I find really amusing Labor are trying to spin the election result as if it was a mini victory insofar as they didn't lose as many seats as expected. So their mandate going into the election was to "minimise damage" rather than trying to win it, if this isn't a clear admission their policies stunk and their performance over the past six years was terrible I don't know what is. Amazing Tanya Plibersik on Q&A rates Labors performance 9/10 and yet decided the best way to celebrate this success was to sack their captain not once but twice.

You have misconstrued (deliberately, IMO) what Plibersek said.

She rated the Government 9/10 on Public Governance and 0/10 on self governance - meaning that she is ashamed and appalled at the undeniable ALP infighting that is what largely allowed The LNP to distract the public from the fact that the ALP was doing fantastic policy work.

The 5% or so that Palmer's party picked up could probably be considered more a "protest vote" rather than a "right-wing-other-than-Liberal" vote... whereas the Greens vote is in part a protest but mainly a genuine left-wing support (i.e. most Greens voters are fully aware of what the Greens stand for and believe in that).


It's still worth remembering that the Libs have almost never been able to form government in their own right... without the coalition with the Nationals and the LNP in Qld (which is more Nationals than Liberals) they would rarely form government.

Hence why I think Labor-Greens will end up going the same way.

Don't forget that despite both being "right wing" there are stark political differences between Libs and Nats (Libs are basically free enterprise whereas Nats are protectionist).




When you consider that the swing against Labor has mainly been in SA, Tas and Vic between 2010 and 2013... I think all this election has shown is how well Julia Gillard did to win the vote in those states 3 years ago. Basically what Labor lost between 2007 and 2010 (Qld, WA, NSW) stayed about the same while the states that Gillard did well in followed those 3 this time around.

I think Rudd probably would've lost the election 3 years ago based on that. I do also suspect however that Gillard might've held more Vic and Tas seats if she'd been there for 2013 but would've got completely wiped out in Qld, NSW and WA which Rudd managed to avoid.

Your math is as good as Labor policies broken, 2% of voting public agreeing means 98% of voting public did not vote for the Coalition?

How did they get 90 seats and counting with percentages like that?

Also which Labor policies do you think should have got Labor over the line?

It doens't add up Notor. If Labors public governance was so fantastic you would expect the team to unite behind their captain and position their election campaign based on their policy strengths and achievements. Instead they went in with the guy who was more popular in the opinion polls.

And doing fantastic policy work doesn't negate all the policy work they butchered, which was a lot and rightfully exposed.

Such as?

As for personality politics, not much of what brought down the ALP was actual policy, rather the greed and selfish ambition of those within. The ALP over the past 6 years has been like a less competent version of House of Cards.

Well, you know, all the shit they fucked up. Like the carbon tax they promised they wouldn't happen and then happened obviously broke trust with the public. The effective asylum seeker framework they dismantled, and led to hundreds if not thousands of deaths, and later reinstated. The mining tax which cost more to advertise than made in revenue. Not going to go through every piece of policy shit they delivered but you would have to have your head firmly buried up your backside if you think these were actually successes.

Of course policy brought Labor down, the infighting was merely a consequence. If Labor were doing so well the public would've recognised this, the opinion polls reflected this and any attempts by Rudd to subvert Gillards leadership would've been firmly rebuffed by the caucus. If we accept your version of events that Labor were doing a fantastic job but decided to white ant their own captain to save a few seats in parliament this reflects very poorly on the character and ethics of the Labor party.

No, the Liberals won the election by shutting the hell up and letting the Labor Party crash and burn.

You don't think they were planting seeds all along?

Oh yeah, this was all just a brilliant cumulative effort over the last 6 years from the Liberal party planting seeds in the Labor party to win the election in 2013. Fuck off.

LOL....that's hilarious......LOL#-o #-o

if all else fails...go the personal abuse....;)

Not within the Labor party (Labor planted their own seeds) but in the minds of the public, with regards to specific issues such as economic management, carbon tax lie and asylum seekers. It's astonishing you don't want to admit Liberals had a hand in undermining the public confidence in Rudd, Gillard and Labor andx that this precipitated their downfall. You're like an petulant unsportsmanlike soccer player who refuses to credit the opposition for flogging them rather blames his own players.

Nah would of been a bit of both, look at their rhetoric and the type of voters they were aiming at.

-PB

childish ....once again.....to be expected really.:^o :^o

That metaphor is faulty in itself because it implies that I view Labor as 'my team'.

And given that a bare 1.8% of voters swung towards the Liberal Party compared to a 7.5% swing away from Greens and Labor I'm pretty comfortable in my assertion that you're wrong.

What?

You mean broad statements like "but the rest of Australian voting public agrees with me" doesn't sound stupid? :lol:

-PB

well i have to say that of course it's not going to be 100% to the coalition, but i wouls say the majority were............


here's the thing......hilarious IMO......

greens polling down 3.38%.......

[youtube]WH_MBwQhGgA[/youtube]




some of the forum members appear in this video....guess who they are....LOL

In terms of "hearts and minds" the Libs spent 3 years pumping out a consistent message. You may not like it but you have to admit they were consistent and people knew what they were about.

Labor spent the last 3 years trashing Abbott.

People saw through it and made up their minds that they had nothing constructive to say so stopped listening. Even when they had a few good points.

Labor have only themselves to blame.

A post earlier...

a post later...


So are you mentally deficient, do you just have a bad memory or have you never heard the metaphor about people in glass houses?

Can the sea level just rise to shut conservatives up already?

It's political satire... ](*,)

If I found a picture of a dog turd I could say some people in this thread would appear in it too ;)

-PB

Afro the metaphor of you being a petulant unsportsmanlike dickhead remains.

The massive swing away from the government indicates the oppositions campaign to undermine confidence in Labors its policies and leaders was an effective one. A non vote for Labor is as good as a vote for Liberal.

Relax... They're rising, they're rising...

same back at you dolt........like editing people's actual quotes to deride them.....

I didn't vote greens :lol:

Also a 7.5% swing is actually a 3.75% swing. Using 7.5% is 'double counting' a single person.



Edited by macktheknife: 11/9/2013 02:19:35 PM

Correct. I don't think anyone here would disagree with that.


And then you go and spoil it with something that makes no sense whatsoever. :lol:

How Australia's thirsty Outback soaked up water like a 'sponge', causing a drop in GLOBAL sea levels
U.S. scientists said a combination of weather patterns over the Indian and Pacific oceans funneled rain over Australia
For an 18-month period the oceans dropped by about 7 millimeters bucking the trend of rising sea levels said to be caused by global warming
A study by NCAR said the soils and topography of Australia prevented rain running into the ocean, causing dry areas to act like an enormous sponge

By SARAH GRIFFITHS

PUBLISHED: 13:12 GMT, 21 August 2013 | UPDATED: 13:12 GMT, 21 August 2013

comments The soils and topography of Australia prevent almost all of its rain from running off into the ocean
The soils and topography of Australia prevent almost all of its rain from running off into the ocean, causing Australia to act like an enormous sponge
A combination of weather patterns over the Indian and Pacific oceans funneled so much rain over Australia that the world's sea levels fell in 2011, scientists said.
Unlike other continents, the soils and topography of Australia prevent almost all of its rain from running off into the ocean, causing dry areas of Australia to act like an enormous sponge.
According to a U.S. study, the effect caused by the La Niña weather pattern around Australia meant global sea levels fell for 18 months during 2010 and 2011, bucking the long-term trend of rising sea levels caused by higher temperatures and melting ice sheets.
The scientists said that as the atmospheric patterns have returned to normal, more rain is falling over the tropical oceans once more and the seas are rising again.
Dr John Fasullo, a scientist at the National Centre for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in the U.S. said: 'It's a beautiful illustration of how complicated our climate system is.'
'The smallest continent in the world can affect sea level worldwide. Its influence is so strong that it can temporarily overcome the background trend of rising sea levels that we see with climate change.'
Dr Fasullo said most of the rain that normally falls over land usually travels back to the sea via streams and rivers over months so when there is torrential rain over the land, the effect on the world's sea levels is almost invisible.
However, during the La Niña of 2010-11, which saw the temperature of the eastern Pacific ocean drop and more rainfall over land then normal, global sea levels dropped by 0.3 inches for around 18 months.
Heavy rains impacted Australia's landscape
Floodplains shown here in southwestern Queensland in September 2009. According to a U.S. study, the effect caused by the La Niña weather pattern around Australia meant global sea levels fell for 18 months during 2010 and 2011
The fall goes against the larger trend of sea levels rising by around 0.1 inch per year since 1993, which is believed to be caused by melting glaciers and ice sheets as well as water temperatures warming up, which are linked to global warming.
However, since 2011 and the end of La Niña, sea levels have risen faster than before at around 0.4 inches per year.

The research, published in Geophysical Research Letters, links the fall in sea levels to more water storage on land, which occurred at the same time as La Niña.
Dr Fasullo noted there have been other La Niña events when scientists did not observe a drop in sea levels as dramatic as in 2010-11.
a huge amount of rain had fallen across Australia
By the time this second image was taken in March 26, 2011, a huge amount of rain had fallen across Australia instead of in the ocean. The scientists said that as the atmospheric patterns have returned to normal, more rain is falling over the tropical oceans once more and the seas are rising again
In a bid to explain the phenomenon, the scientists found La Niña coincided with two other weather patterns that effectively funneled the water over Australia's land mass, where it seldom rains.
The Indian Ocean Dipole weather pattern, which carried atmospheric moisture across the ocean from the west, met the easterly moving moisture from La Niña.
A third pattern called the Southern Annular Mode then caused the rain to fall on the huge continent.
Dr Fasullo told NBC News: 'You have this collision of transports in the Pacific and then southward into Australia — so a big funnel of tropical moisture into Australia — and that led to one of the wettest years on record in Australia, if not the wettest.'
Almost one foot of rain fell over Australia during the 18 month period in 2010-11
Almost 1ft of rain fell over Australia during the 18 month period in 2010-11, which was effectively trapped in the Outback (pictured) with nowhere to go. Dr Fasullo said only in Australia could the atmosphere carry such heavy tropical rains to such a large area, only to have those rains fail to make their way to the ocean
Almost one foot of rain fell over Australia during the period and the rain was effectively trapped in the Outback - the dry, interior of the continent - with nowhere to go.
Dr Fasullo said: 'No other continent has this combination of atmospheric set-up and topography.
Only in Australia could the atmosphere carry such heavy tropical rains to such a large area, only to have those rains fail to make their way to the ocean.'
Much of the water collected in the Lake Eyre basin, which has been likened to a massive inland sea in the east of the country, while most of the rest of the water was absorbed by the dry soil of the Western Plateau.
It is not known whether this strange occurrence will happen more regularly as earth warms up and scientists are not sure how global warming could effect the El Niño and La Niña cycle.
Dr Fasullo believes the event if partly due to climate change, but also partly natural as he claims it was a 'serendipitous interaction' of weather patterns that caused global sea levels to temporarily fall.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2398782/How-Australias-thirsty-Outback-soaked-water-like-sponge-causing-drop-GLOBAL-sea-levels.html

No. A vote for Liberal is a vote for Liberal. That's why it's called a "vote for Liberal" #-o A non-vote for Labor isn't a vote for Liberal if nobody votes for Liberal.

All I did was re-annotate to the way it read. If you had a rebuttal, you'd have made on instead of going "LOL...that's hilarious.........LOL" like a moron. Of course, it's no surprise to anybody in this thread that you lack the capacity to express yourself in an argument - that's nothing new.