View Full Version : Australian PM John Howard wins re-election
efuseakay
10-09-2004, 08:43 AM
Congrats Mr. Howard! :thumbsup:
Yes! Do you know how close it was? From what I understand it was supposed to be a very close call.
Pyrion
10-09-2004, 09:54 AM
Howard: 52.2%.
Latham: 47.8%.
Wow...that's quite a split. Everyone seems to be at such odds everywhere.
Congrats to Howard! Congrats to the US!
Mr Xer Kibard
10-09-2004, 09:58 AM
I'm very unhappy about Howard's re-election. :(
Cousin Dave
10-09-2004, 10:12 AM
This election mirrors our own.
I hope we have the same results.:)
Mr Xer Kibard
10-09-2004, 10:13 AM
Simply because the Howard government is sacrificing Australia's long-term prosperity for short-term economic gain. Howard's health, education and environmental policies are inadequate.
ethics
10-09-2004, 12:05 PM
Congrats Mr. Howard! :thumbsup:
WOOT! This is awesome!!!
Way to go AUSTRALIA!!!!!
Sierra Mike
10-09-2004, 12:24 PM
YES! :)
SM
I wonder if Iraqis know and/or understand what this means?
Mr Xer Kibard
10-09-2004, 01:10 PM
Howard's re-election means nothing to Iraqis considering Australia is quite insignificant on the global stage. Australia is hardly important to the situation in Iraq.
Are you kidding? Of course Australia is important to the situation in Iraq. And the war on terror. Why would you minimize their contribution and support to both?
Techie2000
10-09-2004, 03:38 PM
Politically their support might be important, but logistically, <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/CIB/2002-03/03Cib11.pdf">this PDF</a> and <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=151051">this wire story</a> shows their support is not much compared to what we have put in.
efuseakay
10-09-2004, 04:39 PM
Politically their support might be important, but logistically, <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/CIB/2002-03/03Cib11.pdf">this PDF</a> and <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=151051">this wire story</a> shows their support is not much compared to what we have put in.
Yes... if Kerry were elected, he would replace them with France, who only flew 8% of the sorties in Kosovo while we flew 70%!
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9910d&L=albanews&F=&S=&P=2161
Try telling the Aussies that their contributions in Iraq are insignificant. They are giving what they can... unlike some other countries... :kissmy:
http://www.defence.gov.au/opcatalyst/images/gallery/011004/index.htm
http://www.defence.gov.au/opcatalyst/gallery.htm
Techie2000
10-09-2004, 04:59 PM
Please explain to me how Kerry would get rid of Australian support and replace them with the French?
Anyways I am not saying that it is bad that they are supporting us, as I think that putting even a little is better than none, but at the same time I think that treating it as if Australia's countribution is the make or break for the Iraqis is not a valid thing to do. Bush would have gone with or without the Aussies and anyone and everyone else in our coalition.
I really fail to see why a comparison to us has to be made. The idea of Australia all of a sudden leaving the coalition and Iraq in a lurch and that not being important to Iraq and the fight against terrorism is, to me, the wrong way to be looking at things. That's just my opinion. I think it's sad there are some who minimize the contribution these various countries are making.
Techie2000
10-09-2004, 05:13 PM
I really fail to see why a comparison to us has to be made. The idea of Australia all of a sudden leaving the coalition and Iraq in a lurch and that not being important to Iraq and the fight against terrorism is, to me, the wrong way to be looking at things. That's just my opinion. I think it's sad there are some who minimize the contribution these various countries are making.Leaving the war in Iraq and leaving the war on terror are two different issues. If they leave us in fighting the war in Iraq, it's not a big problem, if they leave us in the war on terror, that's a much different and bigger problem.
Well, perhaps to you they are, to me they aren't. Heh, go figure...big difference between Bush and Kerry too. :)
ravital
10-09-2004, 09:29 PM
This election mirrors our own.
I hope we have the same results.:)
Or better (like a wider margin).
Congratulations Australia, you get it.
http://www.globalaffairs.org/forum/images/smilies/appl.gif
Mr Xer Kibard
10-10-2004, 02:44 AM
Are you kidding? Of course Australia is important to the situation in Iraq. And the war on terror. Why would you minimize their contribution and support to both? I'm Australian and I can tell you now that this election battle was fought over domestic issues. Iraq and the 'war on terror' played only a minor role in the election.
Please don't attempt to turn Howard's re-election into a referendum on the Iraq invasion.
ethics
10-10-2004, 02:49 AM
While you are Australian, please don't attempt to speak for all Australians? Thanks.
Mr Xer Kibard
10-10-2004, 02:54 AM
When did I attempt to? I was simply stating that foreign policy was not a major election issue. Howard was re-elected because of his economic management.
ethics
10-10-2004, 03:04 AM
When did I attempt to? I was simply stating that foreign policy was not a major election issue. Howard was re-elected because of his economic management.
And Cyd pointed out a positive from an American point of view. It's a positive thing for us.
ditch
10-10-2004, 04:05 AM
Mr Xer, Latham, the opposition leader, was promising to bring troops home from Iraq by Xmas. [Yes, Techie, there are not a lot involved but we have more there than the French do.] That was a significant part of his policy platform. Howard won convincingly by saying he would stay. That makes foreign policy AN issue but yes , certainly not the only one. We hardly have any choice but to fight the war on terror with the Bali bombing and the Oz embassy being bombed in Jakarta. Howard rolled in on the results of a strong economic performance. There was not a lot to criticise about the economy although MrXer, you may disagree with that.
The result was virtually decided within two hours of the polling booths closing. Latham was not the man for the job and the results proved it.
Health and education were other major issues, as usual.
The Greens did extremely well which is a positive thing. The balance of power in the Senate is in the hands of a new party, The Family First Party. Merely a collection of religious bigots closely alligned to the Liberals some say. Liberals here BTW are the Conservatives. That's what happens when you live dfown here hanging on with your toes. ;)
I'm smiling. I voted for Howard who happens to be my local member in the seat of Benelong. There was some strong campainging against him which resulted in a 2.5% negative swing. Labor needs to go home and do some soul searching.
araina
10-10-2004, 10:08 AM
When did I attempt to? I was simply stating that foreign policy was not a major election issue. Howard was re-elected because of his economic management.
You did nothing.
Well...I'll restate that( I guess that counts as a "flip-flop" in the white and black right wing world).
You irritated some people who are looking for some sort of vindication for supporting Bush's war in Iraq. Any sort of vindication.
They are willing to overlook the fact that Iraq wasn't the major factor in your elections (unlike here) but going ahead and equating Howard's victory as an Australian public referendum on Iraq.
If tomorrow, Schroeder would fall from the stairs, it would be a sign from God that he was punished for not supporting the war in Iraq.
ravital
10-10-2004, 10:37 AM
Well...I'll restate that( I guess that counts as a "flip-flop" in the white and black right wing world).
You irritated some people who are looking for some sort of vindication for supporting Bush's war in Iraq. Any sort of vindication.
You left out the best parts... we enjoy watching people suffer in faraway lands, we foam at the mouth and party every time a brown child with a funny religion is killed, and we are Bruins fans.
That you would describe the centrists here as a "black and white right-wing world" - after the 18 months of black & white posts I've seen from you, is, well, it would have been funny if it weren't sad.
ethics
10-10-2004, 11:04 AM
Welcome to my ignore list. Conrgats, you are the first and only one to make it there.
ethics
10-10-2004, 11:07 AM
Mr Xer, Latham, the opposition leader, was promising to bring troops home from Iraq by Xmas. [Yes, Techie, there are not a lot involved but we have more there than the French do.] That was a significant part of his policy platform. Howard won convincingly by saying he would stay. That makes foreign policy AN issue but yes , certainly not the only one.
Thanks Ditch. In reading the Australian sources, I got the gist that Iraq war WAS significant.
You did nothing.
Well...I'll restate that( I guess that counts as a "flip-flop" in the white and black right wing world).
You irritated some people who are looking for some sort of vindication for supporting Bush's war in Iraq. Any sort of vindication.
They are willing to overlook the fact that Iraq wasn't the major factor in your elections (unlike here) but going ahead and equating Howard's victory as an Australian public referendum on Iraq.
If tomorrow, Schroeder would fall from the stairs, it would be a sign from God that he was punished for not supporting the war in Iraq.
I find it amusing you would feel free to interpret what I wrote, incorrectly I might add, since you don't know me, buy hey...what ever blows your dress up.
Anyway, they are staying. :) Pretty damn cool if you ask me!
Call it vindication, call it what you will...I'll just call it a reality. Good for the coalition, good for the fight against the terror mongers and GREAT for Iraq!
:kissmy:
ethics
10-10-2004, 11:13 AM
=Good for the coalition, good for the fight against the terror mongers and GREAT for Iraq!
And great for the US and the coalition. :)
It's terrific.
araina
10-10-2004, 01:41 PM
You left out the best parts... we enjoy watching people suffer in faraway lands, we foam at the mouth and party every time a brown child with a funny religion is killed, and we are Bruins fans.
If you say so.... :)
araina
10-10-2004, 01:42 PM
Welcome to my ignore list. Conrgats, you are the first and only one to make it there.
No problem.
Someone tell him if that is meant to make me lose sleep at night, I don't care either.
ditch
10-10-2004, 05:32 PM
Thanks Ditch. In reading the Australian sources, I got the gist that Iraq war WAS significant.
Iraq was mentioned a lot early in the campaigns of both parties. I think most people, regardless of whether they agreed with joining the coalition in the first place, would see that pulling troops out by Xmas is wrong and a policy of the Labor party because it was simply an opportunity to present an alternative to the electorate. An alternative that did not have broad appeal.
ethics
10-10-2004, 05:33 PM
Iraq was mentioned a lot early in the campaigns of both parties. I think most people, regardless of whether they agreed with joining the coalition in the first place, would see that pulling troops out by Xmas is wrong and a policy of the Labor party because it was simply an opportunity to present an alternative to the electorate. An alternative that did not have broad appeal.
Let me ask you this then, if the Conservative party presented the same policy to Iraq as Howard, would they have a better shot at winning? Perhaps won the elections?
ditch
10-10-2004, 05:41 PM
Let me ask you this then, if the Conservative party presented the same policy to Iraq as Howard, would they have a better shot at winning? Perhaps won the elections?
The Liberals here, Howard's govt, are the Conservatives.
:) Liberal here means a different thing to "liberal" up your way.
No I don't think the opposition would have won anyway. Howard is popular and has a better team than Labor. I think though that a different policy on Iraq would have given Labor/Latham more credibility and they would not have then been seen as just trying to be different for the sake of it.
ethics
10-10-2004, 05:43 PM
The Liberals here, Howard's govt, are the Conservatives.
:) Liberal here means a different thing to "liberal" up your way.
I am aware of that, I thought I worded my question correctly, Ditch. :)
No I don't think the opposition would have won anyway. Howard is popular and has a better team than Labor. I think though that a different policy on Iraq would have given Labor/Latham more credibility and they would not have then been seen as just trying to be different for the sake of it.
Ok thank you.
Techie2000
10-10-2004, 05:51 PM
The Liberals here, Howard's govt, are the Conservatives.
:) Liberal here means a different thing to "liberal" up your way.Down under, everything really is upside down...:nut:
ditch
10-10-2004, 06:04 PM
I am aware of that, I thought I worded my question correctly, Ditch. :)
I read it as meaning the conservatives and Howard were two different things.
:)
ditch
10-10-2004, 06:05 PM
Down under, everything really is upside down...:nut:
Too much blood running to our heads. :)
efuseakay
10-10-2004, 08:01 PM
Here are the results if anyone is interested... too confusing for this American... ;)
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2004/results/
ditch
10-11-2004, 12:39 AM
Here are the results if anyone is interested... too confusing for this American... ;)
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2004/results/
The important thing to note about the results from your link is that the Liberals and Nationals govern in coalition. This gives them 86 seats compared to the Labor's 58. That's a landlside in any language. :)
The lack of wins indicated to the Greens and Democrats is surprising. I'll have a better look tonight. This iste of Anthony Greens is a very reliable source of info however as Green is very knowledgeable and up to date.
The Democrats and One Nation, formerly Pauline Hanson's party if you have heard of her, did bery badly at the expenxe of the Greens.
Mr Xer Kibard
10-13-2004, 05:46 AM
Mr Xer, Latham, the opposition leader, was promising to bring troops home from Iraq by Xmas. [Yes, Techie, there are not a lot involved but we have more there than the French do.] That was a significant part of his policy platform. Howard won convincingly by saying he would stay. That makes foreign policy AN issue but yes , certainly not the only one. Both Howard and Latham played down Iraq as an election issue. It proved to be only a minor issue with homeland security playing a larger role in the election battle.
People care more about interest rates than health, education and the environment in this country.
ditch
10-13-2004, 07:53 AM
Both Howard and Latham played down Iraq as an election issue. It proved to be only a minor issue with homeland security playing a larger role in the election battle.
People care more about interest rates than health, education and the environment in this country.
I would turn that around and say that Latham and Howard downplayed Iraq because the electorate did not see it as significant an issue as it will be in the US election. If we had they would have had to address it more fully. I also believe there are a significant number of us that see pulling out by Xmas is simply a ploy of Latham to appear different in policy to Howard.
And yes, health, education and to a lesser extent
, the environment, are the major issues. I would like to see the environment be given higher priority.
Mr Xer Kibard
10-25-2004, 05:08 PM
I would turn that around and say that Latham and Howard downplayed Iraq because the electorate did not see it as significant an issue as it will be in the US election. If we had they would have had to address it more fully. I also believe there are a significant number of us that see pulling out by Xmas is simply a ploy of Latham to appear different in policy to Howard. Public opinion was always divided on Iraq.
I would like to see the environment be given higher priority. Agreed. :)
Mr Xer Kibard
10-31-2004, 02:55 PM
Greens blame greed, ignorance
(AAP)
VOTER ignorance, greed and apathy returned the Coalition to government, a South Australian Greens MP said today.
Kris Hanna, a former state Labor backbencher who joined the Greens last year, today said he was disappointed with the majority of Australian voters.
"(Labor Leader Mark) Latham did his best to offer an alternative but too many Australians were not discerning or caring enough to vote (Prime Minister John) Howard out," Mr Hanna said.
"John Howard appealed to people's ignorance, greed and apathy."
Full article:
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11049399%255E36277,00.html
Unfortunatly, I agree with the above statements. :(
Piobaireachd
10-31-2004, 03:08 PM
Greens blame greed, ignorance
(AAP)
VOTER ignorance, greed and apathy returned the Coalition to government, a South Australian Greens MP said today.
Kris Hanna, a former state Labor backbencher who joined the Greens last year, today said he was disappointed with the majority of Australian voters.
"(Labor Leader Mark) Latham did his best to offer an alternative but too many Australians were not discerning or caring enough to vote (Prime Minister John) Howard out," Mr Hanna said.
"John Howard appealed to people's ignorance, greed and apathy."
Full article:
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11049399%255E36277,00.html
Unfortunately, I agree with the above statements. :(
So the candidate that YOU didn't like won so therefore the Australian people are stupid?
Just amazing....
Unfortunately we will see, read, and hear the same thing when GWB is reelected in this country.
ethics
10-31-2004, 03:15 PM
So the candidate that YOU didn't like won so therefore the Australian people are stupid?
Just amazing....
Unfortunately we will see, read, and hear the same thing when GWB is reelected in this country.
You'll probably see and hear the same thing if Kerry wins. Humans too readily believe garbage and trash as long as it agrees with their opinion.
Mr Xer Kibard
11-01-2004, 02:43 AM
So the candidate that YOU didn't like won so therefore the Australian people are stupid?
Just amazing.... I never said that. However, the Australian election was basically a battle between chartered accountants. Hardly inspirational.
ditch
11-01-2004, 03:35 AM
Greens blame greed, ignorance
(AAP)
VOTER ignorance, greed and apathy returned the Coalition to government, a South Australian Greens MP said today.
Kris Hanna, a former state Labor backbencher who joined the Greens last year, today said he was disappointed with the majority of Australian voters.
"(Labor Leader Mark) Latham did his best to offer an alternative but too many Australians were not discerning or caring enough to vote (Prime Minister John) Howard out," Mr Hanna said.
"John Howard appealed to people's ignorance, greed and apathy."
Of course Mr Xer, you are entitled to believe whatever you want, but Hanna, well he would say that wouldn't he. He's from one of the opposition parties. For Hanna to say that many who didn't vote for Latham were not discerning enough is hardly worth worrying about. Its obviously a sour grapes comment from a loser. How would Hanna know why people didn't vote for Latham? I didn't vote for Latham and it was not for the reasons he gives. The exact opposite in fact. I was discerning enough to be able to see that Latham was not the man for the job and voted accordingly. Howard appealed to peoples' ignorance, greed and apathy? In what ways? So those who voted for Latham were informed, generous and caring? Gee, how sweet.
Hanna is a loser running off at the mouth.