Is this the end of the Greens? The post-WA Election Bump

Remove this Banner Ad

Ludlam's replacement looks like it's going to be a 22 year old uni student :D

its funny because you know (in spite of what he is saying) people would have been putting pressure on him to stand aside.

In politics people who "stand aside" are never looked after, i'm really glad he just took the job!
 
racism legislation is not limited to race and includes nation of origin and other tests. The US has already legislated it is illegal to discriminate based on citizenship and no doubt we will follow.

it is a valid question as the government has had serious discussions about the issue of dual citizenships of our politicians http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliam...rary/Publications_Archive/CIB/cib0001/01CIB05

what difference does it make whether someone has dual citizenship or even no Australian citizenship? The concept is antiquated and by it's design creates discrimination.


Further we have a concept rolling out through society called diversity. This isn't just about diversity of gender, age, race, culture but thought. We should celebrate this, embrace this and reap the rewards. Yet some want to cling onto old concepts such as citizenship, protectionism and discrimination.
Honestly I can accept this type of discrimination.

If you want to represent the country at parliamentary level you shouldn't have any formal claims on you by another country.
 
Honestly I can accept this type of discrimination.

If you want to represent the country at parliamentary level you shouldn't have any formal claims on you by another country.

I hear you but what are you thoughts of the parliamentary review on this issue and the issues raised?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

A 22 year old has the opportunity to earn $220,000 a year. Im sure we'd all jump at that chance. In theory, guaranteed income for another 4 1/2 years too. So he will be earning around $1 million for having not been voted in to Parliament.
He was no3 on the ticket
Probably never thought he would end up in Parliament
My advice.Coin up son
 
He was no3 on the ticket
Probably never thought he would end up in Parliament
My advice.Coin up son

He may have even been placed number 3 purely for political reasons... with the Greens knowing there was zero chance of him actually winning.

Definitely take the cash. Assuming he is actually qualified to take the seat. Time will tell on that one.
 
I would say that you do not qualify to run for Parliament if you are ineligible.
No you're ineligible. Qualified and Eligible are entirely different thing. You can be eligible to do something but still not qualified. i.e. Donald Trump was eligible to be elected President of the United States, but he wasn't qualified for the job.
 
I hear you but what are you thoughts of the parliamentary review on this issue and the issues raised?
Like all reviews you'd need to see what special interests were involved in influencing the outcome.
FWIW I am also against dual citizenship so I can hold a consistent attitude here.
 
Who'd have thought the kid would get in off the back of a s.44 utensil up.

Nice work son.

upload_2017-7-21_12-1-22.jpeg

for as much as I giggle, I respect both Bradbury and this 22yo for getting to a place to win

good luck!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Like all reviews you'd need to see what special interests were involved in influencing the outcome.
FWIW I am also against dual citizenship so I can hold a consistent attitude here.

I'd prefer no concept of citizenship to reflect the decreased importance of nationalism. That concept is decades away, but it's the line of sight with globalisation and a universal social system.

For me, we will never completely get rid of citizenship but a dilution of the significance, flexibility and timeliness will change. Perhaps somewhere between citizenship and simply moving interstate, where the concept of "statehood" means less but has practical purposes like a drivers licence.
 
Last edited:
8RiFl0s7Mj1WGCKxjA4P7NIte8zdOVV2CBmUNNwIhRw.jpg
 
He may have even been placed number 3 purely for political reasons... with the Greens knowing there was zero chance of him actually winning.

Definitely take the cash. Assuming he is actually qualified to take the seat. Time will tell on that one.

None of these loopies are qualified to take a seat. Considering the Greens hate most Australians, our values and way of life - as well as the fact they hate the environment and are hell bent on destroying it along with industry in this country - it is no surprise they are losing support.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...w/news-story/55d4b0ea25a80eaadeb6c3ba1bc0f26d
Greens collapse ‘in most states’

Scott Ludlam, left, and Larissa Waters, right, pictured with Greens leader Richard Di Natale, have both resigned.
Greens leader Richard Di Natale is facing dire warnings of a slide in his party’s popular support with a leaked internal analysis showing it is on track to lose three of its nine Senate seats, as it reels from the loss of two of its most popular senators.

Sounding the alarm over the party’s plight, the Greens analysis also concludes the party is “losing the younger vote” despite a “priority” Greens effort to increase the party’s support among the young.

The document, obtained by The Australian, declares “we’re not on track to save our senators” and says a new strategy is needed to prevent losing key Senate positions in South Australia, Queensland, Western Australia and NSW.

It warns of “stagnant or falling” support in most states based on polling conducted before the shock resignations of Scott Ludlam and Larissa Waters over the past week after they admitted breaching a fundamental citizenship requirement in the Constitution.

The Greens fear another blow to their standing after the furore as Senator Di Natale waits for confirmation he has renounced Italian citizenship.

Tasmanian colleague Nick McKim is yet to produce confirmation he has given up British citizenship.

scaletowidth

The turmoil continued yesterday when Senator Di Natale launched an interim reshuffle while candidate Andrew Bartlett faces questions over a separate constitutional test — whether he held an office of profit under the crown — that could disqualify him from replacing Ms Waters.

“Based on the 2016 results, the seats most at risk are South Australia, Queensland and NSW,” warns the internal analysis.

“Distressingly, analysis of data for the full year since the July 2016 election suggests that outside of NSW, our vote has likely fallen since the election, leaving key states exposed.”

A key warning is that the Greens’ primary vote has not risen above 10 per cent since last year’s election and that state-by-state figures show the weakness of the party in the vulnerable states.

Relying on Newspoll surveys reported in The Australian, the document finds the Greens’ primary vote averaged 11.2 per cent in the year before the last election but fell to an average of 9.7 per cent in the year since.

Those at the greatest risk of defeat are Sarah Hanson-Young in SA and Mr Bartlett in Queensland, assuming he replaces Ms Waters.

Both would have to face voters at the next election, as their terms expire in June 2019.

The internal analysis finds the SA and Queensland seats are “dangerously at risk” and that the NSW seat is in doubt despite a slight improvement.

“Averaged over the last 12 months, NSW has slightly increased its vote. However, the increase is not yet enough to feel comfortable about retaining the seat,” it says.

NSW senator Lee Rhiannon faces voters at the next election.

WA senator Rachel Siewert, whose term expires in 2019, is facing doubts over her position given the fall in the party’s support in the state election and Newspoll.

“It is not unreasonable to think that our Senate vote in WA is under 9 per cent. This puts us at risk of not being the ‘last one standing’ in WA (and) WA should no longer be considered safe,” the analysis says.

Mr Ludlam’s former seat, which is expected to be taken by Jordon Steele-John because he was second on the ticket last year, does not expire until June 2022.

The document acknowledges the short-term movements in the Greens’ vote are within the margin of error for individual polls but argues the trend over a full year cannot be ignored.

“As well as a lower average, the post-election results are very consistent and this consistency has persisted over a whole 12 months,” it concludes.

“This strongly suggests our vote has now dropped below our election result and has stabilised at this lower level.”

The analysis dismisses recent Ipsos surveys that estimate the party’s support at 13 or 16 per cent, calling this “just unrealistic” and “out of line” with other polls, and cites Essential Research results that also show a slip in support.

The document was given to The Australian on condition the author not be named, given the objective was to avoid a witch-hunt and instead trigger a debate within the party over the best way to combat the fall in support.

“People need to look the hard reality in the face,” said one Greens member. TheAustralian was told of concerns that the party had not developed a robust strategy to win back young voters on the back of the government’s higher-education reforms, which will lift fees for students and demand faster repayment of student debt.

A spokeswoman for Senator Di Natale fended off the criticism.

“We’re looking forward to some big campaigns and policy initiatives in the lead-up to the next election,” she said.

“We had a big increase in our house vote at the last election and we are confident we can continue to build and win more lower house seats. In the Senate we are in a good position to consolidate our team.”

Chief pollster for the Newspoll surveys, Galaxy Research managing director David Briggs, said the Greens’ vote peaked in about 2010 in federal and state surveys.

“Even in states in which their share of the primary vote has increased since 2010, the increase has been less than one percentage point,” Mr Briggs said.

“This suggests that the Green vote has plateaued and any suggestion in opinion polls that their share of the vote is now significantly higher than at previous elections is fanciful.

“The other interesting point is that the most significant drops in Green support occur after they have a hand in government.”
 
None of these loopies are qualified to take a seat. Considering the Greens hate most Australians, our values and way of life - as well as the fact they hate the environment and are hell bent on destroying it along with industry in this country - it is no surprise they are losing support.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...w/news-story/55d4b0ea25a80eaadeb6c3ba1bc0f26d
Do you get tired of being so pent up with misplaced rage? I imagine it must be tiring. You must be tired.
 
Where was this right wing derision when the Liberals put Wyatt Roy into parliament and then the ministry? Or is it funny because he's disabled?
 
None of these loopies are qualified to take a seat. Considering the Greens hate most Australians, our values and way of life - as well as the fact they hate the environment and are hell bent on destroying it along with industry in this country - it is no surprise they are losing support.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...w/news-story/55d4b0ea25a80eaadeb6c3ba1bc0f26d
Never stopped Bernardi being a senator despite being as qualified as a pencil. Actually I take that back, a Pencil has more right to be a senator than Bernardi.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top