Elaugaufein
Member
Them CEO's dropped their knitting again.
Clearly it was just too far along by the time Dutton made his announcement to cancel.
-
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
Clearly it was just too far along by the time Dutton made his announcement to cancel.
Elaugaufein
Member
Its such a weird test, drunk people are pretty low on the scale of people I'd seek advice from.
D.Lo
Member
lol yep.
They're so tin-eared to always talk about how people in the public sector make more than 300k PA. Median wage is 50k, $300k is rich as fuck.
Elaugaufein
Member
Only 1 set of WA results came through today (Agriculture), no surprises there. The rest are pushed back to tomorrow.
A pretty good article on the polarisation I was talking about: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/22/14762030/donald-trump-tribal-epistemology
A pretty good example of a bad solution Elaugaufein was talking about whereby Brandis wants an internet kill switch: https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ttle-to-control-australias-telecommunications
A pretty good example of a bad solution Elaugaufein was talking about whereby Brandis wants an internet kill switch: https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ttle-to-control-australias-telecommunications
Elaugaufein
Member
They are gonna want to ride the NatSec horse for a while so they can't seem to be flaunting basic counterterrorism advice like not blanket labelling groups and creating fertile ground for radicalisation as well as alienarion from law enforcement allowing it to go unreported.
And Labor will almost certainly​ bipartisan whatever idiocy they come up with because this area makes painting by numbers seem unpredictable which makes the crossbench unnecessary.
What a fucking fantastic article. I mean it, that is easily the best piece of journalism I have read all year. I have a lot more to say about it, including praise and criticism, but I need to process everything he's said. Thank you for sharing it.
Elaugaufein
Member
I found it interesting but it comes close to (knowing?) self parody it spends a lot of time reporting on the problem and then just sort of shrugs. Which to be fair is probably​ all the media can do , if the media could solve the problem, there would be by definition no problem for it to solve.
Right wing populist authoritarianism with some elements of a personality cult, the gap is never going to be huge. But this is one of the problems with using political / ideologically terms as perjoratives real meaning becomes lost, there's lots of ways it isn't (Hanson's talk about economic issues mirror facism well enough but her voting history is pretty standard Liberal and she doesn't seem to have the militarism either for two easy differences).
Calling Islam a virus that needs to be vaccinated is probably beyond anything sheMs said before imo
Elaugaufein
Member
Its exactly what she said before (and even about Asians back the first time around) wrapped in more obviously awful language because she sought to turn her last major stuffup into an advantage: that she doesn't want those people allowed in Australia. Its not expressing anything new just doing so with even less grace.
Expect to see her polling​ jump too, it's a disturbling popular sentiment especially following an attack like London.
Elaugaufein
Member
In WA news: The Legislative Council being finalized is now supposed to happen at 3 pm tomorrow (WA time). 2 more districts were put up today (South West Metro: 2 Lab 1 Nat 1 Lib 1 Green 1 PHON East Metro 3 Lab 1 Lib 1 Green 1 PHON) the only real surprise is the PHON in East Metro bumping a 2nd Lib.
It's unfortunate, but I don't think it's that surprising. We have some semi-rural areas and aged suburbs under our umbrella. At least, that's who I'm going to blame, absent of any LC breakdown by area.
Elaugaufein
Member
I meant relative to predictions based on early / ATL count. I'm not nearly familiar enough with WA to comment relative to demographic predictions before polling.
Elaugaufein
Member
Final WA LA results:
Final result: Labor 14, Liberal 9, Nationals 4, Greens 4, One Nation 3, Shooters 1, Liberal Democrats 1.
Due to vagaries of the WA system (even chamber with the President lacking a deliberative vote), this is not a great result for Labor despite being one of their best ever. To elaborate: Chamber has 36 members, you need a majority to pass legislation (which means 19 under normal circumstances) however the President traditionally comes from the most numerous part (Labor in this case), which means Labor only has 13 on the floor votes, with the most reliable other votes (the Greens) only bringing them to 17 , because the president is excluded that means the other parties have 18 votes and the president can only vote in a tie resulting in a loss. This means Labor needs to appeal to at least one of the conservative parties to pass anything. The only real out here is to try and get one of the other parties to take President as a role (optimally while also defecting) since that's the only thing that's unquestionably a matter of form rather than requirement. What Labor really wanted here was one of the wild card parties (like Daylight Savings) to get up somewhere giving them a better negotiation path but it didn't happen. Otherwise there legislative paths look slim (the best bets are the Nats , Shooters and Lib Dems on a case by case and a vague hope that PHON proves as stable as expected).
It gets a little worse because in order to fix the malapportionment in population in the divisions that elect the LA, Labor needs an absolute majority on the floor, but through some kind of arcane idiocy the speaker still doesn't get a deliberative vote when an absolute majority is required (unless its a tie), meaning you need 19 votes (not including the speaker), since 18/17 (in your favour) isn't a tie but is a defeat since you need an absolute majority.
Final result: Labor 14, Liberal 9, Nationals 4, Greens 4, One Nation 3, Shooters 1, Liberal Democrats 1.
Due to vagaries of the WA system (even chamber with the President lacking a deliberative vote), this is not a great result for Labor despite being one of their best ever. To elaborate: Chamber has 36 members, you need a majority to pass legislation (which means 19 under normal circumstances) however the President traditionally comes from the most numerous part (Labor in this case), which means Labor only has 13 on the floor votes, with the most reliable other votes (the Greens) only bringing them to 17 , because the president is excluded that means the other parties have 18 votes and the president can only vote in a tie resulting in a loss. This means Labor needs to appeal to at least one of the conservative parties to pass anything. The only real out here is to try and get one of the other parties to take President as a role (optimally while also defecting) since that's the only thing that's unquestionably a matter of form rather than requirement. What Labor really wanted here was one of the wild card parties (like Daylight Savings) to get up somewhere giving them a better negotiation path but it didn't happen. Otherwise there legislative paths look slim (the best bets are the Nats , Shooters and Lib Dems on a case by case and a vague hope that PHON proves as stable as expected).
It gets a little worse because in order to fix the malapportionment in population in the divisions that elect the LA, Labor needs an absolute majority on the floor, but through some kind of arcane idiocy the speaker still doesn't get a deliberative vote when an absolute majority is required (unless its a tie), meaning you need 19 votes (not including the speaker), since 18/17 (in your favour) isn't a tie but is a defeat since you need an absolute majority.
Aarglefarg
Member
The Fairfax-Ipsos two party preferred poll has Labor ahead 55 to 45. The worst Fairfax-Ipsos two party preferred poll for Prime Minister Abbott was 56-44 after the 2014 budget.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...abor-takes-thumping-lead-20170326-gv6lpo.html
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...abor-takes-thumping-lead-20170326-gv6lpo.html
bobnowhere
Member
Does suggest the last Newspoll was an outlier.
Candescence
Member
According to the same poll, Dutton and Porter would be on the chopping block. Considering Dutton has been apparently angling for leadership prospects, his demise, well...
If the budget fails to impress and the polls don't improve or even get worse regardless or whether Turnbull is booted or not, what the hell is the government going to do? They can't just haemorrhage votes for over two years. An early election caused either by the government themselves to just get it over with or a vote of no confidence? And I don't think Turnbull will work up the courage to stop giving fucks and start defying the conservatives. I don't think there's been a government that's descended to electoral oblivion so quickly with no plan to escape it.
If the budget fails to impress and the polls don't improve or even get worse regardless or whether Turnbull is booted or not, what the hell is the government going to do? They can't just haemorrhage votes for over two years. An early election caused either by the government themselves to just get it over with or a vote of no confidence? And I don't think Turnbull will work up the courage to stop giving fucks and start defying the conservatives. I don't think there's been a government that's descended to electoral oblivion so quickly with no plan to escape it.
Elaugaufein
Member
No one will call an election / no confidence themselves without prospect of victory. Its better to hold power than not at least you can try and do stuff to salvage things with it. The Election would be as late as possible in such a case (unless there was a sudden good poll that looked really tempting saving furniture wise).
D.Lo
Member
A lot can happen in two years. Johnny Howard was basically always behind in the polls but pulled it out for elections. Maybe Turnbull is praying for a senior Labor figure to have some big scandal.
Really, what are they going to do, they all hate each other, and the party has barely any talent. IMO their ONLY chance is a complete re-brand with Bishop, but the right hates her as a 'Turnbull Traitor'.
I've got to give it to Labor, they have so much more talent and depth. They've got their share of apparatchiks and their stupid factional bullshit that holds them back, but probably 10+ potential PMs.
Really, what are they going to do, they all hate each other, and the party has barely any talent. IMO their ONLY chance is a complete re-brand with Bishop, but the right hates her as a 'Turnbull Traitor'.
I've got to give it to Labor, they have so much more talent and depth. They've got their share of apparatchiks and their stupid factional bullshit that holds them back, but probably 10+ potential PMs.
What drives One Nation voters.
I thought this quote was interesting:
It took me back to first year sociology and Zygmunt Bauman's "liquid modernity"
The metaphor my professor used was that we'd been freed from our cages, but that freedom can be scary and paralysing.
I thought this quote was interesting:
It took me back to first year sociology and Zygmunt Bauman's "liquid modernity"
The metaphor my professor used was that we'd been freed from our cages, but that freedom can be scary and paralysing.
You can't really win votes by introducing childcare packages when at the same time you're making headlines for trying to amend laws to appease the racists.
I made a rule for myself a while back that "contains no solutions" is not a valid criticism for an otherwise good piece of writing. Can you spitball towards a solution for organisations profiting from intentional falsehoods? Maybe the audience that accepts them is limited, and maybe it was just dumb luck that their guy got into office on the back of it, but it doesn't seem to me the sort of thing that democracy can survive. If the US is even arguably still a democracy.
Problem with prosperity is that not everyone can be prosperous, ergo it comes at the expense of equality. So while we're making ourselves prosperous, why not kick those minorities when they're down?
I guess.
Fake edit: Article pretty much says exactly that in a few parts. Not surprised.
Interesting article.
IMO Australia has undergone too many changes in the past 100 years for this sort of golden age restorative animus right wing political movement to be successful on a wide scale. It's too young a country to be nostalgic about its past. The closest you get is the Anzac mythology but given the celebration of that event is more bittersweet its kind of hard to say we should go back to that and not looking like you've missed the point.
With America or Britain you can quite easily point to very specific eras when their countries where dominant economically, culturally, politically (whether it was perception or reality) that they want to revive.
I can't really pick a moment when that's true for Australia. I'm sure One Nation voters would say the 1950s or something but for a huge proportion of the Australian population they or their ancestors weren't even here yet, the makeup of the country was radically different, etc.
In fact our previous Prime Minister saw his own political doom largely because he was perceived to be too much a relic of this time.
Elaugaufein
Member
I usually don't either but when you're writing a media article complaining about the media having no solutions while not presenting any either, I'm going to head tilt a bit.
Probably. But a look at history says removing easy differences just results in higher bars for the ingroup: the Irish, Protesterant v Catholic, etc. Once it was achieved they'd​ section off someone else to go back before.
Candescence
Member
Treasury figures also quietly revealed expose the government's utter failure to contain the "debt and deficit disaster" - Tones and Turnbull have doubled the government's gross debt in a little over three years, adding more debt than Rudd and Gillard added in their combined terms.
So, about that claim of "superior economic managers"...
So, about that claim of "superior economic managers"...
Just as a somewhat silly aside. I find the idea that Australia is a 'young' country rather funny, especially when most countries on the planet are under a hundred years old due to the fact that WW1-2 ended a large number of previous countries. France is less than 100 years old, Germany really is only about 30-70 years old depending on how you view the you interpret the reunification. The same goes for China, Italy, Korea, Japan, Turkey and most other countries that were touched by conflict during C20.
Candescence
Member
That's ignoring that all those countries have long legacies spanning from their regions regardless of the age of their actual states. For non-Aboriginal Australians, "a penal colony established by the British that peacefully won independence" isn't much of a legacy.
Yes. That was rather my point.
To clarify: We're not talking about culture, or legacy, just the age of countries. If you want to take cultural legacy into account, Australia is over 40k years old. So either way you cut it, we're old.
The nation states sure. But when French nationalists reach back to Charlemagne, the Germans to Barborossa and Arminius, the Italians to the Romans, the Chinese to the Ming Dynasty etc, you begin to see how they all have things Australia does not.
We'd be old in relative terms of nation states simply by virtue of surviving WW2 in tact.
Elaugaufein
Member
Yes. That was rather my point.
To clarify: We're not talking about culture, or legacy, just the age of countries. If you want to take cultural legacy into account, Australia is over 40k years old. So either way you cut it, we're old.
But it's not the age of particular arrangements of land people mean by countries, historically conquering a patch of country near you just meant you got bigger not that you were a new country.
Though what a country is is pretty meaningless historically, Britian considers itself Britain despite the fact the culture dominant group of like ~600 AD was probably far more common in Bretanny in France.
If you use a metric like control of a reasonably contiguous part of land by a cultural group (which is sort of close to the effective meaning) then Australia is pretty young (especially if you allow for brief breaks due to revolution or temporary conquest of the conquerors ending up adopting wholesale the culture of the conquered).
(Though as noted with Britain many countries are much younger than they pretend by this metric. Several groups conquered or invaded their way across most of Europe at one stage or another, but the people treat all these different dominant groups as their own now. Which is weird sort of ? But it's definitely better than say England being a never ending blood purity war).
Elaugaufein
Member
What did he do this time ?
Called some high school kids dickheads and said one of them looked gay.
D.Lo
Member
He was fine back then, Howard was able to smear him as an 'amateur' (the L plate Latham billboards won the election IMO), which is a bit fucking rich since typically even time an opposition moves into government they have never been there before, 'Lazarus' Howard was only previously in government because he's a tenacious weasel and the next gen of Lib leadership imploded at exactly the time the public was sick of Keating (and Costello was a coward).
Latham has slid into grumpy old man territory over the last decade. He started by exposing dirty Labor, then switched to Trump-lite stuff a few years ago. The left gave him fertile ground for a while with identity politics nonsense, but now he's gone too far and is just being a prick.
D.Lo
Member
Quite the opposite IMO, his like is a symptom of it.
So feminism makes mysogynists?
Gay rights create homophobes?
Or do you mean that old white male fuckhead is an identity too - you can't isolate the rational behind identity politics to only groups that deserve it?
D.Lo
Member
Why be so reductive and flippant?
A feminist saying something certain people disagree with creates a platform and audience for someone who complains about it.
An example of him having a platform as a 'plain speaker' was when Gillard talked about 'sustainable population' in the 2013 election because youth unemployment was rising and western Sydney infrastructure was straining. But she claimed it had nothing to do with immigration. It was mealy-mouthed doublespeak, she wanted to appeal to inner-city lefties who didn't want to hear about reducing immigration, and businesses who wanted downward pressure on wages, yet also appeal to western Sydney who simply wanted less people shoved in their suburbs. and more jobs for their youth.
This gave Latham a platform to tell the obvious truth - of course controlling population is about immigration, when most of our growth is from immigration. If Gillard didn't wedge herself between the left's 'multicultural dream', neocon ideals of cheap labour, and the struggling reality of the lower class, by avoiding stating an obvious truth, Latham would have no vector from which to make a point.
What has any of that got to do with identity politics though?
Aarglefarg
Member
We really dodged a bullet with that handshake.
D.Lo
Member
Well I meant more broadly. But even in that example Gillard was playing off one side that lived by identity politics - the left (immigration is always perfect because if you say otherwise you're racist) and another that was largely a class issue - working poor with failing infrastructure and youth unemployment.
And yes, the reply is also possibly going to be an indentity-political one, not denying that. Just that there has been plenty of the former, for the latter to respond to.
I definitely hold the left to higher standards than the right (they're supposed to be the grown-ups) and that's not fair.
That was his turning point, I was only defending how he was when in parliament. He's had moments of brilliance in the decade since, largely connecting the dots and exposing corrupt NSW Labor, but even his book was pretty dirty. I literally described him as Trump-lite lol.
- Status