Thatâs about right. They donât really care about nuclear as long as they can use that as a smokescreen for keep using coal during the âtransitionâ.
Littleproud, Barnaby and a lot of those Queensland MPs are very anti-renewables. The rest of us have moved on though.
ârest of usâ, Tom? Average Australian people arenât uni-grads or political/cultural geeks or activists. Iâve noticed that most of the protesters up at the SLV on Swannie are either quite young or quite old â the big, massive middle is missing. Do these people even care who they are effectively siding with or what a âpermanent ceasefireâ actually would result in? Hint: not âfreedomâ for the long-suffering Palestinian people as the Islamists have the guns and the amoralityâŚ
Are you trying to suggest that uni graduates are all leftist snobs? As a (soon to be) graduate, I find that quite offensive.
Get a hold of yourself.
Completely irrelevant to what we were talking about.
They are the sort of party that will go to the election nuclear nuclear nuclear! Then come back in 10 years and diddly squat has happened.
Has anyone in the LNP run any costings on setting up a Nuclear industry? We are pumping huge cash into Defence, we canât do both. Nuclear has cost blow outs written all over it.
As much as they bang on about nuclear I think there is zero chance they would actually do it. Itâs a smokescreen to keep coal going another couple of decades.
I think theyâve seriously misjudged (or ignored) public opinion on nuclear power though. People donât really want it, unless theyâre Sky News cult members.
Politicians often announce these big plans but then pull them back later on citing too expensive or no financial means. LNP are talking a big game on financial discipline so they need to be mindful here. Itâs a dead topic as they would need bipartisan support and more importantly, state support, they seems off the cards.
However what they do is they try to spin it like they are doing us a favour by scrapping something, they seem to forget they announced it. Announce something you canât justify, then announce later on itâs not going ahead and we will save tens of billions. 
Andrews did that. We will save xx dollars by abandoning the games. But itâs still costing us xx billions. Just think of the saving!
Good to see the vile Hollie Hughes, who last parliamentary sitting week implied Labor senator Fatima Payman was âsupporting terroristsâ for making pro-Palestinian comments, has been 'Concetta Fierravanti-Wellsâed and demoted to 3rd place on the Liberal ticket (which is actually 4th on the Coalition senate ticket).
Speaking of which, is there actually a way or strategy for Labor to potentially winning a 3rd seat in the Senate in most states (apart from the 2022 election where they won 3 in WA). Seems like the Coalition always gets 3 whilst Labor and Green get 2 and 1 each. Surely in a good election for Labor they could get 3 seats across the country and actually, just maybe, get a majority in the senate? Iâm sure they would hate having the Coalition having the lionshare of seats in that âunrepresentative swillâ and being held to ransom by the Greens and others for their agenda.
There is almost no chance of either side winning a majority in the Senate without an overwhelming landslide election due to the mathematics of the quota. At a normal half-Senate election, the quota is 14.3% of the vote. So to guarantee 3/6 seats, you need 42.9% of the vote. Laborâs primary vote in 2022 was 30%, which will guarantee 2 seats in every state, but makes it difficult to go on to win a third. The Coalition polled at around 34%, which is normally enough to reach a third quota in some states.
3/6 seats in each state isnât enough for a majority, though. There are states where you need to be winning 4/6, which means your vote needs to be closer to 57.2%. Any party polling that well in the Senate would also have a thumping House majority.
Itâs quite interesting that in 1996 when Howard won in that huge landslide he came up just short of a majority in the senate despite having nearly double the number of seats Labor had in the lower house, but in 2004 when he had a smaller majority in the lower house he commanded a majority in the senate (and with that, the shambles that was WorkChoices was passed on literally without scrutiny, thank goodness weâre past that era now).
I presume also that the Liberals/Nationals ticket gets a lot of preferences from those who vote for the minor parties like ON and UAP and LDP etc who canât get up (unless if theyâre in Queensland or WA or somewhere else) and those flow to the 3rd candidate on the Coalition ticket. Labor however doesnât get that luxury given that thereâs a lot less minor left-wing parties and the one that they usually receive the preferences from (Greens) usually do well enough to earn a seat in their own right rather than passing off preferences.
Labor really needs to do something about their primary vote. The fact that theyâre ahead of 2PP but behind the Coalition is mind-boggling. They really need to get it close to them or overtake them on primaries to get a chance in the senate to get more seats than the Coalition so theyâre not reliant on the Greens but somehow they just canât breakthrough. That said, thereâs so many rusted on Coalition voters that some things never change.
Probably helped by Pauline Hanson running against One Nation in QLD, which likely split the vote and allowed a third Liberal to be elected, along with Barnaby for the Nats to give them the majority (typically you see two Libs and a Nat elected).
That is the pattern in the numbers. You will normally see a split with three right-leaning and thee left-leaning. This usually translates to 2 Libs and 2 Labor. The final seats are normally filled with a Nat and a Green, but you may also find the independents sliding in here. Again, the primary vote around 30% makes it difficult to get anymore than 2 seats in a state.
I thought in preferential voting you literally canât split or âthrow awayâ your vote since all possible outcomes are calculated?
Last nightâs episode of Media Watch covered reporting on the issue of the purchase of two new Boeing 737s for government use.
Only if all of the votes go your way. In 2001, One Nation received 10% of the vote with Hanson on the ballot, which would normally be enough to be elected (she wasnât elected, I suspect preference deals done favoured the Nats before ON). In 2004, the ON vote dropped below 4%, with 4.5% going to Hanson. The Libs vote increased by over 3%, so it would not be surprising if some of that remainder went their way. You canât win a Senate seat at 3 or 4% primary, especially if there is leakage of preferences.
Andrew Giles walking a tightrope it seems. Might survive for the moment, but a Labor cabinet reshuffle would be wise soon, probably should have done that mid term.
WA will gain a new federal seat in the Perth Hills area, to be named Bullwinkel, after Lieutenant Colonel Vivian Bullwinkel, a former prisoner of war who went on to become director of nursing at Melbourneâs Fairfield Hospital.
LOL at the initial idea that Josh Frydenberg even thinking about running again for Kooyong because:
- He only became interested after the proposed boundary redistribution. He only cares when more Liberal fans are being put into the electorate by the AEC.
- Liberals have already pre-selected Amelia Hamer in Kooyong, whoâd probably have a better chance at competing against Monique Ryan compared to Frydenberg. If they had disposed of her for him then it would reinforce the fact that the party has a women problem.
Dutton must be breathing a sigh of relief now that heâs poured cold water over this. It wouldâve ended up in a clusterf anyway particularly given the Liberals have also preselected Katie Allen back in Higgins and if that is abolished then theyâve got to sort that out themselves with Chisholm and Kooyong all sorted and the Liberals having no chance in hell of winning Melbourne, Macnamara or Hotham.
Labor would find this much easier to resolve. Move the Higgins MP to Chisholm and the Chisholm MP to Deakin or Menzies and take down the remaining Eastern suburbs seats in Melbourne.
Josh would be this cycleâs Kristina Keneally. Ridiculous that anyone would have even thought this was an option.
Itâs laughable seeing all these Liberal hacks coming out saying Hamer should step side, and let Frydenberg take it. Jason Falinski is a dickhead for saying Amelia should settle for state politics. Do these idiots read the room? Itâs the same old LNP club as before. They do understand this stuff just pisses off the electorate even more? More ammo for Ryan to take to the next election.
Ryan is a hard one to read, would need to see some data from the next election to get a gauge on her current following. Josh will also be watching, I somewhat think his entrance back into Federal Politics will not be via Kooyong if Ryan holds her line.
While I think Josh is about the be chance the LNP would ever have at securing office, thatâs a long way away, and likely into the 2030s when Labor fatigue settles in.
I was kind of hoping (ngl) that he would challenge Hamer, just to see how the Victorian Liberals stuff this whole thing up. Add to that the bonus that if Higgins was abolished, where are they going to put Katie Allen who theyâve already endorsed.
Frydenberg in contention would only serve to keep Monique Ryan in parliament. Amelia Hamer is kind of the type that people in Kooyong wanted to vote for but found Frydenberg to be the Morrison-loyalty brand. She could really pose a risk to Monique Ryan. Further to this, the redistribution of Armadale, Toorak into the electorate thatâs loyal Liberal blue will help the Libs, but having said that, parts of Prahran is also proposed to be distributed into Kooyong, and thatâs Greens area which will only help Monique Ryan rather than any Liberal.
People say that out of the teals sheâs the weakest. I kind of doubt that but maybe Victorians (particularly those who live in Kooyong) might think differently. All I know is that Goldstein will be Zoe Danielâs for as long as she keeps running and Tim Wilson is her main competitor.
I donât know. If Labor falls into minority next election then itâs 2010 Gillard era disaster all over again, and we all knew what happened 3 years later. I for one do NOT want to see the prospect of Voldermort/potatohead being the Prime Minister at all.