Ranking our Worst Prime Ministers

Originally posted by frasier ↑

In today's Australian Greg Sheridan says:

I have been reflecting on that this morning. I recall the Whitlam era well - my first ever voter was in the 1972 election. I voted for Gough if only because of his promise to ban conscription and my turn was due.

I voted to oust him in the 1975 election. I can look back on his term without sentimentality.

Whitlam v Rudd v Gillard - they are the 3 standout contenders, no doubt at all. Gough was a shocker. He had a Treasurer far more economically illiterate than Swan, in Dr Jim Cairns, a man known for his philandering and Communist links. Gough had a largely untalented front bench. Not one had experience in government.

In the end, I spared Gough the prize. Why? For a few reasons:
- there is no doubt Whitlam had enormous presence and charisma, something the other two lack in spades. I met him after an election rally in King George Square Brisbane during the 1974 campaign. The big man came into the bar of the Crest hotel next door, where I had retired to with a friend, and worked the crowd, pumping hands and chatting. He shook my hand and we exchanged a few words. There is no doubt the man had an aura about him, you could feel it as soon as he entered a room. Some say Clinton is the same.

- finally, it boiled down to the fact that, despite the fact Whitlam's failings and disasters were easily as bad as the other two, he made some significant reforms with Medicare, the Family Court, no-fault divorce, free tertiary education, abolishing conscription [though we'd withdrawn troops anyway], to name a few. On the other hand, I struggle to think of even ONE worthwhile reform from the 6 years of Gillard and Rudd. Not even ONE. That's because....

- Whitlam was a man of vision and of principle. His philosophy was crash through or crash. Like him or not, like John Howard he strongly believed in issues and wanted them implemented. He stood for something. All of us know that Rudd and particularly Gillard stood for nothing - neither had any conviction at all, other than holding on to power,and voters sussed that out.

=============================================
In the end I decided:

1. Gillard
2. Rudd
3. Whitlam

============================================
I'd be interested in the views of those on HC who ACTUALLY experienced all 3 eras [

Expand

My father ran a business in Whitlams time. He said it was a complete disaster. Wages exploded and he ended up sacking about half his work force to cope with the salary issues and declining business activity. Inflation hit nearly 18% and govt spending lost the plot. He simply did not know what he was doing when it came down to it. We suffered a similar fate with rudd and gillard, the labor party breeds these people. Things improved and settled down under Fraser.
Rudd is quoted as saying that his hero was Whitlam and its funny how they were both sacked for incompetence. Rudd was the begining of the end for a lot of things decent and good in politics and Gillard was the worst. The introduction of the taxes, the lies, the infighting, the spin, the crimes and the unfair work act all got out of control for a special interest group who controlled labor. It was hell sitting this side of the desk and trying to make money when things were not going well anyway. They were a large imput into the dysfunction and division in society. I personally disliked what they did to Australia for their own political madness and gain. Hope we dont remember them through rose tinted glasses as the left would have us believe. We deserve better and i could use less of the myth stuff pumped out of the left, some of us are not that stupid.