Anthony Albanese - How long? -2-

[RedStarUncle]

I mean I think the polling is literally the fact that the average person cannot point to anything good that Labor has done for them in the past 12 months that has made a material difference in their lives

and its human nature to start thinking about the alternatives but our polling really limits that to labor or coalition

The argument is that ALP is a "lock" for the next election.

As a first-term government that historically get treated kindly after one term, and having been a "do nothing" government rather than a "do the wrong thing" government, and even looking at the polling..... I would normally back in that argument.


BUT I think the referendum, albeit indirectly, changes the equation enough that Albo won't get the usual "first-termer" protection. So if he doesn't do something to address concerns and win votes, there's a vulnerability there.


Amazingly... on the back of the wipeout last election and with Libs weirdly pivoting harder to conservative with Dutton as leader, there should be zero scope for Libs to be in the game at the next election. The referendum has, I think, directly given Dutton a degree of credibility as an alternate leader that never really applies to first-term opposition leaders.

 

[peetoo]

The argument is that ALP is a "lock" for the next election.

As a first-term government that historically get treated kindly after one term, and having been a "do nothing" government rather than a "do the wrong thing" government, and even looking at the polling..... I would normally back in that argument.


BUT I think the referendum, albeit indirectly, changes the equation enough that Albo won't get the usual "first-termer" protection. So if he doesn't do something to address concerns and win votes, there's a vulnerability there.


Amazingly... on the back of the wipeout last election and with Libs weirdly pivoting harder to conservative with Dutton as leader, there should be zero scope for Libs to be in the game at the next election. The referendum has, I think, directly given Dutton a degree of credibility as an alternate leader that never really applies to first-term opposition leaders.

Did you recall opp leader abbots shenanigans?

 

[Gralin]

The argument is that ALP is a "lock" for the next election.

As a first-term government that historically get treated kindly after one term, and having been a "do nothing" government rather than a "do the wrong thing" government, and even looking at the polling..... I would normally back in that argument.


BUT I think the referendum, albeit indirectly, changes the equation enough that Albo won't get the usual "first-termer" protection. So if he doesn't do something to address concerns and win votes, there's a vulnerability there.


Amazingly... on the back of the wipeout last election and with Libs weirdly pivoting harder to conservative with Dutton as leader, there should be zero scope for Libs to be in the game at the next election. The referendum has, I think, directly given Dutton a degree of credibility as an alternate leader that never really applies to first-term opposition leaders.

And I don't agree that the referendum will be the reason if Labor lose

 

[Rob R]

It's entirely possible the referendum hasn't had an overall impact on voter preferences for the next election. But I don't see any other better explanation for polling numbers.

View attachment 2064459

Or it could be that they were both impacted by the worsening economic situation that made people less likely to vote for the voice and think less of the government

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[eddiesmith]

I've said it before but why would you vote for someone who won't tell you what they'll do in government? Doesn't sound very clever to me.

So why did you vote for Albo who apparently promised nothing except to hold a referendum?

Because everything they complained about in opposition, they’ve done nothing about and apparently never promised to do anything.

Instead all the rusted on said don’t worry, he’s promising nothing but will deliver everything when he gets to the lodge…

 

[Kram]

$27.50 a kg for chuck casserole steak at the supermarket will do Albo more damage than any lost referendum.

 

[JackOutback]

$27.50 a kg for chuck casserole steak at the supermarket will do Albo more damage than any lost referendum.

Gotta shop at Aldi mate.

 

[Ohitsthatguy]

So why did you vote for Albo who apparently promised nothing except to hold a referendum?

Nine years of lies, corruption and incompetence made it pretty easy to preference them over the LNP

 

[peetoo]

Nine years of lies, corruption and incompetence made it pretty easy to preference them over the LNP

But they have changed

Haven’t they?

Dutton not even aiming to win the next election

 

[Gralin]

Another royal commission another long delayed response from the government that amounts to thanks but no thanks

Disability advocates 'devastated, disappointed and caught off guard' by royal commission response

The federal government has revealed its response to the landmark disability royal commission, but has not committed to a number of the most contentious recommendations.

www.abc.net.au

Pretty much exactly how Morrison handled the Aged Care RC and further evidence that governments call them to get the pressure off

Gives them years to do nothing and act like it's being taken very seriously

 

[Puddy]

Another royal commission another long delayed response from the government that amounts to thanks but no thanks

Disability advocates 'devastated, disappointed and caught off guard' by royal commission response

The federal government has revealed its response to the landmark disability royal commission, but has not committed to a number of the most contentious recommendations.

www.abc.net.au

Pretty much exactly how Morrison handled the Aged Care RC and further evidence that governments call them to get the pressure off

Gives them years to do nothing and act like it's being taken very seriously

Aged Care has deteriorated further under Labor

 

[nut]

$27.50 a kg for chuck casserole steak at the supermarket will do Albo more damage than any lost referendum.

WTF do you shop?

Buy Coles Beef Chuck Casserole Steak 850g | Coles

Shop Coles Beef Chuck Casserole Steak 850g and other great products online or in-store at Coles.

www.coles.com.au

 

[The Punter]

Just to tap the brakes on the "first term government wins re-election comfortably" trope, both 2010 and 2016 elections ended up being quite close. 1984 and 1998 also had first term governments performing below expectations electorally.

The polling (from more than one outlet) clearly shows problems for the government: the ALP's primary is in the low 30s, and the LNP's primary is now above 40.

 

[Gethelred]

These are the ALP's rules. Senator Wong has a point.

What is more important, following the correct procedure or doing the right thing?

 

[The Punter]

What is more important, following the correct procedure or doing the right thing?

A good question to ask Senator Wong. I don't agree with how the ALP operates.

 

[Gethelred]

A good question to ask Senator Wong. I don't agree with how the ALP operates.

I wasn't asking Senator Wong. I'm asking you.

 

[The Punter]

What is more important, following the correct procedure or doing the right thing?

A good question to ask Senator Wong. I don't agree with how the ALP operates.

You have my answer.

 

[Gethelred]

You have my answer.

Not really.

You are taking issue with the specific; I want to know where you stand on the general. It's also entirely too easy for you to oppose a Labor figure on procedural grounds; it allows you to throw shade at both their results and the methods by which they arrive at them without taking a position on the issue in minute or the principle broadly.

Do you, The Punter, think it is more important to follow the rules or to do the right thing?

 

[The Punter]

Not really.

You are taking issue with the specific; I want to know where you stand on the general. It's also entirely too easy for you to oppose a Labor figure on procedural grounds; it allows you to throw shade at both their results and the methods by which they arrive at them without taking a position on the issue in minute or the principle broadly.

Do you, The Punter, think it is more important to follow the rules or to do the right thing?

Which rules? I've made my views clear on Labor's rules.

Who decides what the right thing is? There are plenty of groups and individuals involved in the current disaster in the Middle East who are not acting as I would recommend they act.

It's easy to criticise an organisation from the outside because you only have to adhere to your own internal individual rules. I don't agree with Labor's rules; I am subsequently not a member of the ALP. But organisations need rules. Do I adhere to laws in Australia that I do not agree with? I sure do. There is a process for changing a bad law. But the law is the law, and a law is just another kind of rule. Being part of a team that works means compromise, accepting common rules, and working through differences towards a common goal.

If this response disappoints you, that is how it is. But it's the best you are getting out of me. Nearly all rules are created to ensure we do the right thing. There is disagreement about that. But I think the choice in your question is unnecessarily reductive.

 

[Gethelred]

Which rules? I've made my views clear on Labor's rules.

Who decides what the right thing is? There are plenty of groups and individuals involved in the current disaster in the Middle East who are not acting as I would recommend they act.

It's easy to criticise an organisation from the outside because you only have to adhere to your own internal individual rules. I don't agree with Labor's rules; I am subsequently not a member of the ALP. But organisations need rules. Do I adhere to laws in Australia that I do not agree with? I sure do. There is a process for changing a bad law. But the law is the law, and a law is just another kind of rule. Being part of a team that works means compromise, accepting common rules, and working through differences towards a common goal.

If this response disappoints you, that is how it is. But it's the best you are getting out of me. Nearly all rules are created to ensure we do the right thing. There is disagreement about that. But I think the choice in your question is unnecessarily reductive.

Then, I rather think you should stop throwing shade on those willing to take an idealistic position you yourself are too cowardly to take even when you're anonymous.

 

[The Punter]

Then, I rather think you should stop throwing shade on those willing to take an idealistic position you yourself are too cowardly to take even when you're anonymous.

All I said was Senator Wong had a point. I didn't necessarily agree with her point. She was a team player during the same sex marriage debate, for better or worse. I wasn't casting aspersions on either of the protagonists, but as Senator Payman has discovered, if she wants to take, as you describe it, "an idealistic position", perhaps the ALP isn't the right place for her. Members of other parties in parliament would not have initiated disciplinary actions against a member for doing something similar to Senator Payman: ask Bridget Archer.

 

[Gethelred]

All I said was Senator Wong had a point. I didn't necessarily agree with her point. She was a team player during the same sex marriage debate, for better or worse. I wasn't casting aspersions on either of the protagonists, but as Senator Payman has discovered, if she wants to take, as you describe it, "an idealistic position", perhaps the ALP isn't the right place for her. Members of other parties in parliament would not have initiated disciplinary actions against a member for doing something similar to Senator Payman: ask Bridget Archer.

And we've now come full circle: you defending the rule rather than the ideal suggests that's what you value, and is what my question sought to clarify. You then proceeded to avoid answering the question any more clearly than a hedge maze in a thick fog, and both our time has been wasted.

And don't piss on me and tell me it's raining: you throw plenty of shade in this thread, and your position on Wong here is that she's upholding a party rule you don't agree with.

Have the backbone to actually say what you think sometimes, instead of hiding it behind inference and connotation. It'll do you good.

 

[The Punter]

And we've now come full circle: you defending the rule rather than the ideal suggests that's what you value, and is what my question sought to clarify. You then proceeded to avoid answering the question any more clearly than a hedge maze in a thick fog, and both our time has been wasted.

And don't piss on me and tell me it's raining: you throw plenty of shade in this thread, and your position on Wong here is that she's upholding a party rule you don't agree with.

Have the backbone to actually say what you think sometimes, instead of hiding it behind inference and connotation. It'll do you good.

Let me be clear: I'm not defending the rule. I am happy to concede I am defending an organisation's right to enforce rules, but not the rule itself.

Also, here's what I think: those who moderate a thread shouldn't participate in it. Have a really excellent day.

 

[Gethelred]

Let me be clear: I'm not defending the rule. I am happy to concede I am defending an organisation's right to enforce rules, but not the rule itself.

... because you value the rules over anything moral. That's what that decision says about you.

That you don't like this is not my problem.

Also, here's what I think: those who moderate a thread shouldn't participate in it. Have a really excellent day.

Here's what I think: the next time I see you referring to moderation in a public thread, I'm going to send you a warning reminding you that it's against the rules of the forum. If you do it again, you will receive an infraction.

You have been warned.

 

[evolved2]

Not really.

You are taking issue with the specific; I want to know where you stand on the general. It's also entirely too easy for you to oppose a Labor figure on procedural grounds; it allows you to throw shade at both their results and the methods by which they arrive at them without taking a position on the issue in minute or the principle broadly.

Do you, The Punter, think it is more important to follow the rules or to do the right thing?

Morality is subjective. What is right? Who determines what's right?

In case of the ALP, the party is deciding what's right as a whole instead of allowing an individual vote.

I see no benefit in allowing individual politicians to determine what's right and wrong over the party - the rule is fine.