Half Term Tony. Is it a possibility?

Remove this Banner Ad

No he wasn't. The Libs were ahead on primary vote according to Newspoll

19–21 January
25–27 May
27–29 July (by 4 points)


And so they should. It is the battlers who get their wages suppressed, have their local schools badly affected due to ESL students, put up with crowded hospitals and public transport, suffer from higher crime rates etc

They have been sold down the river by the ALP so that they can gerrymander the vote via immigration

It isn't racist to be against large scale unskilled immigration. It is common sense.

Of course advocates of multiculturalism (vote rigging) can not point to any economic or social benefit for this policy and thus have to resort to screaming racism.

Selling out the poorest in Australia. Yes, that is the act of those with a "social conscience".

.

Taxing them more? As for battlers and tertiary education, I don't think so. It is the preserve of the middle class and a very expensive form of welfare. Humour though that you think that blue collar battlers are desperate to go to uni to do gender and peace studies.

You honestly have no idea and if calling you a moron gets me carded then so be it...happy to wear it.

Who the fck do you think worked on the Snowy. Who the fck do you think worked in all the jobs that "Aussies" don't like working i.e. cleaners. Who the fck do you think worked / continue to work the fruit industry, fish and chip shops etc...

Try thinking before you post. Or at least try thinking without your head stuck up your arse.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Malcolm Turnbull is doing the ultimate troll job - his response in regards to Triggs and AHRC report today was masterful - he was basically showing Abbott "this is how you do it, with diplomacy and without coming across like an arrogant moron looking for a fight."

"The bottom line is this: one child in detention is one child too many. Everyone is anguished by having children locked up in detention," he said.

"The best way for children not to be in detention is of course for them to not get onto smugglers boats and of course we have effectively ensured that by Scott Morrison stopping the boats."

That's how you get your point across without acting like a petulant arrogant moron.
 
what terrorists was he talking about? you can bank on a poll bounce Muslims and terrorism are the main focus of the questions...now, take those two out of the equation and lets see where Abbott is really at.

Could also be a rogue poll. They are hardly uncommon.

Who the fck do you think worked on the Snowy. Who the fck do you think worked in all the jobs that "Aussies" don't like working i.e. cleaners. Who the fck do you think worked / continue to work the fruit industry, fish and chip shops etc...

Wow, Australia depends on those on work in fish and chips shops and cleaners!! If that is the answer let's just let 1m Chinese immigrate tomorrow.

Don't worry about all the evidence internationally about the detrimental economic effect of large unskilled migration.

Its all been superseded by the flake and chips economic theory.

Not sure that would be very popular in Greece though, Golden Dawn and all that.
 
Last edited:
Medusala, would you count the introduction of all the different cuisines from said unskilled migrants as a positive social benefit?

No. You can easily have chefs enter Australia through a skilled migration system. Japan has a huge number of Michelin stars without having mass immigration.
 
The AFR too.

http://www.afr.com/p/national/politics/clive_palmer_funding_revelation_zG7bcO4xrAXNGHvWM5CarO

It's just one big Fairfax conspiracy. Do you categorise the Liberal Party's treasurer resigning due to mismanagement of fund by the PM's chief of staff and husband twitter nonsense?

That's actually a pretty good story!

My point is that The Age leads with so much nonsense most days that people might be less inclined to click on their stories that might be of genuine public interest.
 
No. You can easily have chefs enter Australia through a skilled migration system. Japan has a huge number of Michelin stars without having mass immigration.
Japan is considering starting a comprehensive immigration program because they are a dying race.
 
Japan is considering starting a comprehensive immigration program because they are a dying race.

Australia doesn't have their demographic nor Keynesian induced debt issues.

In any event there is no reason at all for Australia not to have 50k highly skilled migrants a year coming in. That is sensible and indeed desirable. As long as the criteria isn't a job as it used to be ie hair dressers etc being called highly skilled.
 
Australia doesn't have their demographic nor Keynesian induced debt issues.

In any event there is no reason at all for Australia not to have 50k highly skilled migrants a year coming in. That is sensible and indeed desirable. As long as the criteria isn't a job as it used to be ie hair dressers etc being called highly skilled.

Remind me to let you never cut my hair.
 
I've spent the last day reading through some transcripts of the grilling the government gave Professor Triggs and I can't for the life of me work out why they've done it. There is absolutely no political mileage in attacking her in this manner because it won't achieve a desirable outcome for the government, in fact it is safe to say it has completely backfired. With revelations that they offered her a different far more cushy job if she resigned from the HRC is a terrible look, what Abbott also fails to grasp is that people who will decide the next election don't like seeing children in detention centres. It is even fair to say that the more left wing Liberal voters (and even members of parliament) don't like it either.

Abbott is really scrounging around the bottom of the barrel to try and save himself, but he is yet to realise that people don't want an attack dog as their PM, the want a family friendly guard dog that doesn't bark at everyone walking by the front gate, but will come out if you try and step onto the property.
 
I've spent the last day reading through some transcripts of the grilling the government gave Professor Triggs and I can't for the life of me work out why they've done it. There is absolutely no political mileage in attacking her in this manner because it won't achieve a desirable outcome for the government, in fact it is safe to say it has completely backfired. With revelations that they offered her a different far more cushy job if she resigned from the HRC is a terrible look, what Abbott also fails to grasp is that people who will decide the next election don't like seeing children in detention centres. It is even fair to say that the more left wing Liberal voters (and even members of parliament) don't like it either.

Abbott is really scrounging around the bottom of the barrel to try and save himself, but he is yet to realise that people don't want an attack dog as their PM, the want a family friendly guard dog that doesn't bark at everyone walking by the front gate, but will come out if you try and step onto the property.


The Gument clearly missed a Golden opportunity to make positive political capital by just lashing out against a statutory public officer. I couldnt believe how stupid Abbott was, once again.

Why wouldnt they say, 'yes we recognise to serious problem of having children in custody. Thats why we have reduced the numbers from--- down to ---, our policy & actions have --- etc etc'

But no, Abbott once again had to attack like a wild dog. He is simply killing the LNP. He seems have only one speed & one method of operation. Flat out aggression & bullying. He is as nuanced, subtle & smart as a D9.

He has no statesman like qualities what so ever. How many issues & situations has he trampled on so far?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

He's trying to draw out Turnbull and the ALP into being to the left of him so as to sure up the base of the party that support him.
 
And once again, Turnbull just has to say something moderate and reasonable (on this issue) and Abbott appears to be a frothing attack dog. As has been pointed out, there are two odd things about this whole affair.

One is that Abbott is creating this space for Turnbull to appear moderate and reasonable by comparison; Turnbull isn't having to force the issue.

The other is, perhaps even odder, that on this forum it's left leaning posters (like Gough) who are making suggestions that would probably see the LNP win another election whereas Abbott defenders seem determined to follow him over a cliff.
 
One is that Abbott is creating this space for Turnbull to appear moderate and reasonable by comparison; Turnbull isn't having to force the issue.
But that's the point of it. He creates the space, Turnbull walks into it, and the nut job wing of the party only reinforce their beliefs they have to stick by Abbott.
 
But that's the point of it. He creates the space, Turnbull walks into it, and the nut job wing of the party only reinforce their beliefs they have to stick by Abbott.

Surely those nut jobs want to be re-elected? Or is it the same as the Republicans in the US House of Reps where the most right-wing ones are those in the safest seats?
 
Surely those nut jobs want to be re-elected? Or is it the same as the Republicans in the US House of Reps where the most right-wing ones are those in the safest seats?
Many of them are senators. Cory Bernardi for one.

The way I see it is that for career politicians in one of the major parties, power within the party is more important than power for the party. A successful Malcolm Turnbull led Liberal party unmakes the power that the hard right have won over the past two decades. Same as Rudd's position as leader broke a lot of the conventions around factional obligations, and as such those who would happily have power in the ALP in opposition over little power in the ALP in government (Shorten, Conroy, Feeney, etc) got rid of him.
 
And once again, Turnbull just has to say something moderate and reasonable (on this issue) and Abbott appears to be a frothing attack dog. As has been pointed out, there are two odd things about this whole affair.

One is that Abbott is creating this space for Turnbull to appear moderate and reasonable by comparison; Turnbull isn't having to force the issue.

The other is, perhaps even odder, that on this forum it's left leaning posters (like Gough) who are making suggestions that would probably see the LNP win another election whereas Abbott defenders seem determined to follow him over a cliff.

I think you would find a lot of people simply just want a leader that can lead. Turnbull also transcends parties...he will romp it in at the next election if he can become leader of the LNP.

edit: and just read this article that sums it up nicely

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...t-remaining-support-base-20150225-13owou.html

So long as Abbott is preoccupied with appealing to the 30 per cent of the voters who live on the conservative side of the Liberal party, he will continue to antagonise the other 70 per cent of the country. It's about the shortest of short-term survival. It's no way to win an election. It's no way to run a country.
 
Last edited:
Many of them are senators. Cory Bernardi for one.

The way I see it is that for career politicians in one of the major parties, power within the party is more important than power for the party. A successful Malcolm Turnbull led Liberal party unmakes the power that the hard right have won over the past two decades. Same as Rudd's position as leader broke a lot of the conventions around factional obligations, and as such those who would happily have power in the ALP in opposition over little power in the ALP in government (Shorten, Conroy, Feeney, etc) got rid of him.
A pox on both their houses. Where exactly does the nation figure in any of this? Yet another reason I don't believe in so-called democracy. Well put.
 
Australia doesn't have their demographic nor Keynesian induced debt issues.

In any event there is no reason at all for Australia not to have 50k highly skilled migrants a year coming in. That is sensible and indeed desirable. As long as the criteria isn't a job as it used to be ie hair dressers etc being called highly skilled.

When you refer to unskilled migration are you only referring to the present or do you think it was wrong post WW2 as well?
 
No. You can easily have chefs enter Australia through a skilled migration system. Japan has a huge number of Michelin stars without having mass immigration.
Michelin don't publish Red Guides for Oz or any of it's cities so all the imported chefs in the world ain't going to get a Michelin starred restaurant in this country.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top