The point is that a punter was prepared to write him off simply because he wore cufflinks. It's retarded logic and says more about the punter than Turnbull.

What's he supposed to do? Wear a wife-beater and thongs?

Do we really want politicians where advisors as saying yes you can wear those shoes because they have just the right amount of scuffing on them but not those because they're too shiny?
Edited by toughlove: 6/7/2016 02:04:12 PM

Do we really want politicians where advisors as saying yes you can wear those shoes because they have just the right amount of scuffing on them but not those because they're too shiny?

Spot on.
Also I'd rather the politicians with a wealthy background didn't try and pretend they're anything but that. Example, I was watching Michaelia Cash (what a perfect name btw :lol:) on Kitchen Cabinet and she was talking about her pretty privileged upbringing and lifestyle and I didn't mind it at all as that was her. Then I heard she used her backpacking experience as an example of understanding what it was like to be poor and it made me cringe hard.

Plenty of wealthy Australians who aren't cocks who are popular, Dick Smith popping to mind first of all.

What riles Australians up is the "just get a good job that pays good money" out-of-touch attitude.

No one would have the balls to sack dick

Bollocks.

Dick might not be a cock but I heard he can be a bit of a wang sometimes.

Plenty of wealthy Australians who aren't cocks who are popular, Dick Smith popping to mind first of all.

What riles Australians up is the "just get a good job that pays good money" out-of-touch attitude.

Plenty of wealthy Australians who aren't cocks who are popular, Dick Smith popping to mind first of all.

You're thinking of Reinhardt. But it doesn't matter who it is or whether they're self made or not, Australians love to drag you down for being successful.

Everyone is always saying the government should be run more like a business. All of a sudden there's a businessmen in charge and because he wears a nice suit and a set of cufflinks that's enough for scummers to bag him out.

Whether someone is rich or not doesn't mean they can't understand the electorate or that they're automatically a cock.

Turnbull has had about 4 different careers and has been success in most of them before he even got to politics.

I'm not a liberal voter but it's not because he's rich.

Just inherit more coal, right?

I read that too.

It tells you that people are pathetic and want to drag successful people down instead of aspiring to be successful themselves.

20 years ago Greg Norman said something along the lines of this.

"In America if someone sees a BMW they want to work hard and try and own one one day.

In Australia they run a 20 cent coin down the side."

The bloke is worth $100 million. Only in Australia is being rich and being a good, decent, reasonable human a mutually exclusive thing.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-05/coalition-pulls-ahead-of-labor-as-additional-results-counted/7571776

Latest thoughts from Antony Green is that the Libs may get to 76 seats.

He says:

"I think they can get to 76," Mr Green said.

"Seventy-three is a definite, 74 is also likely, 75 is possible, 76 is less possible."

"It's still either a very, very narrow Coalition majority or hung parliament. The Coalition will have more seats than Labor," he said, adding it was less likely the Coalition could get an absolute majority.

I read that too.

It tells you that people are pathetic and want to drag successful people down instead of aspiring to be successful themselves.

20 years ago Greg Norman said something along the lines of this.

"In America if someone sees a BMW they want to work hard and try and own one one day.

In Australia they run a 20 cent coin down the side."

The bloke is worth $100 million. Only in Australia is being rich and being a good, decent, reasonable human a mutually exclusive thing.

What does it tell you when Turnbull does a tour of Sydney's West wearing cuff links
:lol:

I have received numerous questions about why the ABC website is not using the current seat totals on the Australian Electoral Commission's (AEC's) website.

The reason is that the AEC's current seat totals are not totals of seats won, but simply totals of seats where a party is leading. This is not an indication that a party has won these seats.

On the ABC site I prefer to leave these seats as remaining in doubt, not to include them in a total of seats won. The ABC's current seat count is Coalition 68, Labor 67, Others 5 and 10 seats undecided. Five of those seats sit on margins of under 0.5%.

Beyond this issue of dealing with very close seats, there is a second problem. The AEC site is currently excluding six seats that have clearly been won by one of the major parties.

These seats only have first preference tallies. Of these six seats, Labor has clearly won Grayndler, and the Coalition has clearly won Cowper, Higgins, Barker, Durack and O'Connor.

The reason these seats are not included in the AEC's totals is that these seats do not have significant preference counts. The AEC only has first preference totals. On the AEC's website, seats can only be given away if there is a significant two-candidate preferred count. Despite these six seats clearly being capable of being given away on first preferences, five for the Coalition and one for Labor, the lack of two-candidate preferred counts means the AEC won't give them away on its website.

If these six seats are included, and using the AEC's method of totaling all seats where parties lead, then the seat totals are Coalition 72, Labor 72, Greens 1, Nick Xenophon Team 2, Katter's Australian Party 1 and Independents 2.

While the Nick Xenophon team is currently leading on a very tiny preference count in the South Australian seat of Grey, it is not at all clear that the seat can be counted as being won by the Xenophon Team. If they don't win the seat, then the Coalition tally would be 73.

Starting from Tuesday morning, postal, absent and pre-poll absent votes will begin to be included in the count. The postal votes in particular will play a critical part in deciding the remaining doubtful seats.

As the new totals are released, the seat totals on the AEC website will start to change based on leading candidates, and the ABC website will start to give away some of the doubtful seats.

What won't change is the six seat discrepancy between the two sites which is entirely due to the six seats currently excluded from the AEC's totals.

http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2016/07/whats-going-on-with-house-seat-numbers.html

Is the result of neither party winning justifying how our politicians have been living up in the ivory tower?

:lol:

She wasn't anti-vax her last go round in politics was she? At least she's adding another string to her bow.

Hanson says vaccines may cause autism

:lol:

DOWN WITH HALAL!

IMAGRENTS!

CULTURAL MARXISM!

Do you think SJW's and the feral left actually care once their initial goal is achieved? Morality above reality.

If it does happen it will only look bad for the persuasion of people who were for it....I mean what will happen if became a kebab shop? I doubt people in her electorate would go there and also if it did get run down out of business , they only achieved to take over a functioning business and run it down for political purposes.
It would backfire

Man people are so bad azzz!!! :lol:
What's next, crowdfunding to demolish Turnbull's house and build a Medicare office.

Gottchaaa booooom peeepel PoWeR and shit!!
:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

I'm not opposed to what Portugal have done and achieved, if there's empirical evidence of success in other parts of the world which reduce drug dependency, drug related crime etc we should at least consider similar provisions here.

But where in the world has a country legalised supply and demand of hard drugs, and why should we conduct such an experiment on the Australian without proof it will work?

What I am proposing is legalisation of supply and demand, not just decriminalising demand.