|
Recoome posted:Apparently there was a UPF Rally in Perth today. I did not know this was on.
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 22:40 |
|
|
Recoome posted:So basically Perth is a gigantic racist shithole where duders can be openly racist and belligerent and noottthhhiiing happens, it's amazing. I mean the only other place where I'm aware this might be possible is like Bendigo or Melton. They had to bus people into Bendigo for the stupid UPF thing here, and it got a great deal of attention and counter-protesting. The only local protesters are a couple of insane people who are butthurt they can't influence anything and settle for loud whining to the Herald Sun who is only too happy to whip up idiotic headlines. I predict there'll be another shitshow as the next stage of the mosque proceeds now that the pointless objections have been thrown out, but shitshows are good because they can't be hidden and they have the opposite effect to their intention.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
asio posted:These are really great, don't stop Thanks, I've got a reaaaaaally loose association with a couple of people around me and thats how I know about things, but I heard nothing out of the usual circles for this one but the Perth meet had been on my radar for a while. The next one to watch will be the 26th of June in Melbourne, in front of Parliament house. This will be a "solidarity walk" for the Australian flag so a bit of a ??? but there IS a counter-protest being organised, and currently has more people on board. The counter-protesters (I can't think of a good name for them, there's a whole bunch of people including like university students like me) will definitely show up so this will be a litmus test for the right-wing nationalism sentiment in Melbourne at this time. Historically, the pro-multiculturalism does extremely well in Melbourne so it'll be a good show at least. Basically ewe2 posted:
The Narrator posted:Serious question: what does/would it take to weaken the resolve of groups like these? It strikes me that any hurdle presented to them is made to be an inciting event or a cause for martyrdom ("we're persecuted and ignored by the mainstream because they're in league with the pro-refugee media!") and incidents that go unchallenged are turned into demonstrations of power. These groups are always around, I think that we are at a point where their view is waaaaaaaaayyy more influential and prominant then previously. I think challenging the protests is good because it's stops a dumb hugbox mentality but also I mean at almost every rally these dudes come off looking like idiots so I think that is good too. Who knows, I mean there's legit neo-nazis in the year 2016 so idiots exist always?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
Australia is a me-too country in many ways, particularly socially, but I think our population is too small and spread-out to really ever get properly organized like a UKIP or a British National Party. A lot of it is trying to create a nationalist sense where there isn't one, and we always have this xenophobic streak precisely because we really don't have that core identity to begin with. But we're slavish followers of fashion so it's got to look like a right-wing anti-immigration bandwagon, and foster dreams of an Ausexit from obligations we wish we hadn't signed so we can be as awful as Americans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
Frogmanv2 posted:I did not know this was on. Did you miss out on seeing your friends?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
iajanus posted:I'm shocked that a guy with that name is nuts. Worked with him too - probably at the same place  I'm not sure he was nuts, just... unconventional.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
Ket posted:Did you miss out on seeing your friends? Ughhhhhhh that's not LibertyCat
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
Recoome posted:Ughhhhhhh that's not LibertyCat I know, but it was a bad attempt at a joke
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
The Narrator posted:I guess these cases are going to buoy the core group of diehard adherents anyway, and that you're talking about converts (those who might likely be convinced by media presence/notoriety). It strikes me that perhaps the only way to weaken core members is to embarrass them out of publicly expressing their beliefs (for example by showcasing weakness and undermining the group's capability to project a tough image) or to somehow convince them their beliefs are wrong (which seems very difficult on its own). What do people think about the effect of Pauline Hanson getting a senate spot? My recollection of last time was that although it dragged the libs more to the right, it also motivated a strong anti rascist element in the community and at least got the issue out in the open Will the "sunlight is the best disinfectant" factor outweigh the rascist/nationalistic rallying cry? To be clear, I do not want Pauline to get a senate seat but it looks likely.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
I dunno about the impacts it'll have on the majors but I'm not looking forward to her being in the senate this time around, whose spot is she likely to take? If it's an LNP spot I imagine she'll drive them to the right a lot
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
If a coalition of ultra-right minor parties hold the balance of power in the senate to a Lib/Nat house of reps then they're definitely going to have an impact on the tone of the next government.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
The last time Pauline Hanson had a seat the liberals defeated her by adopting all of her policies
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Trapezium Dave posted:If a coalition of ultra-right minor parties hold the balance of power in the senate to a Lib/Nat house of reps then they're definitely going to have an impact on the tone of the next government. They would just split and poo poo over whether Jews should be exterminated or not. This actually happened for the UPF, with what's left being very much the pro nationalist socialist cadre.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
Like I know LibertyCat was being serious when he said that calling people Nazis is intellectually lazy, but it's different when the people you care calling Nazis are actually people who believe in Nazi ideology, espouse Nazi values, and reaaaaaaally like Adolf Hitler as a person. This isn't intellectual laziness, this is calling it what it is. The fact that we have actual concentration camps which we can't really discuss, with only pre-approved media allowed to go over there, an situated in a country which is shooting up university students, or actually Wild Dog Island (also a puppet state), then it's pretty easy to draw some historical parallels.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
Has there been much speculation about how the Senate is likely to break down? Is it too hard to say anything at all with the new rules? If the balance of power is a coalition of many different groups then it will be a trainwreck (at least for the Libs who haven't been good at working with them), but if it's mainly one group like Family First then they're likely to have a fair bit of say in the next government.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
I think it's hard to say anything for sure given the new senate voting changes. It does reduce the chance of total unknown quantities like Leyonhelm and Muir getting in, and those people tend to be more often right-wing than left, but it might just mean that more known shitheads will get in, like Family First.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
MC Eating Disorder posted:I dunno about the impacts it'll have on the majors but I'm not looking forward to her being in the senate this time around, whose spot is she likely to take? If it's an LNP spot I imagine she'll drive them to the right a lot Implying the LNP aren't extreme right wingers already.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
Lion Hat got 0.66 of a quota last time on first preferences, which would be more than enough to elect him in a DD even if everything else went against him.Trapezium Dave posted:Has there been much speculation about how the Senate is likely to break down? Is it too hard to say anything at all with the new rules? Doctor Spaceman fucked around with this message at 01:44 on Jun 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
So someone went 'Well why vote Greens if their preferences flow to Labor anyway?' and I didnt know enough about how the new system works to refute. How does it work now?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
Two new TV ads uploaded today. They both have an extremely Kevin Rudd vibe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hr0QUDQvGc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEcmbAuMmYc Ofcourse, here's what is uploaded on the Liberal Side https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCHAQEDWbWk
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
Trapezium Dave posted:Has there been much speculation about how the Senate is likely to break down? Is it too hard to say anything at all with the new rules? Perennial psephologist Antony Green has analysis up at ABC... here's QLD: http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/guide/sqld/
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:So someone went 'Well why vote Greens if their preferences flow to Labor anyway?' and I didnt know enough about how the new system works to refute. How does it work now? Your preferences will only go to Labor if you write a number in a Labor box. Previously if you voted 1 Above the Line your preferences would be allocated according to the wishes of that party. Now if you vote 1 AtL you vote for all the members of that party (in order from top to bottom) and nobody else. If you want to support more parties, you have to write more numbers. First preference votes determine federal funding, so even if your vote eventually goes to a major party you can help a minor party achieve enough legitimacy to receive funding or to increase the amount they receive. Around 60M total gets allocated, so it's not pocket change.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Lion Hat got 0.66 of a quota last time on first preferences, which would be more than enough to elect him in a DD even if everything else went against him. Lionhat got 0.66 of a quota because he was in first spot and people thought they were voting Liberal
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
Can't wait for the Libertarian tears once Lionhat gets the axe.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
There's two issues that complicate things: 1. the low quota, which would seem to make incumbency work, but unfortunately also lets in anyone in on a lower bar, so that's difficult to predict. 2. the ATL change, which would also seem to make incumbency work, since your preferences will exhaust more quickly from the ballot side, but also given the low quota, will exhaust as the different State quotas fill more quickly. Also, if most people vote ATL, a state could be a lay down misere for one party at a time. Or more confusingly, there becomes a preference tussle between several ATL parties. There's a lot of noise that NXT could get 4 seats, but this is most likely only in SA, there's 6 other states to consider. My gut feeling is that people will still try to vote according to their old ways under the new ATL system and the results might go closer to HTV cards than ever. The biggest worry is that specific preferences by the majors go their way and we do get a bunch of terrible FF senators.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
I'm really interested to see how many people vote 1-6 AtL.Solemn Sloth posted:Lionhat got 0.66 of a quota because he was in first spot and people thought they were voting Liberal Yeah, and a good position combined with a decent name will probably get someone over the line this time too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:I'm really interested to see how many people vote 1-6 AtL. It should be pretty high, Labor and Coalition how to votes have 1-6 preferences and most major party voters follow the ticket.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:So someone went 'Well why vote Greens if their preferences flow to Labor anyway?' and I didnt know enough about how the new system works to refute. How does it work now? Greens preferences don't automatically flow to Labor; voters can preference however they like. A how-to-vote card is just a suggestion for people that want to know how a party they support would like them to vote. Anyway, I suspect the question you're asking in context is more along the lines or "Why vote Greens when a Greens candidate isn't going to win in my electorate and Labor will end up with my vote after preference flows anyway? Why not just vote Labor to begin with?" The correct response to this is to ask "Do you like Green's policies more than Labor?". If yes, then there's a couple of points to make: "More first preferences going to greens influences Labor to steer more of their own policies towards greens policies", "more primary votes to greens means more gov funding for greens", "more primary votes to greens makes them more recognised as a significant party by the media, which results in more media coverage". If you support Greens policies (or anyone else that's not Labor/Coalition), you lose nothing by preferencing smaller parties first.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
Bill has got a lot better at speaking still a bit robotic but a massive improvement
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
This is from a change.org spam petition so you have all probably seen it already but gently caress!quote:My 7 year old daughter is being excluded from lunchtime activities because we have asked that no religion be forced onto her. She is not able to participate in games and awards for being kind at assembly, as well as many other activities because they are run by the school chaplain. This is a Public Independent School. Not a Private or Religious school. This makes me incandescently angry. Especially against the background of the right trying to wedge the left on religious tolerance in the wake of Orlando. Tom Switzer had some nut job asking why it is that the extremist islamisists get a 'free walk' from the left. I don't want to get into the whole ideological purity/dualist/pluralism philosophical mire but having a doctrine of religious tolerance means you don't get to choose which ones go over some arbitrary and shifting bar of acceptability. That's what the law is for. The Orlando shooter, like the Brexit one, don't answer to some court of religious pluralism they are tried under the civil statutes just like anyone who breaks the law. This includes conspiring to break the law and in many countries engaging in hate speech. The most vehemently hateful things I have ever heard (in English, in my presence, so I can't pretend to be a comprehensive census of the practice) were all said from a pulpit in a christian church. poo poo that would make Ray Hadley blush. Stuff like excluding a seven year old because the parents have expressed a wish that the child receives no religious instruction. Let's just have spit on a seven year old for Jesus day.... All this talk about the extreme nationalistic right in mainstream politics especially as it relates to border control. I can't help but feel that this has been an Australian innovation that we have exported to the global stage. Sure the underlying support base for this stuff hovers just below the surface in all societies and the mechanisms for exploiting are well understood. But until the Howard/Hanson exploitation it had become socially unacceptable to murmur such things because of the 'lessons' from WWII. On a pretty straight forward interpretation it could be argued that Hansonism and extreme nationalism degrade the memories of those who served. Hello Lynton Crosby you utter waste of skin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynton_Crosby
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
MC Eating Disorder posted:I dunno about the impacts it'll have on the majors but I'm not looking forward to her being in the senate this time around, whose spot is she likely to take? If it's an LNP spot I imagine she'll drive them to the right a lot The final Senate seat in QLD is most likely going to either Pauline Hanson or Andrew Bartlett. Fairfax-ipsos from yesterday.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:19
|
|
|
Bill Shorten is really good at yelling important sentences. Makes me want to play a Command and Conquer game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:First preference votes determine federal funding, so even if your vote eventually goes to a major party you can help a minor party achieve enough legitimacy to receive funding or to increase the amount they receive. Around 60M total gets allocated, so it's not pocket change. I haven't decided which way I'm going to vote now the new rules allow greater flexibility in preferences above the line, but the federal funding issue might help me make a decision.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
They are still child torturers and concentration camp guards and I'm not changing my primary vote from Greens but I am impressed with the Labour campaign and policies and would/will be very happy at them forming government. Fingers crossed they make it out of this launch without mentioning THE BOATS and ruining the otherwise solid message.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Trapezium Dave posted:Is this for the Senate too, and does it count for both above and below the line voting (i.e. it goes to candidate 1 regardless)? For the Senate the Group receives funding if it gets 4% first preferences after looking at above and below the line votes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
I find the betting odds strange given it's a coin toss and highly unlikely to mimic 2013 preference flow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
Anidav posted:I find the betting odds strange given it's a coin toss and highly unlikely to mimic 2013 preference flow. $5.00 on hung parliament? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
Even with 50-50 polls a hung parliament is still far from certain. The 1990 election was 50.1-49.9 (AGAINST Labor) and Labor still had a margin of 9 seats. There are more independents now than there were then but it's pretty easy to have a close 2PP vote that still results in a majority government with a margin of 5-15 seats.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Even with 50-50 polls a hung parliament is still far from certain. The 1990 election was 50.1-49.9 (AGAINST Labor) and Labor still had a margin of 9 seats. There are more independents now than there were then but it's pretty easy to have a close 2PP vote that still results in a majority government with a margin of 5-15 seats. That's why I hedged with labor forming government. Not mutually exclusive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 22:40 |
|
|
Oh look, a forwarded email from my Grandfathercode:
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 04:42
|
|