The best scenario would be if the MP's convinced Kevin they were going to vote for him then didnt.

Rudd 15. Gillard. All the rest

They need their heads banged together.
It's ok for them, they retire on fat super, we have to live with the consequences if the austerity Tories get into government, because of this nonsense.
They both claim to be Labor, from working class backgrounds and committed to policies rather than personalities, yet can find nothing better to do than fight over who wears the big hat, like inane children.
Spoils of defeat and they're not even back in opposition!

It's pretty clear now its all out in the open. Rudd is about Rudd.

The general consensus is that Gillard is electoral poison: disliked, distrusted and dismissed. In contrast, Rudd is one of the most popular politicians in the country.

"The media has been less than honest about how they as insiders have been part of the campaign run by anonymous sources."

The media pretend that they report events neutrally, when they are actively involved in the events. They then deny that they are actively involved.

This won't be over until either Rudd or Gillard leave altogether, and if it's Rudd who leaves, he'd still be bitching and gossiping to the press for a while after.

Hopefully we'll start to see some serious consideration of what an Abbott government would be like.

I doubt Rudd can possibly win the leadership, and I am sure he knows that. Therefore I give him credit for playing a longer game than next week's leadership spill. Whatever one thinks of Rudd's personal qualities, there is a consensus he is a thinker (no doubt this alone accounts for a lot of the dislike some colleagues feel for him).

Perhaps he is driven by personal ambition but his actions are also consistent with a deliberate strategy to create a new centrist movement, within or outside the shell of the ALP, that is not beholden to the likes of Paul Howes, Bill Ludwig and whoever is running the NSW Labor Council these days. If that's his objective, good luck to him.

Ken says:

"Perhaps he is driven by personal ambition but his actions are also consistent with a deliberate strategy to create a new centrist movement, within or outside the shell of the ALP, that is not beholden to the likes of Paul Howes, Bill Ludwig and whoever is running the NSW Labor Council these days."

That is news to me. Where does he spell that out?

Rudd could have waited until Julia Gillard’s popularity crumbled away. He could have then made the challenge around June 2013, a few months out from the 2013 election. He probably would have regained the prime ministership with little fight.

Its lose lose for Labor.
What will they do with Gillard if Rudd gets a majority. Put a lampshade on her head? And, how long will it take the media to bore of Kevin again?
Its all a bit funny really. Abbott and co must be pissing themselves.

Rudd could have waited until Julia Gillard’s popularity crumbled away. He could have made the challenge around June 2013, a few months out from the 2013 election. He probably would have regained the prime ministership with little fight.

"The media has been less than honest about how they as insiders have been part of the campaign run by anonymous sources. They have hidden their role in the media/political nexus, and they have deceived us about what the way they have both been manipulated by Rudd's destabolizing campaign and their role in manufacturing the leadership crisis."

Michael Gawenda confirms the above with respect to Rudd's so-called 'campaign of destabilisation'? He says that on the evidence so far, there are reporters and commentators - as well as editors and broadcasting bigwigs - who have allowed things to be said and reported that they know not to be true.

There are journalists out there now who are retailing lies. They are doing so on the basis that any briefings they received from Rudd and his supporters were given on the basis of anonymity or even on the basis of 'background'.