woohoo!! congratulations to julia gillard, not only australia's first woman prime minister, but now australia's first elected woman prime minister. i'm so glad that she has managed to put together a coalition to lead the country.not that i've been a huge fan of her approach towards assylum seekers & her response to mining companies. but here's hoping that the next couple of years will see an effective ETS in place - one that doesn't put an undue burden on the poor. and also a more humanitarian and compassionate treatment of those seeking refuge, but i'm not holding my breath on that one.
despite her faults, she is still light-years ahead of that tony abbott person, & i'm really glad that he's not our neighbouring PM. if that had happened, i suspect that the net migration figures between australia & nz would see a significant change in direction.
i'm sure that the new coalition government is going to struggle to do very much, given how tight the numbers are. and i'm also sure that the attacks on ms gillard simply for being a woman, and daring to be a childless one, will also continue. but still, i've got a smile on my face tonight, and i bet a lot of australian women do too.
10 comments:
And congrats to Julia for ignoring the wishes of the majority, for governing at any price and for not admitting when she lost the election. But being a woman is the main point, huh? And no, your delete will not affend.
Squire.
Squire
I presume you mean she's ignoring the wishes of the majority by forming a government despite the fact that the majority of voters didn't vote for her.
Doesn't almost every leader in a democratic system do that? I know in NZ the last time a Prime Minister's party commanded an actual majority of votes was in 1951. It's certainly been the norm in Australia for a good long time.
Lefties will justify anything to get the govt or leader they won't. I bet a lot of women are grimacing also, rather than smiling. Her govt won't last long, there is no moral mandate, Gillard will get punished next time around.
Squire.
What the hell is a "moral mandate"? And is it any different from an electoral mandate? Do you think Tony Abbott has a moral mandate to govern despite more people voting against his party than for it as well?
A moral mandate is when 400,000 Australians voted for the Opposition or another party, rather than Gillard and Labor. Abbott has the popular vote,yet Gillard refused to relinquish power. But Lefties only care about a means to an end, rather than fair play. If it's such a great victory for Gillard, how come she looked so shame-faced on TV. Labor are not exactly chuffing back the celebratory champagne, and no wonder. A stolen election, rather than a won one. Still, don't get so angry Hugh, you have your way...for now.
Squire
Believe me, I'm not at all a Gillard or Labor supporter. I don't share any of the joy expressed in this post at her election.
I just don't understand your logic. Even less now. I think you'll find a lot more than 400,000 Australians voted for another party. But you say Abbott "has the popular vote". The only thing he had over Gillard is that more people voted for his party than for Labor. Would you say that the party which gets the largest share of the popular vote is the only one that's entitled to govern? Would you say this even if the party's share was a lot less than 50%?
You could equally say that more Australians voted for parties that promised the fibre-to-the-home programme, so any government that wouldn't implement that program (eg a Coalition government) would be undemocratic.
Any sort of ETS will hit the poor.
Company pays ETS and charges more for its goods/services.
wow I just discovered this blog and was thinking 'hey cool, an onto it fem site!' until I read this post and realised that you're more excited about a women getting into power than the fact that her governments policies will fuck over the poor/imigrants/environment...
Get some fucking political/class analysis!
G.
well G, if you don't like what's written here, how about you don't bother stopping by to read it. and if you'd like to continue commenting here, i'd suggest you stop telling us what to write. if there's some analysis you'd like to see, how about you do it yourself & put it forward in a more intelligent fashion than we've seen from you thus far.
I'm with Hugh here, again I'm not a fan of Gillard and her politics but she has done what the political system has asked her to.
The election is not a Presidential one where the person with the most votes wins. We elect MPs and the leader of the party that gains the support of the most MPs becomes the PM. Simple as that.
If you think that the voting system should be proportional or anything else, then people should be campaigning for electoral change, not talking about "moral mandates" or having "lost the election" when clearly this isn't the case.
Post a Comment