I feel like the damage to the office of the President and to the system as a whole will take decades to recover from
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusPoliGaf |Early 2016 Election| - the government's term has been... Shortened
- Thread starter Bernbaum
- Start date
- Status
I feel like the damage to the office of the President and to the system as a whole will take decades to recover from
In a normal country, whichever party can appeal most to the poor and working class would have a vested interested in fixing voter suppression. In a country where the two major parties are right wing, this probably doesn't apply so much.
Aarglefarg
Member
I see. That makes sense, thank you.
Democrats are absolutely opposed to voter suppression. That only occurs in states with GOP governors and legislatures. And it targets ethnic minorities, not the working class in general - the white working class is increasingly Republican voting bloc terrifyingly enough.
It's true that neither party has the incentive to replace FPTP, but Democrats are disadvantaged by the electoral college, the legislation that limits the size of the House, Tuesday voting, and, currently, gerrymandering, which both Obama and Eric Holder are lobbying to end.
In theory that's what we're waiting for. In practice, a lot of Republicans are actually completely fine with Donald Trump's behaviour since he's passing through everything they really want. Its already damaging the country but most either don't really care or actively welcome it.
The Republicans ramming through the AHCA is proof of that. Trump may have leaned on House Republicans but there was zero reason to even try and pass a bill that is unanimously hated so badly that you're forced to hide from your constituents by not attending town hall meeting and purposely unplugging your phones. Unless of course that's exactly what you want to do and you believe your voters will still support you to the very end.
And they might be right, some communities who stand to lose the most from the current iteration of the AHCA claim that they're willing to "bleed a little" to help Trump pass through his agenda. At the end of the day, there's a whole lot of faith based voting in the United States. One where people believe Donald Trump's campaign promise to bring jobs back to America but refuse to believe that he'll do them dirty with regards to Obamacare because "he's a good man, why would he treat us battlers like that?".
AHCA is not an example of the kind of damage I'm talking about. Yes, Republicans want that. But a lot of them have a respect and pride for the institutions and conventions of their government that Trump does not have. The longer he stays in, the more damage he does to that. Yes, there are movements that are loyal to the Republicans that want to burn it all down, but not all of them.
Yeah, I agree with that. I guess I just mean the type of damage people on OT love to talk about (Trump becoming a literal dictator and destroying their country).
Trump still has a ~90% approval rating amongst Republicans. I don't think these dignified Republicans actually exist in any significant number.
90% of voters? I'm referring to elected officials. Also I'm not saying it's that likely, I'm responding to the notion that "checks and balances" are going to fix everything. So long as he has support in the house, it doesn't seem likely that anything can stop him. That would require action by elected Republicans.
Oh sure. Well unless his popularity amongst the general voting public improves dramatically, or history turns on it's head (which is totally possible given the past year) the GOP is in for a drubbing in the House next year. So even if they don't do anything now, Democrats will in 2019.
It's been a 100 days, which is almost 1/3 of a year, which means we may as well be 1/6 of the way there! Positivity!
Unfortunately, even Watergate took forever, and that was with a Democratic legislature (albeit Nixon was far far more popular in 1972 than Trump is now).
I do wonder how being run by a tech billionaire would play out. A win for science at least I'd hope.
Though I'd probably prefer Musk over Zuckerberg.
I think this bank tax is a smart move from the Libs. The public suspicion of banks has been festering for nearly a decade. I think any "war" the banks attempt to wage will just make the Libs look better to swing voters.While those genuinely concerned about it aren't likely to vote Labor anyway. Labor can't take the banks side either without looking like tools. Is it too far to suggest it's a wedge?
Though as the banks will pass it on and everyone knows that I cant imagine it will turn out nice for the government.
Just like the broadband tax they are planning to levy on RSPs knowing full well it will get passed onto consumers.
Elaugaufein
Member
I don't think it's a wedge exactly because Labor is safe in saying it doesn't go far enough. A wedge splits your opponents​ base no matter which way they choose to move. Its still more wedge-like than anything the Libs have come up with that isn't NatSec since about 2013.
"Doesn't go far enough" always struck me as a weak way of saying "wish we did that." I admit I have no idea how well it plays though.
Which would be great as it might increase demand on banks other the five it applies to.
Pretty sure this was a Murdoch policy. Forgo billions from FTA TV licenses, add tax to service providers?
Which would be great as it might increase demand on banks other the five it applies to.
Pretty sure this was a Murdoch policy. Forgo billions from FTA TV licenses, add tax to service providers?
Elaugaufein
Member
It was probably a Murdoch solution (or whatever will get them favorable coverage on the issue) it's a "we hobbled the NBN and it's not going to be commercially viable and we need to do something to avoid exposing how much we fucked it up to the general public. " policy, they needed to get the money to cover the for the other providers laying private fibre in the cities (the most lucrative part for the NBN) from somewhere (and they don't have the fortitude to introduce a general levy or tax raise).
I think the point Morrison made was valid (shock horror) - if the big banks pass it on to the consumer it just makes smaller banks more competitive. Then again, I'm not sure why anyone would actually go with a big bank for a home loan - when I got mine they didn't even seem at all competitive with smaller banks. I got a 3.89% rate, with a 5% deposit and a 100% offset account with Qudos. I think the best I could get from a big bank through a broker was a 4.14% introductory rate with no offset.
And isn't the "they'll just pass it onto consumers" argument applicable to all company tax discussion?
Elaugaufein
Member
Its applicable to anything you do to any company at all (maybe substituting employee for consumer) unless the market is highly competitive. If anything​ such things being passed along to the consumer suggest margins are near 0 (and given profit reports that's a load of bollocks) or the free market is considerably less competitive than they say.
AdventureRacing
Member
I don't know if it's a wedge but I agree that it's a good idea. Banks already have a negative mindshare and if they pass this on to consumers it'll be difficult for them to convince people that this is the governments fault and not the greedy banks. When they make monster profits again next year regardless that'll just add fuel to the fire. I'm with the Newcastle permanent so it suits me anyway.
This is definitely a mixed budget. It has awful parts like drug testing, seriously that's one of the worst policies they've ever proposed. Based on that alone I would reject this budget. I almost wonder if it's put in there just so it can be negotiated out later (we'll remove this if you agree to xyz). Then again it could just be that I underestimate how much the public loves crack downs on 'welfare cheats'.
I also think in a lot of areas they haven't one nearl at enough like on house pricing.
The complete lack of anything related o renewable energy or climate change speaks volumes about where we're at as a country on this issue. The fact that so few people care says even more.
There are some good parts though and it's far better than the last few budgets. At least things are moving in the right direction.
AdventureRacing
Member
Couldn't agree more about the big banks. I don't understand it at all. In my experience they aren't competitive with the smaller banks on interest rates. I know many people who stay with them just because.
Elaugaufein
Member
Easier to have all your bank stuff together I think. The smaller institutions can't really compete on stuff like quick access to funds, ease of finding an ATM , etc.
The big banks have traditionally been a lot better than the smaller lenders on interest rates. They raised their rates due to APRA regulations from... I thought it was last year, but this article suggests 2015: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-21/home-loan-rule-changes-could-push-up-rates/6637598
In the ten or so years prior to that, smaller banks and credit unions usually had higher rates.
In the ten or so years prior to that, smaller banks and credit unions usually had higher rates.
bobnowhere
Member
Billy's doing alright. Not an easy target this budget.
Candescence
Member
Tones isn't saying how how he feels openly about this budget, but he showed it on budget night...
Edit: Also, the cost of the big business tax cut has risen by $15 billion, to a total of $65.4 billion, handing Shorten an easy bludgeon to hit the government with. With all the tax raises in this budget, I don't get why the government is continuing to hang on to such an unpopular tax cut policy - small to medium business cuts were more reasonable, but we know anything more isn't gonna boost the economy.
Edit: Also, the cost of the big business tax cut has risen by $15 billion, to a total of $65.4 billion, handing Shorten an easy bludgeon to hit the government with. With all the tax raises in this budget, I don't get why the government is continuing to hang on to such an unpopular tax cut policy - small to medium business cuts were more reasonable, but we know anything more isn't gonna boost the economy.
Elaugaufein
Member
Having big business on their side is the Libs institutional advantage. They can't afford not to throw them some bones. Especially considering how they are going at banks and gas exporters right now. If they aren't careful they'll have Gina and Murdoch gunning for them.
Candescence
Member
Well, the budget apparently isn't improving the poll situation with Reachtel at least - 47-53 to Labor.
The polls are not nearly good enough that "stem the bleeding" is acceptable - if Newspoll doesn't improve either, Turnbull and Morrison are politically dead men walking.
The polls are not nearly good enough that "stem the bleeding" is acceptable - if Newspoll doesn't improve either, Turnbull and Morrison are politically dead men walking.
bobnowhere
Member
They almost went full Labor and still 51.6% of people say they would be worse off. That sounds like people just aren't listening.
Essential and Newspoll will probably more telling as they are more regular.
Elaugaufein
Member
People may also doubt they can​ get the positive stuff through their own party and Senate.
Though the Senate stuff should be pretty easy really. Bernadi , Leyjonhelm and maybe Gichuhi may batten down and flat out refuse but if you can't manage to get it through the rest of the Senate somehow you've got negative negotiating skills.
Even if Labor decided to oppose for political reasons (maybe ? We're far enough from an election I could see it happening but it seems far more risky than Shorten usually goes when on the defensive. He usually takes his risk on the offensive.) they could try and get some combination of Lambie, Greens , Hench, NXT and probably even PHON (though it might take her about a week to realise that it'd be a fairly clever move but if she's learnt from last time she'll be taking credit for it by this time next week).
I can't see them having made such a radical course change without checking the internal numbers either. The train through nowhere (and metro "Internet that doesn't suck" tax) smacks of something put in to shore up the Nats support guaranteeing internal numbers.
Though the Senate stuff should be pretty easy really. Bernadi , Leyjonhelm and maybe Gichuhi may batten down and flat out refuse but if you can't manage to get it through the rest of the Senate somehow you've got negative negotiating skills.
Even if Labor decided to oppose for political reasons (maybe ? We're far enough from an election I could see it happening but it seems far more risky than Shorten usually goes when on the defensive. He usually takes his risk on the offensive.) they could try and get some combination of Lambie, Greens , Hench, NXT and probably even PHON (though it might take her about a week to realise that it'd be a fairly clever move but if she's learnt from last time she'll be taking credit for it by this time next week).
I can't see them having made such a radical course change without checking the internal numbers either. The train through nowhere (and metro "Internet that doesn't suck" tax) smacks of something put in to shore up the Nats support guaranteeing internal numbers.
Bingo. They've tried pretty much every strategy available to them and it's not moving the needle. Public is just waiting for the next election.
bobnowhere
Member
Another Reachtel has ALP 54/46, this one was commissioned by channel 7, the previous by Sky News.
I continually wonder why people stick with the big 4, when there's always better deals elsewhere.
Reminds me of how late last year/early this year one of the big long standing regional building societies here went to the hassle of changing to a bank just because supposedly it made the perception of them safer. Makes no sense to me.
Candescence
Member
Newspoll has hit - Federal 2 Party Preferred: L/NP 47 (-1) ALP 53 (+1)
OH BOY
So far, surprisingly, Ipos is the only poll that improved for the government, but still only 47-53 to Labor. But Newspoll getting worse for them after the budget unveiling? Turnbull and Morrison must be sweating.
OH BOY
So far, surprisingly, Ipos is the only poll that improved for the government, but still only 47-53 to Labor. But Newspoll getting worse for them after the budget unveiling? Turnbull and Morrison must be sweating.
bobnowhere
Member
Ipsos is so infrequent that it hard to read what exactly is effecting what.
The Newspoll is trouble, all the news will be about it tomorrow. Though I imagine the far-right numpties on Sky will only talk about Ipsos. Essential should be out late Monday or early Tuesday as well. Newspoll actually shows some positive numbers for Turnbull vs. Shorten in a week where Turnbull took a back seat to ScoMo.
When you make your Prime Ministership about Newspoll numbers you eventually get hoisted by your own petard.
The Newspoll is trouble, all the news will be about it tomorrow. Though I imagine the far-right numpties on Sky will only talk about Ipsos. Essential should be out late Monday or early Tuesday as well. Newspoll actually shows some positive numbers for Turnbull vs. Shorten in a week where Turnbull took a back seat to ScoMo.
When you make your Prime Ministership about Newspoll numbers you eventually get hoisted by your own petard.
Elaugaufein
Member
Turnbull and ScoMo have apparently already said not to judge the effect until it's had a couple of months to get through to the public (fair). Though the complete lack of effect is probably making them nervous.
Candescence
Member
Essential Poll is out - 46-54 to Labor.
Ipos is the outlier. The budget hasn't improved the government's polling situation, and probably won't anytime soon. Anyone want to take bets on when the killing season resumes?
Ipos is the outlier. The budget hasn't improved the government's polling situation, and probably won't anytime soon. Anyone want to take bets on when the killing season resumes?
bobnowhere
Member
The last Ipsos was in March and had The Greens at 16%! I don't think the Greens have ever polled that high. The latest one has The Greens at 13% and ONP at 2%, there is something going on with their methodology that is seriously off when it comes to the minors.
Some fun stuff in the Essential report, the budget has gone down well in general but it's along party lines, Liberal voters seem to like a Labor budget while Labor voters don't, partisan much! People seem to like almost every single measure but believe almost every single section of society will be worse off.
Some fun stuff in the Essential report, the budget has gone down well in general but it's along party lines, Liberal voters seem to like a Labor budget while Labor voters don't, partisan much! People seem to like almost every single measure but believe almost every single section of society will be worse off.
Elaugaufein
Member
From what I've seen a Labor-ish budget by a Coalition government frees Labor supporters to criticize where it doesn't go far enough, while they tend to circle the wagons on pragmatic politics and being a party of government when Labor itself does those things.
I don't really hang around any Liberals openly into politics so I dunno what's going on there.
TheWasTheJoke
Member
Apparently there privatising Inner West Sydney Buses, unfucking-believable, Gladys is infinitely worse than Baird ever was and this state is going to shit.
I can't I'm saying this - but they might very well lose the State of NSW with this.
The NSW Labor party - oh god we're going from bad to worse.
I'm hoping for many independents to takeover the Legislative Council next State Election.
Labor might just pull off having every State/Territory and the Federal Government...
bobnowhere
Member
Queensland will be trouble next year for Labor state-wise and the last time I saw polling Dan Andrews was down 54-46 in Victoria.
I don't think NSW Labor could possibly found more lightweight leader than Foley, complete waste of space.
Elaugaufein
Member
Queensland will just be trouble generally since its unlikely PHON will get less than 12% of the vote and it's likely to be concentrated. I'm sure the LNP are running internal polls in the rural and suburban seats at risk , as well as looking at likely preference flows in Metro seats if they do a deal with PHON , and weighing up whether they should attempt to freeze PHON out via a deal with Labor or do a preference deal with PHON or run dead on the matter.
Labor will be running similar numbers too, on whether they should take an LNP deal and where they should be aggressive and passive against PHON.
PHON could well end up with balance of power and will likely favor the LNP and they'll get a 4 year term (because we're a bunch of idiots who thought adding 4 year terms to a majorotorian single house system was a good idea). The only upside is that it could hurt both of them badly at the following election since Queenslands system doesn't have the feedback time that PHON seems to require to work out what populism is and there's a section of the LNP who will definitely enable their worst tendencies.
Not a surprise after pushing it through here in Newcastle.
- Status