fact that the debate was at the Press Club, it's a reasonable guess that most of the audience was from the Left and biased that way before the debate began.
In view of the fact that the debate was at the Press Club, it's a reasonable guess that most of the audience was from the Left and biased that way before the debate began.Watching the debate on TV and notice the infamous worm more often + or going up for Rudd and going down for Abbot!
PS: When Abbot was talking about local boards for hospitals the worm liked him. Crititism of unions and mention of workplace relations he went sour.
In view of the fact that the debate was at the Press Club, it's a reasonable guess that most of the audience was from the Left and biased that way before the debate began.
...
it's a reasonable guess that most of the audience was from the Left and biased that way before the debate began.
I only caught the last 30 minutes of the debate so I can't comment on who was the better overall. However, I was very disappointed in Abbott's style. His constant pointing of his finger at Rudd just came across as very bad manners, to me at least. He also interrupted Rudd on may occasions, but I didn't see the reverse happen. It may be OK in parliament, but on a TV debate he should have been a bit better groomed on how to act.
Indeed.I only caught the last 30 minutes of the debate so I can't comment on who was the better overall. However, I was very disappointed in Abbott's style. His constant pointing of his finger at Rudd just came across as very bad manners, to me at least. He also interrupted Rudd on may occasions, but I didn't see the reverse happen. It may be OK in parliament, but on a TV debate he should have been a bit better groomed on how to act.
In view of the fact that the debate was at the Press Club, it's a reasonable guess that most of the audience was from the Left and biased that way before the debate began.
Indeed.
Tony Abbott largely conducted himself as if he was having a one-on-one debate without an audiance. He was trying though as there were times where he clearly made a conscious effort to look towards the camera but he too often slipped back to looking at Kevin Rudd, pointing the finger, interrupting and at one point laughing at Rudd's comments.
THE big fat lie being peddled by the Rudd government - that Tony Abbott ripped $1 billion out of the public hospital system - fails on three counts. First, the Opposition Leader can scarcely be accused of gouging the states when he was not even health minister at the time the funding deal was done. Second, the so-called cut was a relatively small reduction in a previously projected increase in funds to the states. And third, the $1bn-plus reduction over five years from July 2003 was designed to partly offset John Howard's subsidies to private health funds, and thus to private hospitals.
A cut in forward estimates but an increase in real terms. It depends on the point of view from which a case is argued.I noticed that every time Rudd was telling porkies the worm went up. They particularly liked his lies about Abbott gutting the public hospital lsystem;
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ations-on-health/story-e6frg71x-1225843986576
It's not surprising Abbott was losing his cool.
An objective perspective I heard today was, "Hardened liberal supports will consider that Tony Abbott won the debate, Hardened labour supporters will consider that Kevin Rudd won the debate and neutral, swinging, uncommited voters will follow the worm".
Interestingly, one uncommited voter I know advised that they cringed every time Tony Abbott opened his mouth to answer a question. Their perspective was that "Each time Mr Abbott was asked a question, Mr Abbott seemed to be trying to find away to denigrate Kevin Rudd and avoid the actual questions".
one uncommited voter I know advised that they cringed every time Tony Abbott opened his mouth to answer a question.
I found the Polygraph chart at the bottom of the screen during the debate trhe best bit of the whole thing.
Vote1! for Polygraph charts
It would make for a more interesting debate if the pollies could see the 'worm' in front of them!
N.T
I didn’t want to see the debate, so cannot comment on this one.
But last time worm too, moved against Liberal representative as soon as he opened his mouth.
So surely it was predetermined and not influenced by the debate.
Happy, the comment was made by ABC commentator (radio) this evening that the worm turned upward everytime either man made a positive comment, and turned downward with every negative comment. I didn't see the debate, but perhaps this makes sense? i.e. we are really sick of the constant criticism of one party toward the other, and long for positive, useful policies which will actually make a difference to our lives.Not sure how you come to that conclusion, its the Press Club a room full of journos not the 7:30 Report.
I thought here we go again when Abbott opened with the usual broken promises jargon, which I felt had no relevance considering the whole debate was about reform. I wish I listened to the radio to avoid Rudd's continuous smirking and overcompensated hand gestures.
Good point, Duckman. You're right. viz particularly the Four Corners programme on Tony Abbott where the journalist focused to a quite unreasonable extent on Abbott's religious background. If ever there was a case of biased reporting, this would be it.The media also need to start to lift their game. Can anyone see any similarities to the Climate Change Debate of 12 months ago? I certainly can.
Remember 18 months ago when Labor released the ETS policy - instead of putting the fine tooth comb through Labor's policy the media went to town on the Opposition for their lack of policy detail.
Perhaps so. But consider now how different a tune Paul Kelly is singing.I can actually recall reading Paul Kelly......"The Coalition need to embrace an ETS or risk political obscurity at the next election".
Perhaps they do. And obviously the government has more to release re its total health policy.My bet is, if Abbott keeps his power dry on this one (and he is taking some hits in the interim), he can come over the top of Labor closer to the election by trumping the Labour health policy. This was half suggested by Glenn Milne on Insiders last Sunday - they have some radical, practical solutions to excite voters.
Only if Mr Abbott actually has something better to offer.Just as the the public were dissolutioned with a complicated ETS, Abbott can expose Rudd's health scheme as more of the same.
Very astute comments, moXJO. I agree that Tony Abbott may have gone about as far as he can go with the 'hard hitting' negative comments, in the absence of any actual forward thinking policy. If he's not careful he will throw away the advantage he has gained so far.Abbott is no where near as polished as Rudd, and he was a bit of a fool to take him on in a debate. I hope the libs are building up their policies as all the finger pointing at labor is starting to fall on deaf ears. Constant negative comments from the libs (even though labor has managed to stuff up everything they touch) won’t win many votes. Labor changes to the next policy so fast, that the public seem to forget the previous stuff up. Whether this method has shortened voter’s attention span or what? Is beyond me.
Rudd’s spin and deflection techniques are world class. Let’s face it, he knows what the people want to hear. And Abbott needs to cotton on to the fact that he is not in a boxing match that he can win by brute strength alone.
Yes, in presuming they didn't have a monitor in view, that would be fun, if nothing else, to see how they reacted.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?