The other week Gillard said a vote for the greens is NOT a vote for labor, so she says.

Now she says that labor rcvd the larger number of votes based on 2PP which includes the green preferences. But if a vote for the greens isn't a vote for labor as she said, then libs got 500K more votes.

So is she now saying that a vote for the greens is now a vote for labor?? what a contradiction.

Seems she'll say anything to get ahead, lyine coniving deceptive woman she is showing herself to be.


I wish the media would pick up on these annomolies.

Like Gillard saying she is open to a carbon tax this election cycle yet Swann said there is no intention of a carbon tax till 2013, outside of this term??

Either way the way this Oakshot fool is carrying on we're going back to the polls within weeks, just wait and see. Then these independants will be voted out as will the green queens.

the sooner we have a first past the post system the better.

coalition won 82 seats on primary vote well ahead of labor.

laborfornever wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:24pm:


Fair enough, you want first past the post, but you cant have your cake and eat it too, if we do that it needs to be the single party with the most votes, not a coalition, as if its a coalition we have numb nuts screaming like banshees that IT NOT FAIR.
what do you expect GREENS voters to do? not preference Labor because its not fair,child.

First past the post should also provide the ruling party with the right to implement their agenda without opposition regardless of how bad a policy might be.

If it means labor wants a carbon tax they can do it, if they want 40% mining tax they can do it.

It shitz me no end that oppositions can stop a governments agenda.

let them implement it and if we don't like it then the next incoming party can dismantle it.

Just like the GST you lot whine about, labor could get rid of it but they wont.

======================

I sort off agree with you .

The biggest problem is tho when some policies 9 especially larger financial ones) are implemented into our system it is then harder to take it away once we have  a system working  around it....

laborfornever wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:36pm:



Is that the official unscrambling an omelette policy?

Life certainly can be simple when you do not let little reality problems interfere.

In MY electorate (Ballarat) the Greens did not allocate prefences - which I believe was the case in not just this electorate
The best solution I had was via a 'how to vote Liberal card' -numbered in REVERSE

When they ARE given it is a "serving suggestion" only - the decision on preferences is always the decision of the voter
Anyone that says a Green vote is an "automatic vote for Labor" is talking a LOAD of NONSENSE

Please delete wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 3:47pm:

So do I expect my GREENS vote to flow to Labor.
The funny thing I'm finding is that its the coalition supporters whinging the loudest about GREENS voters preferencing Labor, it was always going to happen.
The fact is many GREENS voters are disenchanted Labor voters who would never preference the coalition.

mozzaok wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:55pm:


Thus the mystery of how that political rash called the Liberal Party keeps coming back. Which only a balm of intelligence and applied education can remedy and alas only half the population have a clue.

buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 3:29pm:


But if you take out the word 'automatic' it DOES become true. With 80-90% of green preferences flowing to labor your protestations ring a little hollow!

skippy. wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:29pm:



Well actually, I'd expect the Greens voters to want to elect Greens...
I'm sure they're pretty unhappy about it too....

If I'd voted for a 'smaller' or 'special interest' party...Greens, Sex Party, Shooters Party or whatever....I'd much prefer that the representative from THAT party had won the seat, rather than just having MY vote given to one of the major parties...
After all, I voted for a special interest party because I didn't 'like' either of the major parties all that much.....

Who in their right mind would place their first preference for the environment by voting green and then choose their alternate position to be diametrically opposite by voting against the environment (Liberal).

I just do not see what the Libs do not get you can not be environmental vandals and expect green preferences.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 7:04pm:






The swing against the Government was relatively small, as an across-the board figure
Where it fell was the problem

My local Labor member was returned with an INCREASED majority - a rarity for a rural seat
The local Greens vote rose by roughly 50% - one of the highest in the country

We've done our bit
Our community wind farm will have a DIRECT connection next year to around 2000 homes and businesses
I have insulated myself, as best I can, from eruptions and implosions of government

But, it's early days ......
And an outcome based on which party the GG has the greatest confidence
It's HER call
Hers ONLY

Please delete wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 3:47pm:


You credit far too many, with far too much grey matter.

buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 7:32pm:


Actually, I heard on the radio today, that the GG 'may' give the 'call' to the Chief Justice, to avoid any appearance of bias.....

Not that I personally believe she would be biased....
I guess she thinks maybe better safe than sorry....

All that matters at this point is this vote and clearly we have the left side of voters that couldn't bring themsleves to vote for labor so they voted Green and Labor and Greens decided to head that protest off at the pass deciding that Labor would have their votes anyway.

Make no mistake this is about an extreme left  side of politics, unaccountable for their policies pinching votes from the accountable labor...not that it worries me, from a conservative side, this is all good news watching the 'tards fight it out 

And it seems that Labors count is dropping

Some interesting statements -

Anna Bligh says that the 'poisonous' way NSW Labor treats leaders come election time 'like a revolving door' is a danger and a worry.

Maxine McKew says that the Federal Labor campaign was poor and changing leaders without asking the people was a mistake and led to many seat losses.

Julia Gillard bans the henchman Arbib from going on TV in case he says something that damages her and them.


Is this a party that should govern?
The same party that lost a majority after ballsing up its one term?

No sorry, time they went.....

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 10:52pm:



Interesting though, did you catch Kevin Rudd's victory speech in Queensland?
Glowing and smiling!

See his supporters?

Wearing yellow t-shirts and not a single mention of 'ALP' anywhere.

Interesting, suggests Kev may have actually enjoyed it a little bit....

buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 6:27pm:

Don't worry about him Buzz, the dick cant even spell properly and he bags Labor for education.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 25^th, 2010 at 10:05am:



Have you written a book?
What is it on? Fiction or Fact based?

Most I have written was a dissertation at university on the Asian Financial Crisis of 1998 which I look back on now and really enjoyed too.

In the middle of it and working to deadlines, it felt less enjoyable.