11-08-2013 05:28 PM - edited 11-08-2013 05:30 PM
on
11-08-2013
07:57 PM
- last edited on
11-08-2013
08:03 PM
by
underbat
Kevin Rudd broke the debate rules by taking in notes for his opening and closing addresses. Yet referring to them still make him look unsure and lacking in authority.
Abbott won by the length of the straight. He didn’t just deny Rudd the win Rudd badly needed - he actually smashed Rudd and showed he was more ready for government.
Abbott came out looking prime ministerial, if anything.
But the format is a shocker. Almost no engagement.
Verdicts:
To Abbott:
Laurie Oakes
Michael Kroger
David Speers
Ben Packham
Channel 7 worm
To Rudd:
Peter van Onselen
Graham Richardson (although he’s backing off now)
Even:
Kieran Gilbert
Chris Kenny (now backing off and leaning to Abbott)
Even the talking heads who amazingly call it a Rudd win or draw have nothing but criticism for Rudd.
Major Rudd flaws: cheating on his notes, reading his notes, lacking specifics, being called out on scares, looking flat, deferring responsibility for a decision on a second Sydney airport to his deputy, being accused by Abbott of waffling when, er, he was waffling.
A major disaster.
on 11-08-2013 07:59 PM
WELL DONE KEV!!!!
WINNER!!!
on 11-08-2013 08:01 PM
on 11-08-2013 08:04 PM
on 11-08-2013 08:12 PM
Laurie Oakes said Abbott was really the winner
on 11-08-2013 08:14 PM
Was Laurie Oakes asleep during the debate?
The worm said Kevvie was the winner.
The rules said no notes, maybe that is a silly rule?
on 11-08-2013 08:16 PM
@clair.de.lune wrote:Laurie Oakes said Abbott was really the winner
He was but the diehards are to blinded by their desperation to admit that and blinded by their hate of Abbott and anything Liberal.
Abbott wiped the floor with Rudd and Rudd lost badly. The Labor lovers on here know it but just wont admit it
on 11-08-2013 08:19 PM
11-08-2013 08:27 PM - edited 11-08-2013 08:28 PM
The Age readers say Kev won.
56% Kev
on 11-08-2013 08:28 PM