Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2015/03/01 02:02:39
Subject: Re:Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
Yak9UT wrote: Tony Abbott has to be one of the biggest fools in Australian Political History.
Even the Yanks are now making fun of him and that says a lot
Here is a video John Oliver did on Tony Abbott
This is the reason why people don't like him.
I think the Monarchy is abhorrent and all the aristocratic nonsense that goes along with it is archaic, but by God that old man at the end deserves a Knighthood
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
2015/03/01 08:34:23
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
Yak9UT wrote: Tony Abbott has to be one of the biggest fools in Australian Political History.
Even the Yanks are now making fun of him and that says a lot
Here is a video John Oliver did on Tony Abbott
This is the reason why people don't like him.
That video is priceless, I nearly chocked on my breakfast.
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
2015/03/02 00:38:43
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
H.B.M.C. wrote: They'd be mad to replace him and Turnbull even madder to try. After watching the last Prime Minister and the other person who pretended to be Prime Minister floundering around and backstabbing one another the Libs made a good point of saying "How could anyone vote for this?"... and now they're going to do the same thing.
I think Turnbull should wait till after the election. I'm a big Turnbull fan , i was livid when the liberal party dumped him for captain stupid. The main thing i like about Turnbull is his seeming ability to trancend two party politics and actually do the bipartisan thing.
I love all the idiots in the papers saying Turnbull should do the honourable thing and not challenge captain stupid....errr just like tony did?
Also every one should watch the Bolt Report, it's good for stress relief, i spent a good half hour yelling at the TV , I also leaned Turnbull is public enemy #1 and killed Marylin Monroe (or something)
Anyone else think it's getting suspicious how quiet Christopher Pyne has been in the media lately?
that video is awesome, the 30 second silence had me in stitches.Loved the start as well, that intro is awesome.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/02 00:39:15
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
2015/03/02 01:35:13
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
It's completely wrong to have a thread about Tony Abbott without something to showcase his immense ability in answering on the spot questions (starts at about 30 seconds).
The problem with Tony Abbott is he's an okay Opposition leader (in that he knows how to spin gak and vote down anything the other side tries to do) but he's terrible at leading a party in power. He still thinks he's in Opposition, and it's all he knows how to do.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2015/03/02 01:53:51
2015/03/02 02:21:19
Subject: Re:Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
Dropbear Victim wrote: Now thats a scary thought! I really wish Shorten was gotten rid of and labor could go back to being a functional political party.
The Labor party has way deeper problems than just Shorten. There is a lot of major reform needed to seperate the party from the union movement and bring in some serious talent.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/03/02 04:12:18
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
-Loki- wrote: It's completely wrong to have a thread about Tony Abbott without something to showcase his immense ability in answering on the spot questions (starts at about 30 seconds).
The problem with Tony Abbott is he's an okay Opposition leader (in that he knows how to spin gak and vote down anything the other side tries to do) but he's terrible at leading a party in power. He still thinks he's in Opposition, and it's all he knows how to do.
Was he ever a "Okay" opposition leader?
I think had Labor not been as chaotic as it was I doubt he would even be considered able to get into power.
He lacked any sort of charm or charisma and always said something contradictory or stupid.
Hence the video you posted was when he was at the time in Opposition.
I don't even think he is that smart to have been able to get things done on his own and now he tries all these captain calls and looks even more stupid.
I think Liberal Government its pretty warped to think Abbott is the right man for the job.
Even Malcolm Fraser a Former Liberal Party Prime minister had some interesting words on Tony Abbott
The Liberal party is a shadow of its former self
Elysian Drop Troops 1500pts
Renegades & Heretics 2056pts
2015/03/02 04:23:30
Subject: Re:Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
Dropbear Victim wrote: Now thats a scary thought! I really wish Shorten was gotten rid of and labor could go back to being a functional political party.
The Labor party has way deeper problems than just Shorten. There is a lot of major reform needed to seperate the party from the union movement and bring in some serious talent.
Be careful what you wish for. UK Labour started down that road when Tony Blair became leader back in the mid 90's, and these days you could barely slip a ciggy paper between them in terms of policy. A two party system functions, barely, when the two parties have actual basic philosophical differences, but at this point the UK is essentially a one-party state run by landed capital and the banks. And if that sounds like an exaggeration just consider; even the prospect of another party, the SNP, taking a decent-sized chunk of seats at the next election has Labour lords and activists talking about going into coalition with the Tories.
Better your second party remains inept for a few additional years than abandon any remaining principles they have and essentially become their opponents with different coloured ties.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
2015/03/02 07:15:40
Subject: Re:Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
We already had that happen here in the late 90's with one nation. I'm quite supportive of smaller parties. Any one who says a vote for a smaller party is a wasted vote is a fool and a two party stooge. If no one votes for smaller parties then we deserve the two party mess we have. An erodi g vote isvthe only thing major parties in a two party system have to listen too
/end rant
Course the major parties could just decide it's all due to the leader they have
2015/03/03 02:41:35
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
Yak9UT wrote: Was he ever a "Okay" opposition leader?
He won government... therefore yes, he was a good and successful opposition leader, because that's the only real performance measure for the job.
Even Malcolm Fraser a Former Liberal Party Prime minister had some interesting words on Tony Abbott
To be fair, Malcolm Fraser has moved well the left on plenty of issues. He's to the left of most politicians in Australia at this point. That doesn't mean he ought to be ignored, just that 'even former Liberal Prime Minister Fraser' is a phrase that means a lot less than people think.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yodhrin wrote: Be careful what you wish for. UK Labour started down that road when Tony Blair became leader back in the mid 90's, and these days you could barely slip a ciggy paper between them in terms of policy. A two party system functions, barely, when the two parties have actual basic philosophical differences, but at this point the UK is essentially a one-party state run by landed capital and the banks. And if that sounds like an exaggeration just consider; even the prospect of another party, the SNP, taking a decent-sized chunk of seats at the next election has Labour lords and activists talking about going into coalition with the Tories.
Better your second party remains inept for a few additional years than abandon any remaining principles they have and essentially become their opponents with different coloured ties.
Nah. First up, this isn't about being temporarily inept - this is about a chronic, multi-generational talent shortage in the Labor party. They spent a very long time in opposition, two extremely troubled terms in government, and are now back in opposition and the only thing in their favour is the terribleness of our current PM. We are more than two decades since Hawke & Keating, and while Gillard might have been pretty good in different circumstances, that's it, the rest of the them have been nowhere near the ability you'd require out of one of your two major parties. Rudd and Latham were absolute disasters, and the only other real contender in that time was Beazley, who was well thought of on policy issues but was miles short of what you need to win an election (and then to enact policy). Crean was just a fill in no-one took seriously... and is that it? I can't even remember if anyone was in there.
And the reason for this is very simple - they are wedded to the union movement, and the union movement is an increasingly irrelevant part of Australia. Private sector union membership is a bit over 10% of the workforce, that is a ludicrously small portion on which to base one of your two major parites. But despite that, the union movement retains effective control over all appointments within the party, up to and including pre-selection.
Its a very obvious problem when you want to be a mainstream party that can hold government in its own right, but you draw your leadership almost entirely from a sector of the economy that's represents very few people, and is declining every year.
There is a vast left wing in this country with a great deal of potential talent, but it is locked out of mainstream politics because leadership positions in the Labor party come through union ranks.
Look at Malcom Turnbull, who's the overall favourite for Prime Minister among the electorate. He came in to politics from outside the normal grind of the two major parties. That's a road that's hard enough as it is within the Liberal party, within Labor its basically impossible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bullockist wrote: I'm quite supportive of smaller parties. Any one who says a vote for a smaller party is a wasted vote is a fool and a two party stooge.
Well, they'd certainly be someone who has no idea how the Australian electoral system works. Preferential voting people - your vote can't be wasted no matter who you put first.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/03/03 02:46:10
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/03/03 04:56:36
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
Well you say it can't be wasted, but I know a few people who wanted to vote Greens purely based on the refugee issue (lets ignore the problem with voting for a party for just 1 reason). They felt there was no point, because Greens are never a contender for their seat, and their vote would just trickle down to a party they didn't support. So they viewed their votes as being wastes. So while the vote was still counted, an individual can still think of it as a waste
I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own...
2015/03/03 05:03:52
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
motyak wrote: Well you say it can't be wasted, but I know a few people who wanted to vote Greens purely based on the refugee issue (lets ignore the problem with voting for a party for just 1 reason). They felt there was no point, because Greens are never a contender for their seat, and their vote would just trickle down to a party they didn't support. So they viewed their votes as being wastes. So while the vote was still counted, an individual can still think of it as a waste
Then they have no idea how our voting system works. If you put 1 in the box for the Greens candidate, then if he is no the winner or second candidate, your vote moves to your next preference, and if that preference is removed then it goes to your third preference and so on.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/03/03 05:54:51
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
sebster wrote: Then they have no idea how our voting system works. If you put 1 in the box for the Greens candidate, then if he is no the winner or second candidate, your vote moves to your next preference, and if that preference is removed then it goes to your third preference and so on.
No, that's the whole point. If the single issue that decides your vote is something that is only supported by one of the minor parties who have no chance of being elected, then your vote just winds up going to a party that you don't actually want to support.
2015/03/03 06:05:59
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
The Greens (or whatever party, if they get at least 4% of first preferences) will get the little bit of funding that your vote provides, though (which could be SEVERAL dollars), and it encourages other voters and the media to take them more seriously.
The really silly thing about Abbott being voted in is most of Labor's problems are being too much like the Liberals, not too little. I think it's a huge shame, because I've felt like Labor is who I should want to vote for, since I'm not super crazy into environmental issues, but the Greens are the only ones who seem to have a functioning sense of ethics and just about all their policy positions seem to be good.
2015/03/03 06:45:01
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
insaniak wrote: No, that's the whole point. If the single issue that decides your vote is something that is only supported by one of the minor parties who have no chance of being elected, then your vote just winds up going to a party that you don't actually want to support.
People who base their voting on a single issue are in for a long run of frustration and disappointment. Not because the system isn't fair, but because they're setting themselves up to see the election purely in terms of disappointment. We've all got beliefs and ideas that we love that aren't viable right now (or possibly ever). That doesn't mean the rest of it doesn't matter and we should take our vote and go home.
The other point is that when your vote gets allocated to your second and subsequent preferences, you aren't 'supporting' that preference, just indicating a preference between the remaining alternatives. Consider how it works in conversation form;
AEC - Welcome to Democracy, who's your favourite?
You - I really want the Greens to win.
AEC - Duly noted.
(sound of furious counting while Anthony Green earns his sweet, sweet ABC salary)
AEC - Okay, the Greens aren't going to win. No, sorry not even close. Everybody else picked either Liberal or Labor, who would you prefer out of those two?
You - But I want Greens.
AEC - No-one else voted for them. You don't get to pick this by yourself, everyone gets a say. And everyone else wanted Liberal or Labor, so out of those two what's your preference?
You - Out of those two? If it has to be one of them, I guess I'd prefer Labor.
AEC - Thanks! Welcome to your vote still counting, even if it isn't for the party you wanted most of all.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/03/03 06:54:21
Subject: Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
Yak9UT wrote: Was he ever a "Okay" opposition leader?
He won government... therefore yes, he was a good and successful opposition leader, because that's the only real performance measure for the job.
Well, that depends on what you think the job of an Opposition is. If it is return their party to power no-matter the cost, then well done Abbott. If you think the opposition's job is to contribute to the running of the government by supporting issues close to the hearts of the voters who elected them, and mitigating policies they disagree with, while still not shutting down the government in a fit of pique, then, well, I'm not sure honestly, Abbott cant have been as bad at it as the Republicans are at least.
sebster wrote: Nah. First up, this isn't about being temporarily inept - this is about a chronic, multi-generational talent shortage in the Labor party. They spent a very long time in opposition, two extremely troubled terms in government, and are now back in opposition and the only thing in their favour is the terribleness of our current PM. We are more than two decades since Hawke & Keating, and while Gillard might have been pretty good in different circumstances, that's it, the rest of the them have been nowhere near the ability you'd require out of one of your two major parties.
I still think that one of the great tragedies of the last few years was the loss of Wane Swan when he joined Gillard in falling on her own sword. I had a lot of respect for Swan, and would have been happy to see him lead the Labor party.
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: The really silly thing about Abbott being voted in is most of Labor's problems are being too much like the Liberals, not too little. I think it's a huge shame, because I've felt like Labor is who I should want to vote for, since I'm not super crazy into environmental issues, but the Greens are the only ones who seem to have a functioning sense of ethics and just about all their policy positions seem to be good.
I like the Greens, but I don't agree with all their policies. The whole anti-nuclear thing is just too, i don't know; ideologically purist i suppose.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/03 06:58:04
I thought the Greens were the voice of reason at the last election compared to the shambles that was Labour and Dr No (Tony Abbott for the uninitiated).
Thing about Australia though is that a government gets voted out rather than voted in. Keating out, Howard out (lost his seat as the PM), Gillard/Krudd out.
Tones is just the next on the list
2015/03/03 09:06:01
Subject: Re:Why all the abbott hate - A question for aussies
Elysian Drop Troops 1500pts
Renegades & Heretics 2056pts
