- Mar 10, 2009
- 7,268
- 1
- 0
Spare Tyre said:
Do you have a link to their "party program", or some official info about the platform they run on?
- Status
Do you have a link to their "party program", or some official info about the platform they run on?
- Nov 2, 2009
- 1,112
- 0
- 0
- Jun 16, 2009
- 19,654
- 2
- 0
The greens platforms are all about having a better "greener" planet and shutting down the economy. The greens did get Labor home as a lot of the seats they have won were only because of the greens which shows how the people of australia have rejected the labor party. Of course you are going to say the contrary to me Spare Tyre because you are a labor supporter. I think this was a monuemental effort by Abbott to get the liberals to where they are now and that needs to be recognised.
Another point that I would like to make is that i am sick of hearing labor people claiming that they kept Aus out of recession. The reason why they where able to give out so many handouts to the people was because they money the liberal government had in the bank because they brought the country into a very strong economic position. The government prior to Howard's Coalition government had the country into great debt and when the federal and state liberal governments got into power the brought the budget back into surplus. Liberal would of managed the recession far better than labor have and the country will go further backwards if they are elected back into parliament. The Liberal government would be a bit dissapointed with the result in NSW as they would of been hoping for a bigger swing to them but it was a swing none the less. I think the Corangamite seat in Victoria, to be so close in that seat where it is 50-50 is a big win for Liberal especially when that seat was likely to stay with Labor. People need to remember how dire the Liberal party was 6 months and a year ago and look where they are now. if Rudd was in Government this would of been a landslide win to the Coalition.
Another point that I would like to make is that i am sick of hearing labor people claiming that they kept Aus out of recession. The reason why they where able to give out so many handouts to the people was because they money the liberal government had in the bank because they brought the country into a very strong economic position. The government prior to Howard's Coalition government had the country into great debt and when the federal and state liberal governments got into power the brought the budget back into surplus. Liberal would of managed the recession far better than labor have and the country will go further backwards if they are elected back into parliament. The Liberal government would be a bit dissapointed with the result in NSW as they would of been hoping for a bigger swing to them but it was a swing none the less. I think the Corangamite seat in Victoria, to be so close in that seat where it is 50-50 is a big win for Liberal especially when that seat was likely to stay with Labor. People need to remember how dire the Liberal party was 6 months and a year ago and look where they are now. if Rudd was in Government this would of been a landslide win to the Coalition.
- Nov 2, 2009
- 1,112
- 0
- 0
- Apr 8, 2009
- 131
- 1
- 0
yeh i totally agree auscyclefan94.
like i work in mining and have been for 3 yrs. the way they talk about mining is so lame. greens wanna ban coal? how will they make metal? Ive done report after report on the possibilities of the world without coal and the skyrocketing demand for energy (esp in developing countries) means that we cant do without coal even if we wanted to. Anyone who votes greens arnt doing our country any favors.
labor didnt have to do much to get through the 'recession' after howard gave us the highest surplus in the developed world back in 07.
secondly, ur right abbott has done really well.
labor have [labor + greens + getUP + unions] all bankrolling and campaigning for them.
coalition have only themselves. one voice vs 4 major ones and they still managed to take more seats.
itll suck if they lose because of some independents.
like i work in mining and have been for 3 yrs. the way they talk about mining is so lame. greens wanna ban coal? how will they make metal? Ive done report after report on the possibilities of the world without coal and the skyrocketing demand for energy (esp in developing countries) means that we cant do without coal even if we wanted to. Anyone who votes greens arnt doing our country any favors.
labor didnt have to do much to get through the 'recession' after howard gave us the highest surplus in the developed world back in 07.
secondly, ur right abbott has done really well.
labor have [labor + greens + getUP + unions] all bankrolling and campaigning for them.
coalition have only themselves. one voice vs 4 major ones and they still managed to take more seats.
itll suck if they lose because of some independents.
Ferminal said:
Why didn't I get paid for this...
Admittedly I predicted ALP and also put my money on them
A big day/night for Australia, I guess I've regained some faith in "democracy" although supporters of either party would probably say it's a poor situation for the Lower House to be in. I'm not sure whether I'd prefer an ALP or Coalition minority government. Abbott is definitely a case of "be careful what you wish for", but the independents in Government and a Green-controlled Upper House would be a good moderator. On the other hand I think an ALP alliance with the ex-National independents could be amusing, if not effective, at least better than the shambolic nature of the last three years. This situation tends to remind me of what we had in W.A. just over two years ago, massive swing to the opposition but not enough to form government in their own right. In that case, the Liberals managed to buy the Nationals back. But I think Abbott has less to offer and is dealing with tougher characters.
Regardless, there will be a massive post-mortem inside Labor, McKew didn't seem at all impressed with the situation (tough luck for her, hero to zero in three years). Although he never lost his charm, Hawke looked disappointed, Keneally seemed devastated but Evans (Minister for Population?) almost looked liked he was expecting this result from the outset. Eric Abetz is nothing more than a goblin.
Liberals, Nationals and Greens were all big winners.
On a sad note, Wilson Tuckey lost his seat to the Nationals, this means Barnaby will have to increase his performance four-fold in order to keep parliament ridiculous.
Us informals had a positive swing too! http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseInformalByState-15508.htm
ABC website is showing LIB/NAT: 72 ALP: 70 GRN: 1 IND: 4 UNDECIDED: 3
I assume the fourth independent is the Tasmanian ex-Green.
The three they have left undecided should go one Coalition and the other two ALP.
You would consider the fourth independent to side on the left, although maybe it's no different to the other three on the right, we truly don't know.
If the Coalition end on 73 then I think the "most likely" outcome is forming a government with the three conservative indepedents. If Labor manage to take 73 then they could be able to negotiate with one of the final three independents and tentatively hold power.
I assume the fourth independent is the Tasmanian ex-Green.
The three they have left undecided should go one Coalition and the other two ALP.
You would consider the fourth independent to side on the left, although maybe it's no different to the other three on the right, we truly don't know.
If the Coalition end on 73 then I think the "most likely" outcome is forming a government with the three conservative indepedents. If Labor manage to take 73 then they could be able to negotiate with one of the final three independents and tentatively hold power.
Australia has imitated Britain pretty quickly: hung parliaments and minority governments. Could it be the Westminster-style, two-party system has run its course and no longer represents the diverse populaces of modern nations?
Perhaps both countries may need to re-think their democracies and make them properly representational: most voters are disenfranchised by their votes being all but wasted in seat counts. Some candidates achieve as much as 44% of primary votes but lose their seats on preference deals.
A proportional voting system would ensure the will of the people is made to pass: one person, one vote to the party/candidate of their choice.
The big two, Labor and Liberal, would never go for this as it would erode their respective positions. The Greens (with some 12% of primary vote) could be holding as many as 17 seats if voting was counted proportionally instead of the one they are likely to take in Melbourne.
This election however, the Australian public has voted that the big two are on the nose. Tony Abbott and his Liberals shouldn't bleat too loudly: they haven't won it in their own right. Julia Gillard and her Labor Party, well they only have themselves to blame for squandering a large mandate. Should she retain the Prime Ministership, she still will not have been elected by the people.
Gillard will have achieved office twice: one with knives, one with kisses. That's some legacy.
Yet such irony would be befitting the most negative and uninspiring campaign in living memory, an election some Aussie funnyguys labeled 'Ratfuck 2010.'
Perhaps both countries may need to re-think their democracies and make them properly representational: most voters are disenfranchised by their votes being all but wasted in seat counts. Some candidates achieve as much as 44% of primary votes but lose their seats on preference deals.
A proportional voting system would ensure the will of the people is made to pass: one person, one vote to the party/candidate of their choice.
The big two, Labor and Liberal, would never go for this as it would erode their respective positions. The Greens (with some 12% of primary vote) could be holding as many as 17 seats if voting was counted proportionally instead of the one they are likely to take in Melbourne.
This election however, the Australian public has voted that the big two are on the nose. Tony Abbott and his Liberals shouldn't bleat too loudly: they haven't won it in their own right. Julia Gillard and her Labor Party, well they only have themselves to blame for squandering a large mandate. Should she retain the Prime Ministership, she still will not have been elected by the people.
Gillard will have achieved office twice: one with knives, one with kisses. That's some legacy.
Yet such irony would be befitting the most negative and uninspiring campaign in living memory, an election some Aussie funnyguys labeled 'Ratfuck 2010.'
the_kman said:
Maybe your average Aussie knows that you guys use lots of coal. Most Americans would be surprised that we get @50% of our power from coal and nothing to take it's place coming online in the near future
- May 6, 2009
- 8,522
- 1
- 0
auscyclefan94 said:
Just because it has high ratings doesn't stop me from thinking that Tracy Grimshaw should die in a fire and the program is rubbish. Every week the program just repeats itself. I mean it consists of pensiors need more money, how to pay less at the super market, or just buy in bulk, and ladies, why going to Asia to get a b00b job may not be a good idea, or some latest in losing weight, or making you sleep better.
- Jun 16, 2009
- 19,654
- 2
- 0
CycloErgoSum said:
The fact is that the Greens kept labor in it in so many seats which is a joke. Labor's primary vote was the lowest since WW2. I don't see how Gillard in a hung parliament even if she does win is a great win for her and the party. A first term government has not been voted out for 40 years which shows how dismal they are.
Labor have nearly every other party other thna the coalition that give them preferences and they may not even scrape over the line. A lot of the seats they won was because of greens preferences getting them over the line. Unfortunately my vote did not count for the liberals as I am in a big labor seat. Can someone tell is that Adam bandt gay? By the looks of his speech he is so he and bob Brown would make a good couple.
I think the Liberals should "bleat" loudly. Look at the position they were in. This is a big coup for them.
craig1985 said:
Is it only Today Tonight that compares dishwashing liquids on a monthly cycle?
craig1985 said:
Don't forget the obligatory conman story, or neighbourhood disputes.
auscyclefan94 said:
It has been a dismal result for the Labor party, and they only have themselves to blame. I think Costello was spot on in his analysis, their shift to the right to try and pick up the Liberal vote has only resulted in some of their own supporter base deserting them.
Does it really matter if Adam Bandt is gay or not? How the hell can you say he and Bob Brown would make a good couple, just because they are both gay?
The Liberals shouldn't bleat loudly as they did not win the election. Yes, their position improved, but that is due more to the shambles of the Labor party. The nation effectively has told both parties to get lost and come back with some proper policies. Hopefully the Liberals can look past their "victory" and re-instate a viable leader in Malcolm Turnbull.
- Mar 11, 2009
- 10,526
- 3,558
- 28,180
- Mar 10, 2009
- 7,268
- 1
- 0
- Nov 2, 2009
- 1,112
- 0
- 0
- Nov 2, 2009
- 1,112
- 0
- 0
Alpe d'Huez said:
It seems we're well on the way. There's usually a bit of a time lag. I'd expect us to arrive in 5-10 years time.
CycloErgoSum said:
The US system seems pretty stuffed as well.
I sometimes wonder whether it is to do with the shift from "modernist" pervasive, over-arching social institutions to a "post modern" fragmentation and atomization of society and social values. And to what degree the changes in politics over the past 50-100 years might be paralleled with commerce: increasingly political parties seem to be retail outlets competing for business, with PR spin & a vast reliance on advertising whose claims can't easily be verified and with very little accountability. ......... Yep, the more I think about it, "citizens" seem to have become "consumers".
Alpe d'Huez said:
Yes, the weight of expectation on Barack Obama and the economic cards he was subsequently dealt looks set to erode his mandate and eventually his presidency.
Australia's Kevin Rudd ran on a similar platform of hope, change and reform and, although he made some mistakes on policy and implementation, his political execution from his own, at times, mafia-like party antics led to a premature downfall for his party. Tony Abbott's Liberal Party has no mandate or legitimacy of its own, though, expressing the Australian public's dissatisfaction with both major parties.
Should Abbott form a minority government with the support of a few independent MPs, it will be less of a Liberal victory than a Labor loss.
To ACF94: with proportional voting the Liberal party would hold a clear majority of seats with their primary vote and your vote wouldn't have been wasted, as you so complain. However don't be so indignant with the Labor/Green prefence deal as the Liberal party is part of 'The Coalition' of Liberal, National, LNP and CLP parties (not to mention the conservative FFP, One Nation, Fred Nile's Christian Democrats, et al who always prefence the Liberal Party) and has been so for many decades, sharing continual electrol support among their respective candidates.
- Nov 2, 2009
- 1,112
- 0
- 0
fatandfast said:
Yep, most of us know we use a lot of coal. We use it for our own electricity and we export vast amounts of it. Unfortunately, a lot of it is brown coal which is very dirty in terms of greenhouse gas, and many of the power stations are old, inefficient and very dirty as well.
Clearly perspectives vary. It is true that at present we have an economy that is very reliant on coal. We also have a planet requiring significantly reduced GHG levels. Some people, including me, are concerned that "Big Coal" is having a significant influence on government policy re renewable alternatives, to the extent that other possibilities are being shut out (think automobile industry in the early 20th century).
I would like to see us accelerate the transition towards other energy sources and a thus a reduction in our GHG "footprint". Typically, Australia squabbles about such things, caves to vested interests of some sort, and then after eventually making the inevitable shift discovers we lag behind much of the rest of the world and that any opportunity we might have had to become the developers of important new technologies is long gone.
Spare Tyre said:
Yes, I agree completely that society is heavily atomised and this makes it difficult to govern a 'unified' country of shared-interests. We have moved from asking 'What is good for all of us' to 'What is good for me' when we enter voting booths. There is very little real sense of community and unity and the dominant political motive is no longer hope but fear and loathing. Political parties go shopping for these sentiments and exploit them viz 'Stop the Boats'.
A real furphy that one. It strikes a chord with those unsophisticated enough to understand both Australia's responsibility as signatory to the 1951 UN Refugee's Treaty and the insignificantly small number of boat people we see arrive on our shores. The issue instead has become a symbol of city-dweller's (which is most Australians) displeasure with over-crowding, congestion and seeing people of different colour in their formerly white neighbourhoods. John Howard's record immigration intakes were responsible for all that (along with State Govt incompetence to build more homes) and he did it to keep wages low and expand the market for his corporate backers. It was a marvellous piece of sleight-of-hand to fool so many for so long with cries of 'border protection.'
There is little accountability in two-party systems as the party with the mandate has no motivation to be transparent. Witness Rudd's reluctance to investigate by Royal Commission the AWB Scandal - it could have seen Liberal MPs go to jail. With minority-coalition govts there's more scope for accountability, at least in theory.
The U.S system is a unique one; it is two-party dominant and it invests incredible power in the hands of a King-like President. It might be the worst of both worlds.
- Jun 16, 2009
- 19,654
- 2
- 0
CycloErgoSum said:
Yes but the greens are a much bigger party than the ones that give preferences to the labor Party.
thrawn said:
Err, I think stopping a first time incumbent getting re-elected for the first time ever is something to bleat about.
thrawn said:
I'm sure ACF will be happy if Abbott gets in and he can enforce some good Christian values back into society
I find it weird being older than Wyatt Roy, I can't comprehend it!
Malcolm Turnbull is far too sensible to lead a major party.
Interesting that you can still bet on the outcome (who takes the Executive), Coalition @ 1.56 on Betfair.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 36K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 41K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram