Do you realize the role of a prime minister is to act as a figure-head, not a policy decider? You are criticizing the government as a whole, not Abbott's shortcoming's specifically.

Anyway, down to your points, I agree with: - having no minister for science

• (and to add) Abbott being the minister for women.

• His stance on gay marriage/other conservative issues

• His stance on climate change/environmental issues

• subsidizing the mining industry which only accounts for 7% of Australia's GDP

Can you justify why $50billion needs to be spent on the NBN? How is that a worthy investment for people to get faster internet?

CEFC was not closed down, the government stopped subsidizing it saying it should survive on it's own if it's making a profit.

The government's stance on the following issues: - uni fee deregulation/hecs adjustment - medicare co-payment (wow $7)

and all the other budgetary issues you've listed were always entirely transparent. Please note there isn't unlimited money, you can't have the NBN funded, CSIRO funded, uni fees deregulated, PPL supported, medicare subsidized ... all at once. These are all debated issues, unless you want a raise in taxes, don't fairly expect to have everything in your best interests.

Broken promises about budget cuts to ABC/SBS - this happened and he should be held fully accountable.

So far, however, I am not convinced that "Abbott" has royally fucked the country over, and deserves to be killed.

You've listed issues pretty obviously in your vested interest, some guy in his mid-late 20's?

Lets just disregard how stupid everything in your second list of dot points.

The coalition's blind eye to Murdoch's tax evasion has nothing to do with Abbott, it was an issue with Gilliard, Rudd and Howard as well.