My vote

I have always, always, always, always voted Liberal.
Why?
I thought they were right, and everyone else was wrong.

Less and less now do I think they are right and everyone else is wrong.
Now they are both right and both wrong. So how to vote.

I am fortunate enough to be comfortable. I am not in desperate need of anything. I don't need more money, better health care, better schools, better public transport, lower interest rates or higher housing affordability. I am secure in my career and am employable, I can access affordable child care, I live where there is little crime, my local beaches are clean and I have enough water.

So how should I vote?

I have the luxury of not having to think about today, tomorrow, next week, next month, or even next year. I do not even have to think about the next five years. I'm thinking about the next ten to twenty years. And what is the point of difference between the parties regarding Australia's future, thinking that far out?

1. Our relationship with the US. The Americanisation of Australia. I used to think that having choice was the fairest way for a society to operate. I think that the US model of "choice" is ineffective and unfair. As Peter Garrett famously penned "The rich get richer, the poor get the picture". I agree. I see our relationship with the US as being corrupt. Not financially, but morally. This is not the direction I want Australia to take. I'd prefer the European model. Better services but higher taxes. Less choice but better outcomes.

2. Kyoto. I used to think that if China and the US didn't sign, then what's the point? I used to think that since we have met the targets then isn't that what matters? I now think that we should have signed it. Why? It the point of it. It is a symbol that we care and no matter the insignificance of our contribution, a lot of small amounts add up to a lot. To put any reason forward why we should not sign is just an excuse. We don't need excuses, we need solutions. And the best place to start is at the beginning. Aspirations turn into plans turn into actions turn into outcomes.

3. Iraq. This is not just morally corrupt but all other types too. Make love not war. And all that. Enough said.

So I'm voting Green. There, I said it. I never thought I'd say it but there you go. I'm no "greeny" save the frogs and shit, but my values are now firmly aligned with theirs on climate change and foreign affairs.

And Bob Brown will turn straight for Missy Higgins. Enough said.

The debate?

Or was it a popularity contest? I agree that John Howard has all the charisma of a John Howard, but I can't believe that people think Rudd has much more.

I started off with the decision: to worm or not to worm. As it turns out, I should have taken my Combantrin and watched the ABC. The 60 minutes audience were voting before anything was said. Literally. It simply made the worm irrelevant, except for the relative difference between what each leader had to say about any particular topic, or who seemed to be more credible about one topic or another. I must say that I did laugh a couple of times. Once, in a slip of the most Freudian kind, Rudd almost said "Mr Coward" instead of "Mr Howard" until he caught himself.

I'll divide this post into two parts, the synopsis, and the blow by blow commentary.

SYNOPSIS

Rudd wins when they talk about:
- Tax on higher income earners
- Kyoto
- George Bush

Howard wins when they talk about:
- Unions
- Practical environment solutions
- China

Pretty even on other things, like Indigenous affairs, Iraq, education, interest rates, inflation, child care.

It seemed the risks for both sides are with the team they have behind them. Johnny got poor marks when Turnbull and Costello are mentioned, and likewise Rudd when Combet and Shorten are spoken about.

COMMENTARY

I did like that the cricket analogy was used at the start. The PM sent Kevvy in to bat.
The Labour innings went like this....

The Labour openers score well with a few beautiful cut shots to the boundary in the first over. The cost of living comments are paying off well for Rudd.

After 10 overs, it's 0/65.

Johnny is still flat. But then he changes bowlers, brings on the spinners. Let's not get back to the old days with Union bosses!

After 20 overs, it's looking better for the home side. Both openers are back in the pavilion and it's 2/112.

Some comments about TV ads and broadband help the batting side here. It looks like those two wickets have not slowed down the scoring at all.

After 30 overs, it's 2/187.

Oh no, a dropped catch for the government. Why did he confirm that Costello would be the next captain! And he's doing a great job as vice captain now!

After 40 overs, it's moved on to 2/261. It looks like a big score to chase down.

More talk about unions, this should help the bowlers. And yes, finally the breakthrough! Comments about union financial support to the Labour party brings about a run-out. The new batsman to the crease is not fazed, the very next ball is launched over the boundary for six! Apparently people like what the unions did with James Hardie victims!

At the end of their 50 overs, the visitors (and the favourites by the way) and well in command, amassing a score of 3/339.

Now the home side is in to bat.

Poor start, no wickets but a slow run-rate. We shouldn't remind the public that the government have been in power for so long.

After 10 overs, 0/29. It's a long way home from here.

Wicket! A tax refund on computers yorks the batsman and knocks the middle stump out of the ground. Then more wickets tumble. Interest rates take their toll. A dodgy lbw decision makes things worse.

After 20 overs, 4/75. But it looks like rain.

Masterstroke from the PM! He calls Rudd pathetic! Brilliant batting PM! And it's a rain dance that has worked, the rain tumbles down and the covers go on.

This doesn't look good, we may not get a result.

But wait, it looks like things are clearing up. And yes, it's been announced that play will resume shortly. The revised target is 265 off 38 overs.

Back in the middle, the PM lays it all out, making statements about union policy on full employment being put aside over workplace control. Bit it's a swing and miss I'm afraid Johnny!

The next few overs pass and the battle is even.

After 30 overs, the government have regained some ground, but the win looks out of reach. 6/145. 120 needed off just 8 overs.

Nice play again from the PM. He needs to stay at the crease if the government are to have any hope in this match. Great hook shot over the link between the environment and the economy - good scoring opportunities here. 16 off that over!

Turnbull is out! Or is he? There's mass confusion in the middle. The PM backs Turnbull over bush and the crowd doesn't know whether to cheer or boo! The 3rd umpire gives him out. A good innings but now it's 7/199. 66 needed in 4 overs.

Trump cards now, talk about APEC and getting China to talk to the USA. Four! Four! Four! This is getting close!

No! Don't talk about Bush! Howard is out! 8/231.
Terrorism threat increased or decreased since Iraq? Out! 9/235.
Labour brings his strike bowler back straight away. Combat troops will be withdrawn from Iraq next year. But the edge goes through the slips! Missed chance there!

Are you sorry Johnny? Are you sorry that you're not sorry? No! It's disrespectful! Six! 9/250.
Just 14 needed off the last over.

Big Mal is at the crease now. Go Mal, Go Mal!
Four, Two, Dot, Two, Four!
Just two needed to win off the last ball!
Edged through cover, they get the first, coming back for the second, The return is fired in at the keeper..... and .... a run-out is it? Yes! it's a run-out! It's a tie! It's a hung debate.

More like a mastur-bate. It really was a wank, a toss, a pull, a slog, a tug, a jack-off.
I don't think it helped anyone make any decisions. I think it's foregone who Australia likes the most. We just won't know if this translates into votes.

I vote for Ray Martin. Or that dude from SkyNews, whoever he was.
Better yet, I vote for me.
Vote M for PM!
I'll give you free broadband, but you have to have my blog as your homepage. Deal?

Election?

So little Johnny has gone and called the election date. Giddy up.

Since I am interested in the outcome, but not to the extent that I will march in a street with a banner, my post is bound to be somewhat in the middle. I suppose I am right wing, but only because I'm not left. But isn't that the definition of right wing anyhow?

I think whatever way you're going to vote, it lines up with a certain biblical philosophy. Particularly about unconditional election.

I quote from wiki....

In Calvinism, this election is called "unconditional" because his choice to save someone does not hinge on anything inherent in the person or on any act that the person performs or belief that the person exercises.

Similar to voting Kevin'07, since a vote for Kevin is just a vote against Johnny. Our vote does not hinge on anything inherent in the person (he's as boring as Johnny) or any act that the person performs (what has he done??) or belief that the person exercises (except that he believes the opposite to Johnny).

or.....

the Armenian doctrine of conditional election in which God's eternal choice to save a person is conditioned on God’s certain foreknowledge of future events, namely, that certain individuals would exercise faith and trust in response to God's offer of salvation.

Similar to voting for Johnny, since our vote is all about our belief that we have foreknowledge of future events, namely, that voters would exercise faith and trust in response to Johnny's offer of a strong economy.

I wonder if there's an unconditional election doctrine for the Greens?
There used to be one for the Democrats, but I can't remember who they are anymore.