Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Get a new bike from $50 per week

More evidence shows Tucker ahead of Humphries

By GnT 14 November 2007 48

With the election just around the corner, ABC have informed us of another poll which shows the Greens’ Kerry Tucker could steal the second ACT Senate seat away from the Liberals’ Gary Humphries.

Despite Senator Gaz being relatively popular here, this reflects how much Canberrans are fed up with Howard and his crew. As cranky said in another thread, “Gaz, you may well be a nice bloke, but you keep lousy company.”

What’s Your opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
48 Responses to
More evidence shows Tucker ahead of Humphries
Showing only Website comments
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
thetruth 2:43 pm 16 Nov 07

My point is it will not be only for 6 months – the greens WILL ave balance of power.

The deal with the labor party is – labor will not win majority in the senate who do we want to have the balance – not libs and the dems are sooooo out of contention so it will have to be the greens.

In return the Greens will sure up the house of reps vote.

Canberra will gain the type of influence it wants if it voted more for the Libs in the reps – just look over the border.

A green balance of power would be an unmitigated disaster for this country as a whole and I believe will result in a massive swing back to the Libs at the next election or they will become more centralist to keep power (just don’t see that happening)

jemmy 12:03 pm 16 Nov 07

Where have I implied I’ve orchestrated anything? I think you’ve misread my comments.

The fact is that generally ACT senators have no influence: there’s only 2, and they’re swallowed in the parties’ machines. There is a possibility for the next 6 months one can have national influence, provided they don’t subsume to the dominant parties.

You’ve had a lot to say in the last week, most of which has confused me on your understanding of how politics works. It’s not a matter of what should be, or ideal, or fair, if you can’t actually achieve it; it’s a matter of getting a result. Most times you have to do deals with people you dislike. I dislike the Greens, but if voting Green in the ACT will restore Senate oversight of the House AND give an ACT senator some power for 6 months, I’ll do it. If you allow your dislike of Brown or Tasmanian logging or whatever else to affect your tactics and you elect major party senators, then you remove even that small 6 month window of ACT influence before the Senate changes completely in July.

thetruth 8:48 am 16 Nov 07

Oh I am so glad that you have the rest of the country worked out so that you can orchestrate a we will let one in and the rest of the country won’t strategy.

While you are at it I would like a Rudd victory but Gillard to lose her seat – can you also take out Albernese, Carr and another left wing space cadet?

jemmy 1:54 am 16 Nov 07

At the risk of repeating myself, vote *tactically*, don’t vote to align yourself with one of the tribes. (God, I hate tribalism.) If you vote Green in the Senate, all you are doing is changing ONE senate seat to remove the Libs stranglehold. You’re not putting Bob Brown in power or doing anything. It’s peculiar to the ACT that the Senator takes their seat immediately and not in July. I’m not saying the entire country vote Green, just here in the ACT. Come July, what the rest of the country voted will take effect and our two senators will be relegated back to their usual doorstop position, but in the meantime, We Weilded The Power, Ha Ha.

Elvis Las Canberras 12:20 am 16 Nov 07

Yep Kerrie is a bit nuts! I met with her several years back and she had her head in her hands (literally) when discussing some issues about Civic (and it has plenty of issues).

Supposedly forward thinking, she thought that bars with 20 seats should only have 20 people having a drink at them. I mentioned a holiday to Hobart where Knopwoods in Salamanca has 50-100 outside most Friday nights and she said that this would cause too many problems. I suggested she go down for a look (apart from having enjoyed the spectacle, she may have even learned something from her green comrades about blocking, opposing and stopping everything as they seem to be doing a good job of down there at the moment!).

thetruth 8:05 pm 15 Nov 07

Boomcat – no I am not a 15 year old liberal schmuk, nor am I a 40 – 50 something career public servant that wishes their life way blissfully remembering the Whitlam years as the zenith of their social past. But that just confirms my direspectful comment.

My point stands generations of skills, capital and social institutions will not be swept away with some dwebby training program.

Many people sustained by these industries have been doing it all their lives. Most of our power station infrastructure is coal fired. The reality is that the industrial shift is not simple and simplified solutions put forward by industrial and economic pygmies will not work and will cause more human misery and social dislocation.

You want fries with that order?

boomacat 6:57 pm 15 Nov 07

PS – that was supposed to have a 🙂 in it to express that I was joking (doubt a young Liberal would vote at all, let alone vote Labor in the Reps)!

boomacat 6:56 pm 15 Nov 07

thetruth – try actually reading the post before criticising it – I said that the industries were bottom of the economic food chain, not the people working in them.

You might have inferred that from the fact I emphasised the need to retrain those people to ensure their future livelihoods, but given you’re probably some 15 year old young Liberal schmuk that’s probably too much to ask.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | | |

Search across the site