Oh, Fairfax 
And this piece of great objective reporting.
I think itâs a bit naive to say Pauline hasnât been trying to piggyback on the success of Trump.
Sheâs advocated for a Muslim ban, which is textbook Trump. Sheâs shown a willingness to stir up skepticism toward mainstream institutions; last nightâs disgraceful barring of the ABC from her event is an example. Her stance on vaccines is broadly in line with Trumpâs (although that could be coincidence). Sheâs also gone out of her way to portray herself as a bastion of the anti-establishment; anti-establishmentarianism is basically the whole reason Trump won. Sheâs also aped Trumpâs attempts to win working class voters by portraying herself as fighting for the interests of workers, whilst also being somewhat anti-union.
The big difference between the US and Australia is electoral systems. The rigid two party system means voter blocs will vote for a party, even if the candidate isnât that appealing. College educated white men may have voted Republican in the last election simply because theyâll never vote Democrat, so attributing that victory to Trump might not be necessarily correct. In the US, lots of people will simply vote for a party without question every election. Here in Australia, thanks to a longstanding combination of compulsory voting and preferencing, voters can vote third party and still matter.
Back to anti-establishment, she might not be Trump but she and other prominent right wing leaders worldwide have clearly shown that they want to capitalise on Trumpâs victory to deliver the same result in other western countries. What last night demonstrated is that, in a state which has a problematic unemployment rate and has been suffering from economic uncertainty in recent years, she was still unable to break through, which arguably suggests she wonât come near the highs which Trump has.
1 Like
I didnât say that. I 100% agree Pauline has been trying, pathetically, to piggyback off Trump.
Doesnât mean theyâre the same or linked in any way though.
Actually, if anything, that isnât textbook Trump - itâs the one thing that heâs clearly walked away from, months before the election even.
I absolutely think they are though. Aussie politics isnât in a vacuum anymore, especially with the rise of social media.
I think it speaks to Paulineâs ineptitude as a leader, that there is significant momentum for her to capitalise on, yet she has managed to run her ship into the ground. WA was a disaster for her; she ran a campaign arguing to fuck over the GST share of her most popular state, then backflipped. Canât wait for a Newspoll for Queensland.
1 Like
How can an American President that won 12 out of 10 battleground states be compared with someone that just got 4% in an Australian state election?
Am I missing something here?
This is like saying if Peter Beattieâs wife rocked up, sporting a new bob, and using the slogan âIâm With Herâ, and talking about open borders, that suddenly sheâs Hillary Clinton.
The analogy is just bizarre.
She could pathetically parrot off every one of Hillaryâs lines and she still wouldnât be linked to Hillary in any way.
Theyâre virtually identical on major policy positions. Pauline has tried to piggyback on Trump, as you admitted.
The fact she polled at 4% is precisely my argument. The movement which most obviously tried to bring Trumpism (anti-establishmentarianism and anti-immigration) to Australia is looking less and less likely to be around for much longer.
But people donât simply vote on policy. In fact, Iâd argue many times people never vote on policy.
They vote on personality and competence.
1 Like
This would be more akin to somewhere between Bernardi and Abbott.
Or UKIP in the UK.
Certainly not One Nation, or say for example the BNP in the UK. Completely different.
I think we saw last night that lots did. Case in point: the Nationals held up because they fought for the funding of their constituents, while the Libs went waaay backwards. I also think privatisation played a bigger role than many realise.[quote=âFiretorch, post:253, topic:1123â]
This would be more akin to somewhere between Bernardi and Abbott.
Or UKIP in the UK.
Certainly not One Nation, or say for example the BNP in the UK. Completely different.
[/quote]
And I doubt Bernardi will fare nearly as well without first billing on the SA Liberal Senate ticket. Abbott is a political pariah now. Rise Up Australia isnât anywhere to be seen. Pauline absolutely was angling herself to take a portion of the far-right vote which Trump motivated. She came the closest of any in Australia but her incompetence got in the way.
Itâs been hilarious reading some Facebook groups I happen to be a part of this morning. The far-righters in them were absolutely enamored to Pauline, making her out to be some massive force which would be a king maker in the WA and QLD elections. This morning, theyâre all changing tune, talking about how she canât do leadership like Trump.
1 Like
This doesnât make sense. How do you know that lots simply voted on policy and nothing else? If anything, Nationals candidates have fantastic local exposure and are well known in their community, compared with say eastern states drop-ins in the last week, from One Nation. I already mentioned above that Colinâs perception of being out of touch (and arrogance), plus for example the privatisation of a public utility meant there was no chance he was going to survive.
It is closest to Bernardi and Abbott in terms of tone, substance and style.
Pauline Hanson is a solar system away.
Oh, well in that case you should come to me for your political analysis instead. 
You should avoid loony tune facebook groups as they give an unrealistic picture as to what, well, normal people are thinking.
Incidentally, I know youâre implying that Iâm one of those people changing my tune, talking about how Hanson canât do leadership like Trump - just amuse yourself with a search of these boards of âPaulineâ posted by âFiretorchâ. The first time Iâve ever mentioned her was, well, the other day when you compared her to me and I retorted that she had nothing to do with me.
Oh and by the way I voted Labor yesterday. But I smell far-left spin from federal Labor, Shorten and Fairfax a mile off.
Oh and one final, but very important point as to the difference.
That was a state election yesterday. It is ridiculous to think people were going to change their state government because of something not within their remit - immigration policy. Or because they have gripes with state education or health departments; departments that just deliver basic services.
Anti-establishmentarianism would be someone in WA using to their advantage the Canberra-hatred in WA. Not, for example, someone from the eastern states herself, lol.
I agree, but Iâm not surprised; itâs just as laughably wrong & opportunistic as Turnbull & co. claiming that renewable energy was entirely to blame for recent power outages.
Politicans stretching & twisting the truth to/past breaking pointâŚwhatâs new?
1 Like
Her claimed qualifications are being questioned.
Heh, the majority are normal folks sharing cooking recipes. I got added by a friend.
But there are a few âoff the deep endâ. Theyâre fun to follow.
Absolutely not - if the Canning by election was a test for Abbott then this was surely a test for MalCON.
It seems many factors were in play for the Libs:
- Privatisation
- Penalty rates (Federal)
- Govt dithering and being a âdo nothingâ team (Federal)
- State debt
You canât compare federal by-elections with state electionsâŚ
As a Western Australian, I can confidently say this had nothing to do with it.
Yep. State politics and federal politics canât really be compared fairly.
If (well, probably when) the NSW Liberals are voted out of office in March 2019, it will be because of issues and unpopular policies on a state level rather than anything to do with the current Federal Government.
1 Like