<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Election year bits &#8216;n pieces</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mumble.com.au/?feed=rss2&#038;p=1597" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597</link>
	<description>Politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:23:47 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Lentern</title>
		<link>http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597&#038;cpage=1#comment-1885</link>
		<dc:creator>Lentern</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 01:24:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597#comment-1885</guid>
		<description>The Herald writer must be taking their cues from mumble, I&#039;d just finished reading Ross Gittens article which discussed at length albeit amongst other things the unwillingness of the government to have a real go at explaining things to the voters.

Your point about Tanner is interesting in that there is only one. If it were a handful you might say that many were just overly cautious being new to government. If there was nobody like Tanner one might think some directive has come from Rudd&#039;s office but with Lindsay saying what&#039;s on his mind that doesn&#039;t stack up either.   


Skimmed down to Erik Jensen and read about Qanda and how the would be gentle ride turned into the interview from hell. I don&#039;t know if I agreed with Jensen, more likely it was a calculated trade off than a lapse of judgement but he was right that it was no picnic. 


What Jensen appeared not to appreciate was just how unlikely many of the attendants (and young viewers) were likely to change their voting allegiance in the next twenty years and just how unrepresentative a bunch of bookish, rally attending youths are of the broader, apathetic youth vote. 

Personally I thought it was  fairly typical Rudd performance, offend nobody, stay out of trouble, throw in a couple of daggy expressions and sooth the audience before continuing if they got a bit grumpy &quot;I&#039;m just explaining how..&quot;(in a voice that says &#039;Please, hear me out.&#039;)

I&#039;d give him points for not getting into any real stick spots which I expect Abbott probably would do as the discussion wore on. Same as Swan who doesn&#039;t have the same verbal flexibility to get about. Gillard and Turnbull did a joint one from memory a while back: From memory Gillard came across as a  bit partisan, a bit nasty, Turnbull very carefully changed his tack depending on the issues and did extremely well but presumably opposition is easier than government and few have the communication skills of Turnbull.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Herald writer must be taking their cues from mumble, I&#8217;d just finished reading Ross Gittens article which discussed at length albeit amongst other things the unwillingness of the government to have a real go at explaining things to the voters.</p>
<p>Your point about Tanner is interesting in that there is only one. If it were a handful you might say that many were just overly cautious being new to government. If there was nobody like Tanner one might think some directive has come from Rudd&#8217;s office but with Lindsay saying what&#8217;s on his mind that doesn&#8217;t stack up either.   </p>
<p>Skimmed down to Erik Jensen and read about Qanda and how the would be gentle ride turned into the interview from hell. I don&#8217;t know if I agreed with Jensen, more likely it was a calculated trade off than a lapse of judgement but he was right that it was no picnic. </p>
<p>What Jensen appeared not to appreciate was just how unlikely many of the attendants (and young viewers) were likely to change their voting allegiance in the next twenty years and just how unrepresentative a bunch of bookish, rally attending youths are of the broader, apathetic youth vote. </p>
<p>Personally I thought it was  fairly typical Rudd performance, offend nobody, stay out of trouble, throw in a couple of daggy expressions and sooth the audience before continuing if they got a bit grumpy &#8220;I&#8217;m just explaining how..&#8221;(in a voice that says &#8216;Please, hear me out.&#8217;)</p>
<p>I&#8217;d give him points for not getting into any real stick spots which I expect Abbott probably would do as the discussion wore on. Same as Swan who doesn&#8217;t have the same verbal flexibility to get about. Gillard and Turnbull did a joint one from memory a while back: From memory Gillard came across as a  bit partisan, a bit nasty, Turnbull very carefully changed his tack depending on the issues and did extremely well but presumably opposition is easier than government and few have the communication skills of Turnbull.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Graham</title>
		<link>http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597&#038;cpage=1#comment-1883</link>
		<dc:creator>Graham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:12:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597#comment-1883</guid>
		<description>I thought Rudds performance on Q and A was wooden and made him look rather unappealing. Sure it was a tough audience, but I think it also had something to do with the format. Rudd almost looked like he was in the dock and under cross examination. It would be most interesting to see Abbott in the same setting - my guess is that he would have used that larrikan charm that he can often turns on to great effect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought Rudds performance on Q and A was wooden and made him look rather unappealing. Sure it was a tough audience, but I think it also had something to do with the format. Rudd almost looked like he was in the dock and under cross examination. It would be most interesting to see Abbott in the same setting &#8211; my guess is that he would have used that larrikan charm that he can often turns on to great effect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rudd and rhetoric &#8211; The Stump</title>
		<link>http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597&#038;cpage=1#comment-1874</link>
		<dc:creator>Rudd and rhetoric &#8211; The Stump</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:41:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597#comment-1874</guid>
		<description>[...] interesting post this morning by Peter Brent at Mumble. Under the heading &#8220;Rhetorically Challenged&#8221;, he says: During the Howard government’s [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] interesting post this morning by Peter Brent at Mumble. Under the heading &#8220;Rhetorically Challenged&#8221;, he says: During the Howard government’s [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597&#038;cpage=1#comment-1873</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:35:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597#comment-1873</guid>
		<description>Si.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Si.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony</title>
		<link>http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597&#038;cpage=1#comment-1872</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:31:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mumble.com.au/?p=1597#comment-1872</guid>
		<description>Peter,

Do you mean &quot;nicks&quot; as in pinches?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peter,</p>
<p>Do you mean &#8220;nicks&#8221; as in pinches?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
