Blair has covered a highly variable area around Ipswich since its creation in 1998, having been substantially redrawn at three redistributions since. Originally covering areas inland of Ipswich and the Sunshine Coast, the redistributions of 2004 and 2007 saw it progressively take over central Ipswich from Oxley. Prior to the 2010 election it lost 28,000 voters in territory south of Ipswich to the new seat of Wright, in exchange for 13,200 voters in rural areas around Lake Wivenhoe to the north (previously in Dickson and Fisher) and 5500 in the eastern Ipswich suburbs of Collingwood Park and Springfield Central (from Oxley). As the areas lost were rural and conservative, Labor’s margin was boosted from 4.5% to 7.0%. The seat further recorded what by Queensland standards was a mild swing of 2.7%, the resulting Labor margin of 4.2% making it their fourth safest seat in the state.
Ipswich had been an area of strength for Labor since the early days of the party’s history owing to its now defunct coal mining industry, but it has more recently been prone to rebellion against the party’s efforts to appeal to new middle-class constituencies. The most famous such occasion occurred when Pauline Hanson won Oxley in 1996, scoring 48.6% of the primary vote as an independent after the Liberals disendorsed her for advocating the abolition of government assistance for Aborigines. The creation of Blair in the next redistribution did Hanson a poor turn, dividing her home turf between two electorates. Rather than recontest Oxley or (more sensibly) run for the Senate, Hanson chanced her arm at the new seat, but the major parties’ decision to direct preferences to each other may have sealed her doom. Hanson led the primary vote count with 36.0% against 25.3% for Labor and 21.7% for Liberal, but Liberal candidate Cameron Thompson pulled ahead of Labor on minor party preferences and defeated Hanson by 3.3% on Labor preferences.
Thompson went on to absorb most of the disappearing One Nation vote in 2001, more than doubling his primary vote without improving his two-party margin over Labor. A redistribution ahead of the 2004 election clipped this by 1.8%, but he went on to handsomely consolidate his position with a 4.5% swing. In 2007 the Liberals targeted Blair as part of its “firewall” strategy, a key element of which was a risky decision to fund a $2.3 billion Ipswich Motorway bypass at Goodna in the neighbouring electorate of Ryan. This proved of little use, with Labor picking up a decisive swing of 10.2% which typified the shift of blue-collar voters back to Labor on the back of WorkChoices.
Labor’s winning candidate was Shayne Neumann, a family lawyer and partner in the Brisbane firm Neumann & Turnour and member of the state party’s Labor Unity/Old Guard faction. His LNP opponent at the coming election will be Teresa Harding, who is “director of the F-111 Disposal and Aerial Targets Office” at the RAAF Base Amberley.
ignore post 299
Maggie says hello.
Won an election playing the old male trick of having a war
[Centre
Posted Saturday, August 11, 2012 at 4:48 pm | Permalink
Kezza, just how strong is Julia?
WOW!]
Let’s put it this way, Centre.
We’ve a gym in our shed, and I reckon JG’d kill any of my son’s friends at the bench thingy, not to mention the punching bag thingy – wraps or no wraps!!
She’s a bloody star.
Nothing but admiration for her.
Centre
Two things. You do not understand long term growth for a party. For the Greens to vote against the Status Quo would destroy the party, unless there is good and transparent arguments to the contrary. The kind os ones you need to win the support of Mr Burnside.
As well that is a very big if there. For all we know the committee could recommend On Shore be returned to, or Abbott’s Nauru or something else entirely.
I think Gillard’s given up on the Coalition under Abbott accepting Malaysia and the expert panel’s recommendations are instead designed to put pressure on the Greens Party … and they should seriously consider what saying no to the recommendations would do to their long term goal of becoming a major political force
[She’s a bloody star.
Nothing but admiration for her.]
Have to second that.
She has the strength of ten of those cowards who so regularly denigrate her to their sniggering mates,
A good argument might be to stop putting people lives at risk and to reduce the heat of the AS issue and then over time increasing the yearly intake and then develop a regional approach.
The current policy has not worked and the Greens voted to keep it.
And we know that Tone and co will bring in policies that will be more harsh than what we have been debating in recent weeks.
Mexi
The Greens are irrelevant if Abbott says yes to Offshore. That is why bagging the Greens is doing Labor no good. Labor either gets Abbott to vote yes or else nothing changes. The latter in line with Green policy and what their base wants.
Thus Labor has to get Abbott to say yes if it wants change.
Guytaur appears to be drowning in his own, bovine?, excrement.
Yes Kezza, so many would have cracked at the constant negativity and criticism she’s had to endure.
Look at Abbott, two mistakes and he’s had to take a ten count. 1. loss of jobs blamed on carbon pricing. 2. Electricity prices ALL blamed on carbon pricing.
Abbott is very weak. He’s starting to crack at his very first moment of pressure.
Haha@Hill
Third it, she has more guts than is neccesary.
Okay so are the Greens serious policy makers or show ponies living off the work of others without getting their hands dirty.
No wonder they lost the Melbourne By-election
Newspoll week
Newsltd will try to help their man Abbott
by bring up the leadership chestnut , and throw in some propaganda and a scandal just for measure
Guytaur, the Greens have peaked!
If they reject the Houston findings, they are finished.
I reckon most people would kill to have JG’s temperament.
For example, I really admire my oldest sister. She’s been through the wringer, inside out, upside down, back to front, and come out the other end a most successful person.
But her temperament was something else! Sure, she could exhibit an even temperament every other day, if not week.
JG does it every day. Week in week out, displays such an even temperament that Tony Abbott cannot even contemplate.
And she’s fkn smart as.
And she’s absolutely fabulous when she takes a week off. She’s out of contact. She allows her ministers to have their say; she trusts them.
And they’re terrific too.
We are so lucky to have her and the ALP in power now.
No answer, but this seems to be the Greens position. Next question what do you do to people who arrive in Australia by boat? Do they get sent to the Regional Processing Centre?
Deblonay:
[his social agenda would also suit Murdoch’s neanderthal views]
I don’t regard it as fair to attribute Murdoch’s views to Neanderthal thinking. The records on their outlook a more than a little patchy. Moreover, they were probably more respectful of the biosphere than Murdoch and were probably very much more communitarian.
“Murdoch really doesn’t have “views” as such. He has privileges and his expressions reflect his reckless defence of these privileges.
Womble asked
[Do Labor supporters here care what happens to those we send to Malaysia if it goes ahead???]
The deal gives them the right to be there, so they aren’t subject to being banged up and beaten, nor sent back to a country where they will be persecuted. It also gives them the right to work and send their kids to school.
So beyond those protections no I don’t care a damn what happens to them. No more than I care a damn for millions of others living their lives in less financially well off circumstances than we enjoy here in Australia. I don’t lie awake at night fretting for little Indian kiddies who need to scavenge tips, nor South American kids growing up in the favela, or indeed any other poor bugger overseas. If you like you can call it heartless, or the complacency of wealth. I prefer to think it’s just pointless to do otherwise.
Any persons sent to Malaysia will be living in a reasonably stable country and not living in fear of being killed. They will certainly be in a much better place than many less fortunate people in the world, and presumably many of their countrymen who have not been able to afford passage out of their homeland. They will also be assessed by the UNHCR and when a place becomes available in another country they will be resettled.
Our responsibility isn’t to give everyone who claims to be a refugee a new life as a rich westerner. It is an unachievable and unsustainable ideal. No matter how many we take it will never be enough. So it is reasonable to seek to limit who we accept to those we deem (or more correctly the UNHCR deem) most needy. The refugee convention was not established to create a profitable business model in people trafficking and to try and hold that the strictest reading of it is more important than the intent is foolish. The convention specifically mentions people who have come to another country “directly”. Most of the boat arrivals are people who have come by very indirect routes, and passed through countries whose cultures are much closer to their own, but of course not so rich. I see no reason at all why I should feel so much more sympathy for these people than for say the refugees we would accept from Malaysia in their place, or those stuck starving in African camps but couldn’t afford a smuggler to get to Australia.
And before you raise any red herrings, yes aircraft arrivals and white folk should be subject to similar conditions as boat arrivals, and no I am not taking up Howard’s position.
Whilst much of Howard’s policy of deterrence to unauthorised boat arrivals is something the ALP and most Australians would agree with, his reasons for politicising it were base wedge politics. Same as why Abbott is saying no to Malaysia. They do it for one reason only – it works. The first response of any Coalition leader in poll trouble is to scream “BOATS”. Only when this is no longer a sure fire winner for them can we sit down and talk about sensible bi-partisan solutions. The Malaysia deal offers a chance that maybe the Libs favourite dog whistle will no longer work.
At the end of the day I care a whole lot less about what happens to potentially 800 people sent to live in reasonable peace and prosperity in Malaysia than about what happens to things like Carbon Pricing, Resource Taxation, Disability Funding, Education Funding, Broadband and all of the other important achievements of this government that will be torn asunder if Abbott was to ever get his hands on power.
I certainly don’t see any value at all in some quixotic crusade to keep open our borders that has the exceeding likely consequence of putting Tony Abbott in charge to both implement his border policies and destroy so much great policy work of the present government. If the Greens won’t yield to the bigger picture here by going with whatever Houston comes up with and we all end up with a situation where tow backs and Nauru are keeping Abbott in the Lodge whilst he dismantles Carbon Pricing the NBN and everything else then I’m not sure even your warm inner glow will be much comfort. It certainly won’t comfort those of us who want to see a progressive Australia.
Centre – The best thing that can happen for the Greens is for Tone to be elected and govern like Campbell Newman then the Greens will act outraged and grow on the back of that.
If the answer is yes, what is wrong with Labor Malaysian proposal?
Sorry, couln’t resist…..
4 The Aussies are spitting tacks at their poor results. In public they’re being laidback – “for us, silver is the new gold,” said one of their reporters. In private, I know from Australian friends, they are in a rug-biting rage. And to be more or less level with New Zealand: the pain just goes on throbbing. As Gore Vidal nearly said, “it is not enough to win; Australia has to lose.” Let’s call them “the plucky island nation” – that’ll rile them even more.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2012/aug/11/olympic-games-top-ten
Electoral-vote says Ryan is a Hail Mary play.
There’s an interesting summary of his pros and cons here.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Maps/Aug11.html#item-1
These predictions about the Greens demise have been around before. About the time that Bob Brown left Tasmanian Parliament. They came from,the same News Limited source. They were wrong then and they are wrong now. The Greens are different to he Democrats and will not fold and self detruct like them.
So Centre and Mei you can drag out the crystal ball as much as you like. It does not change the reality that the worldwide Green movement that Australia has one so much to foster isi going to die.
mexican
I think the real best thing for the Greens would be to at least try and get real. 😆
They must support the Houston findings for their own, and the people they are so supposedly concerned about (refugees) best interests.
Honestly if they don’t, they must be put last on the Senate.
ruawake:
[Next question what do you do to people who arrive in Australia by boat? Do they get sent to the Regional Processing Centre?]
Australia could be one regional processing centre. We would make use of the major cities to do our processing since these cost less to run than Christmas Island. As soon as identity is established and security cleared we give them an AAV, a medicare card and the right to seek employment, do training and study, and give them a case manager who oversees their engagement with the bureaucracy and puts them in touch with a suitable support community. The kids go to school and the adults learn/develop their English and some relevant skill or get accreditation for an existing skill.
We keep an eye out for those who can be accepted under other migration programs (e.g. skills, business, if not asylum) either here or in some other country they might be comfortable going to.
Mexi
Alright if you think that ring uo Adam Bandt and get him to pass a vote of no confidence. The Greens prove everyday your fantasy scenario of an election now and Green supported Abbott PM is wrong.
Centre
Are you Paul Howes or Sam Dastyari? Simple fact is put Greens last and YOU are voting FOR ABBOTT with no restrictions. See Howards last term to see how that went.
If anyone can bring the working/rural vote together it’s JG.
My accent is the result of boarding school scholarship entitlement
– when in rome do as the romans do.
So, when I hear JG’s accent, it’s reminiscent of those I love. And the actuality of most of the peeps I live near/work with.
She’s so down to earth, so honest, she’s going to win over the greater amount of the populace.
Mark my words.
Guytaur – I have never predicted that the Greens will disappear nor should they but the point I have may is the Greens are a narrow based party that is continuing to evolve and in time may well broaden its support.
The real test for the Greens will be economic policy for the Greens at this stage don’t have a complete policy that would appeal to the mainstream or even potentially to small l Liberals.
This is partly why the Greens poll better in seats like Melbourne then they are in seats like Higgins.
The Greens vote will be stronger with a a Newman type federal government then they would be otherwise for they can focus on their core base of social policy.
Guytaur
Parties whose only skills are talking “principles”, handwringing and sitting on hands have no future, long term or otherwise.
And have a 5% mortality rate? Its not easy is it.
Centre @ 281
Agin you are correct.
Next week is next week. Last week was JG’s week. Runs on the board.
Yes, Australia could be the location for the regional processing center but the problem with that is, these people need a location that is closer to where they are.
Otherwise some may still fall for the pay me and take a boat ride.
It’s the snobs that don’t like her, puffed up, silly people who love themselves and not the country that nurtured them. They are despicable.
Rossmore
[The Aussies are spitting tacks at their poor results. In public they’re being laidback – “for us, silver is the new gold,” said one of their reporters. In private, I know from Australian friends, they are in a rug-biting rage.]
I went to work yesterday and one of the registrars is a Pom. He walked in to the room and said “I gather we won another three gold medals last night. I don’t even know what they were in. It’s too hard to keep up with them all. You Aussies don’t have that problem, do you?”
We threw him out.
centre:
[{The Greens} must support the Houston findings for their own, and the people they are so supposedly concerned about (refugees’) best interests.]
It’s odd to be demanding our destruction while giving us advice … 😉 Doubly so since the best interests of refugees is not a major consideration for the party you support. For you, it is about border protection not refugee protection.
What we Greens must do is honour our commitment to the well-being of vulnerable people in ways that those who support us recognise as vaild. We should support the recommendations wherever they are consistent with this standard but not otherwise. If our leadership were to wilt under the bullying from the ALP we might as well pack up shop and leave politics to be fought out between the conservative parties because clearly, we’d be adding no more to public policy than did the now defunct Democrats, who did wilt in the face of the desire for gold stars from the conservatives and their publicity machine.
[I see the holier than thou attitude of Labor people towards the Greens continues.
This despite some self evident truths. One of these self evident truths is News Limited campaigning against the Greens. Current allies of the Labor party in more than one Parliament. So happy to pick up the cudgels for the News Limited campaign anf foment at least the appearance of disunity for the benefit of only News Limited and the Coalition.
Also on the Asylum Seeker issue remember where Labor has been on the issue.
Also remember every time you use the drowning line that the Greens have a policy that would have created less refugees in the first place with their past and continuing policy of being at war in occupation of countries.
-4 For BW’s efforts at fomenting discord and division at a time when Prime Minister Julia Gillard has needed the exact opposite. Of course primarily at fault here is the NSW Right.]
Puhlease, I am the victim here! WAH WAH. Minus 4! And a Trojan Horse for News Limited! Plus holier-than-thou!
I have written numerous posts looking at the substance Greens policy measures. Only one Greens poster on Bludger has bothered to respond to the substance of the policy issues I have raised. Those responses have been honest and measured. That is what is needed. OTOH, the other Green posters continue to launch abusive personal attacks.
In the scheme of things, IMHO, ten thousand asylum seekers more or less out of tens or hundreds of millions of displaced people around the world, is utterly insignificant in terms of the policy substance.
OTOH, if the Greens want 200,000 asylum seekers a year they should just say so.
Now, what would matter, however, is the systemic, major, damage that a Greens government would do to the Australian economy.
Closing Olympic Dam Mine is a prime example. That is 10,000 jobs gone right there.
Dio
You should have showed him the Bisons and asked why the British Government is concentrating on bread and circuses instead of trying to keep the country out of depression.
Guytaur
HELLO
Howard’s last term went sensational. He didn’t have your mob to contend with and that enabled Labor to get back into government.
It is essential that if the monkey
were to win, he has control of the Senate so Labor get back into office SOONER rather than LATER.
Good Afternoon Bludgeketeers! 🙂
Well may we say, ‘God Save the Queen’, because nothing will save Tony Abbott!
As Centre has called it for Kevin Rudd, I’m going out on the Right limb and calling, ‘Time!’ on Tony Abbott.
It may not happen overnight, but it will happen.
See, I’ve spent what time I have had spare the past few days reading all the links put up by our capable contributors, and it all gelled in my head when I read the Malcolm McKerras article on the Northern Territory election that the tide has turned on Mr Abbott and is running back out to sea and will leave him stranded like a shag in budgie smugglers on a rock.
The reasons I have come to this conclusion are:
* The grand tour of the United States and China was a flop. All Abbott could generate out of the US leg was an embarassing picture of ultimate sycophancy towards that country, and a sensorious leak about something the eternally gloomy Kim Beazley said behind closed doors about Labor’s chances at the next election(just before a 5% rise in the PV in Newspoll, which only went to prove that KB always had atrocious timing).
Then onto China, with his Lathamesque hand-shake with the official sent to meet him, and his failed attempt to show the Chinese who was boss in the Australia-China relationship. Which was followed, so quickly it made heads spin, by a quick trip to China by the Liberal Party/Big Business equivalent of those men from the old days who used to follow the horses down the street and sweep up their droppings, to repair as quickly as they possibly could, the damage that he had wreaked with the ever-inscrutable but hard as Pig Iron nails Chinese.
* So we move on to our man(well, actually, News Ltd’s man) Abbott, and his preaching to the converted speech at the IPA. All about ‘ Free Speech’, apparently, but actually another exercise in the Olympic sport he is seeking to represent Australia in, of ‘Extreme Obsequiousness and Sycophancy’. Wherein he attempted to equate ‘ Free Speech’ with a media ‘Free For All’.
Followed up in double-quick time with his stated intention of seeking to crack down hard on the bane of conservative existence, because they cannot control it at present, the Internet.
* Next, the ever-manic martinet, who can’t seem to get his record out of the ‘ Carbon Tax Bad’ groove, was off to Far North Queensland to, explore the potential for Mining Company exploitation of the Cape after CanDoMan repeals the Wild Rivers legislation, er…help Noel Pearson by ostentatiously desporting himself before the cameras with a paintbrush.
* But in the meantime, Tony couldn’t resist inserting himself into the Northern Territory election campaign, because he’s like, so good at winning elections. Nor could he resist having a crack at the Prime Minister, for, wisely, deciding to leave the Territory Labor Party to win their own election, as Mr McKerrras believes they are on track to do.
Which is where I believe the genesis of the wheels fully starting to come off the Abbott caboose will occur.
For, as any Press Gallery journo who thinks they are worth their salt, is wont to do at the drop of a hat, when they are talking about Labor leader’s effect on State elections, the assertion will thus have to be made that Mr Abbott must have had a negative effect on the outcome of that election. Or at least, no positive effect. If that election is lost by the CLP, as McKerras predicts.
And a leader who cannot win elections for their party, even if only by proxy, soon enough ends up on one of Bruce McIver or David Farley’s trucks.
And no one would be more aware of how ruthless the termagents of the Liberal Party can be(eg John Brogden), when a privately known about weakness becomes imprinted into public consciousness negatively, and what that means for your future in the party…than Tony Abbott.
Economic refugees from the very close and much less economically advanced Indonesian Archipelago is probably the largest reason for Malaysia to not have the UNHCR standards on refugees.
Which is an argument to overlook this “deficiency” and back the Malaysia Solution.
It is a special case of international real politic which those judges who so angered the PM failed to recognise.
The drowning deaths should be placed at their morally privileged door.
JG brought the electricity pricing debate to the fore.
Lots reckon she’s been advised to do so by her imported advisor.
Maybe, maybe not.
But I see JG’s input right in there.
(It was part and parcel of the carbon price debate.)
Why? Because she’s growing into the job of PM.
It was so obvious the ready/not ready wasn’t part of a plot.
(No “getting fit” for months/weeks beforehand, is a big pointer)
I see JG as a chess player extraordinaire.
And, boy, is she good at it.
What took Mr Atkins so long?
We have been calling Mr Abbott out on his serial lies and his multiple policy disorder for years.
And no-one was paying us to figure it out, either.
BBC going the same way as ABC???
David Cameron’s appearance on Chris Evans’s Radio 2 breakfast show has caused consternation at the BBC, with senior figures within the corporation unaware that the prime minister was booked to appear.
BBC insiders said there were fears that Cameron’s 20-minute interview with Evans on the country’s most popular breakfast show on Thursday breached BBC rules on impartiality.
Cameron read out messages from listeners and told Evans about the legacy of the London Olympics, defending the government’s policy on the controversial issue of the sale of school playing fields.
One BBC source said they expected Labour leader Ed Miliband would be badgering the corporation to come on to Radio 2 to read out listener text messages next week. But there is no indication that Labour is preparing a complaint about the Cameron interview.
The BBC has strict guidelines governing the appearance of politicians on non-news programmes, which require senior executive approval, as well as topical issues that are the subject of public debate.
Such is the level of sensitivity over the interview that the BBC is believed to have discussed internally whether to remove it from the iPlayer. It remained available at the time of publication.
“Nobody knew anything until it was too late to do anything about it. It was a huge cock-up,” said one BBC insider.
“The BBC has made huge efforts and spent an enormous amount of time on maintaining its impartiality during the course of the Olympics, and then this screws the whole thing up,” said another corporation source.
“David Cameron went unchallenged for virtually the entire interview. It appears the editorial guidelines have got everything covered apart from the possibility that the prime minister might turn up to read listener dedications.”
Cameron defended the government’s policy on sport in schools, saying only 21 playing fields had been sold off since 2010, 14 of which were schools that had been closed and four had merged, he told Evans.
The prime minister was interrupted by the DJ who told him: “It’s not the Today programme, I don’t care about the facts and figures.”
Cameron responded: “We are not selling off playing fields, it’s very important we keep them.”
Britain’s legacy from the 2012 Games and efforts to encourage more children to become involved in sport is already a source of much political debate.
The entire interview, which took place live from the Olympics Park, where Evans is on location for the duration of the Games, was conducted with the BBC’s Olympics theme, composed by Elbow, playing in the background.
Cameron read out a number of text messages from listeners in the “listener breaking news” section of the show, which included “I let my new chickens out this morning” and “On my way to pick up my new Mini”.
The prime minister commented: “That’s buying British, I approve of that.”
Evans, who introduced Cameron as the “prime minister of Great Britain, the ultimate Team GB”, read out the newspaper headlines and asked Cameron: “They’ve not been bad headlines over the last 13 days, have they prime minister?”
Cameron said it had been a “wonderful few weeks for Britain, every day there is something to lift the spirits”.
He added that he had been doing “big deals for Britain” and wanted to reassure listeners that “I am also chairing the Cobra meetings”.
Evans said the Cobra meetings sound “so James Bondy” and was a “pretty cool name”. Cameron replied: “I promise there isn’t someone stroking a white cat.”
The BBC’s editorial guidelines state: “Any proposal to invite a politician to be a guest on a programme or area of content where to do so is the exception rather than the rule, must be referred to chief cdviser politics [Ric Bailey].
“We must apply due impartiality to all our subject matter. However, there are particular requirements for ‘controversial subjects’, whenever they occur in any output, including drama, entertainment and sport.”
A BBC spokesman said: “The BBC is committed to impartiality across its output and, while the Chris Evans Show has a lighter, more conversational tone than our news programming, it is entirely appropriate and within BBC guidelines for political figures to appear on entertainment shows, as long as those with alternate views are offered the same opportunity over time. In this case, the leadership of the opposition has already been invited onto the show and we are awaiting their response.”
The Labour party declined to comment.
• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly “for publication”.
• To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook
Hmmm
Reply to Fran or watch footy?
Footy wins 😛
😆
MexBeemer:
[{the lack of a complete economic policy that would appeal to the mainstream} is partly why the Greens poll better in seats like Melbourne then they are in seats like Higgins.]
No. In Higgins, they are tribal Liberals. They vote Liberal despite the lack of a developed economic policy that would appeal to the mainstream.
If and when we are a realistic chance of leading a government (i.e when we have about 2.5 times as much support in primaries across the country as we have now, and thus have the human and material resources that would imply) we will require and be in a position to develop a better specified set of economic policies. At this stage, IMO, a dot point wish list illustrating our general paradigm suffices.
To those saying Angus Houston, Paris Aristotle or Michael L’Estrange as individuals are susceptible to being “told” what to find in their review is fantasy.
But to say that as a threesome they would cooperate in such a sham is absolutely bloody ridiculous.
Won’t happen. These talented men know how valuable a reputation is. No way will they trash their own.
C@Tmomma
Nice post. I would have added three points:
(1) BB called it early
(2) The MSM are hyena pack has the sniff of mortality in its nostrils.
(3) Mr Abbott is being hacked at in public by some on his side
(4) Mr Newman is demonstrating on a daily basis just what damage mad monk(ey)s can do when given the levers.
Mexi
Greens are a minority party evolving over time. This is good as it means they are representing what their voters want. Policies will increase votes over time.
The Greens have been responsible in backing Labor economic policies and not playing games with them. As they could hve done. Of course that would have led to destruction.
Practicality at the fore there.