Opinion AUSTRALIAN Politics: Adelaide Board Discussion Part 5

[ADL9798]

Dunstan yet another example of a clear trend in state and federal politics - the very rapid shift in voters from more affluent, inner city constituencies away from the Liberal party not to Labor but to the Greens - who took nearly a quarter of all votes (22.5%) in this by-election.

The swing is even more significant if you combine this result with the 2022 election.

Liberals: -6.7% in 2024, -2.6% in 2022 (Total -9.3%)

Labor: -2.9%, following +6.4% in 2022 (Total +3.5%)

Greens: +8.8%, following +4.4% in 2022 (Total +13.2%)

If nothing changes I expect similar swings in 2026 in Heysen and Unley - these seats also saw high and rapidly increasing numbers of Greens voters at the last election.

The choice for the Liberal party is pretty simple.

A - Ignore the very clear message that voters are sending you, continue down the current path of culture wars and anti-science/anti-climate change nonsense, chase the fringe extremists but keep losing elections.

or

B - Listen to voters, course correct, and re-gain the middle ground through sensible, centre right economic and social policies (including on climate/energy) reflecting mainstream views held by the majority of Australians, lose the fringe extremist vote but maybe start winning elections again.

This isn’t a swipe at Finizio who strikes me as pretty sensible. It’s unfortunate that politicians like her are being tarred with the same brush as the rest of their party, and that ironically the more moderate Liberal seats are the most vulnerable to being poached, leaving the balance of internal power sitting with the remaining far right factions. It’s going to make the job of course correcting for the Liberal party a lot more difficult I suspect.

 

[Cap]

Dunstan yet another example of a clear trend in state and federal politics - the very rapid shift in voters from more affluent, inner city constituencies away from the Liberal party not to Labor but to the Greens - who took nearly a quarter of all votes (22.5%) in this by-election.

The swing is even more significant if you combine this result with the 2022 election.

Liberals: -6.7% in 2024, -2.6% in 2022 (Total -9.3%)

Labor: -2.9%, following +6.4% in 2022 (Total +3.5%)

Greens: +8.8%, following +4.4% in 2022 (Total +13.2%)

If nothing changes I expect similar swings in 2026 in Heysen and Unley - these seats also saw high and rapidly increasing numbers of Greens voters at the last election.

The choice for the Liberal party is pretty simple.

A - Ignore the very clear message that voters are sending you, continue down the current path of culture wars and anti-science/anti-climate change nonsense, chase the fringe extremists but keep losing elections.

or

B - Listen to voters, course correct, and re-gain the middle ground through sensible, centre right economic and social policies (including on climate/energy) reflecting mainstream views held by the majority of Australians, lose the fringe extremist vote but maybe start winning elections again.

This isn’t a swipe at Finizio who strikes me as pretty sensible. It’s unfortunate that politicians like her are being tarred with the same brush as the rest of their party, and that ironically the more moderate Liberal seats are the most vulnerable to being poached, leaving the balance of internal power sitting with the remaining far right factions. It’s going to make the job of course correcting for the Liberal party a lot more difficult I suspect.

Dutton's nightmare nearly comes true as Liberals dump senior woman for top ballot spot

Liberal preselectors opted for backbench senator Alex Antic as their top ballot pick, relegating shadow cabinet minister Anne Ruston to second, leaving questions about the party's commitment to female candidates, writes Brett Worthington.

www.abc.net.au

They have already made that bed.

This cracks me up



Having had the misfortune of listening to Speirs talk in a meeting I am not suprised at all that he is on the nose.

I just can't see who repaces him, Aston Hurn in Barossa is well spoken, but female, so that won't get up.

Tarzia would be a bust, Psioni, Whetstone ? They are long serving in safe seats? The well seems awfully dry.

 

[relapse]

Dutton's nightmare nearly comes true as Liberals dump senior woman for top ballot spot

Liberal preselectors opted for backbench senator Alex Antic as their top ballot pick, relegating shadow cabinet minister Anne Ruston to second, leaving questions about the party's commitment to female candidates, writes Brett Worthington.

www.abc.net.au

They have already made that bed.

This cracks me up



Having had the misfortune of listening to Speirs talk in a meeting I am not suprised at all that he is on the nose.

I just can't see who repaces him, Aston Hurn in Barossa is well spoken, but female, so that won't get up.

Tarzia would be a bust, Psioni, Whetstone ? They are long serving in safe seats? The well seems awfully dry.

From what I am aware Hurn is their next leader in waiting.

The Dunstan result suggests that Liberal will struggle to win the next state election so they may as well just hold on to Speirs for two more years and take him to the next election as a sacrificial lamb. From there Hurn can then take over and start building towards trying to win 2030.

 

[Cap]

From what I am aware Hurn is their next leader in waiting.

The Dunstan result suggests that Liberal will struggle to win the next state election so they may as well just hold on to Speirs for two more years and take him to the next election as a sacrificial lamb. From there Hurn can then take over and start building towards trying to win 2030.

Hurn is a first term MP isnt she ?

Next State and Federal elections are going to be interesting for the Libs or potentially whats left post election if they continue down the current path.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

From what I am aware Hurn is their next leader in waiting.

The Dunstan result suggests that Liberal will struggle to win the next state election so they may as well just hold on to Speirs for two more years and take him to the next election as a sacrificial lamb. From there Hurn can then take over and start building towards trying to win 2030.

Speirs doesn't seem a bad leader but does that heavy accent put people off? He is a quantum leap on Marshall.
Labor has a trump card in Mali. A young, smart energetic leader and I believe he has a positive vision for SA. As long as he controls some of his party, I see a long Premiership for him if he wants. I suspect though he is Federally bound.

 

[relapse]

Hurn is a first term MP isnt she ?

Next State and Federal elections are going to be interesting for the Libs or potentially whats left poat election if they continue down the current path.

Yep

She was Marshall's chief of staff and this is her first term, she's not quite ready yet (only around 34? and young in political experience) but she is the one who they're banking on to be the future of the party (I am pretty sure everyone knows this already, but she's Shannon Hurn's sister).

Prior to the election I am pretty sure that DVHP was viewed to be the next leader, but that all came unstuck when he messaged an assault victim asking her to sympathise with her attacker and then went on to lose his seat to Geoff Brock.

I think Speirs was just in the right place at the right time when he was appointed as leader.

I actually think Hurn will be good, she's younger and has the ability to connect with the Gen Y voters. I think once she's ready they need to put her straight in the driver's seat.

 

[Slippery Pete]

File under “things people in this thread said weren’t happening.”

File is becoming overloaded.

How Covid lockdowns hit mental health of teenage boys hardest

New research findings are contrary to what had previously been thought about pandemic’s effect on children’s wellbeing

www.theguardian.com

 

[El Doederino]

Speirs doesn't seem a bad leader but does that heavy accent put people off? He is a quantum leap on Marshall.
Labor has a trump card in Mali. A young, smart energetic leader and I believe he has a positive vision for SA. As long as he controls some of his party, I see a long Premiership for him if he wants. I suspect though he is Federally bound.

Yeah I’m sure Mali will go into federal politics soon enough. His loved nation wide. He’d be wasted as just an SA premier.

Labor don’t have any decent enough second choices.

Libs may as well give up while Mali is still around then pounce once he’s gone and they try to convince us that Mulligan has any brain cells

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Hurn is a first term MP isnt she ?

Next State and Federal elections are going to be interesting for the Libs or potentially whats left post election if they continue down the current path.

Yeah, Hurn is 1st term.

The rumours going around are that Tarzia is the one considering a challenge.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Yeah I’m sure Mali will go into federal politics soon enough. His loved nation wide. He’d be wasted as just an SA premier.

Labor don’t have any decent enough second choices.

Libs may as well give up while Mali is still around then pounce once he’s gone and they try to convince us that Mulligan has any brain cells

Fair go. Turbo Tom.

 

[Cap]

Another lawsuit incoming for the ABC if they don't withdraw innaccurate comments towards Dick Smith on his energy comments..
And he has the $$$$'s to do it if they remain steadfast and don't take it down. Bit hey it's only Australian taxpayers money so why should they give a *? Just be another lawsuit loss to add to the ever burgeoning numbers.

Loading…

www.heraldsun.com.au

Elon Musk criticises fact checkers and accuses them of ‘tyranny after Dick Smith complains about ABC RMIT fact check​

The billionaire has hit out at ‘government fact-checkers’ after the RMIT ABC Fact Check unit published a controversial report about comments made by Dick Smith about nuclear energy.

Billionaire Elon Musk has condemned the work of fact checkers and accused them of “tyranny” after businessman Dick Smith claimed the RMIT ABC Fact Check unit published a report that is “full of lies” about nuclear energy.
Mr Smith said he will take defamation action against the ABC if the fact check is not corrected.

On Monday, Mr Musk responded to a Sky News Australia article shared on the social media platform he owns, X, formerly Twitter, that explained Mr Smith's disgust over a fact check about the Australian businessman’s comments relating to nuclear power.

Mr Musk replied to a post by US columnist Michael Shellenberger that said, “one of the government’s main fact-checker groups has been caught spreading misinformation about renewables and nuclear.”

Mr Musk replied, “Having government ‘fact-checkers’ is a giant leap in the direction of tyranny.”

RMIT ABC Fact Check is jointly funded by the two taxpayer-funded organisations and is headed up by director Russell Skelton.
In the RMIT ABC Fact Check, the report also quoted Stanford University Professor Mark Z. Jacobson, another energy expert, said California has “been running on more than 100 per cent wind, water, solar for 10 out of the last 11 days for between 0.25 and six hours per day.”

But Mr Smith said this too is misleading: “What they don’t say is that California is nuclear-powered, so it’s just completely dishonest.”

“So in other words, they are proving what I’m saying is correct.”

In the fact check report it states Nepal is one of four countries running entirely on wind, water and solar, but neglects to point out, Mr Smith said, that: “The diesel fumes in Kathmandu – you can hardly breathe – are using fossil fuels and 70 per cent of the power in Nepal is burning wood and it’s not renewable.”

Mr Smith also said the fact check that has marked at the top of the document, ‘Your inoculation against misinformation’ is “disgusting”.

“The first thing a journalist does is check their facts, and they didn’t even phone me,” he said.

“I’ve spoken to people at the ABC, and they’ve said Dick, ‘I support nuclear but if I mention that here I would have no career path’.

“When it comes to the ABC, when they are commenting on energy simply don’t believe them.

Mr Smith made a claim which is wrong

For anyone whose is interested here is the claim.

We fact checked Dick Smith on whether a country can run entirely on renewables. Here's what we found

Entrepreneur Dick Smith says no country has ever been able to run on renewables, labelling the idea "impossible". What do the experts say?

www.google.com

"Look, I can tell you, this claim by the CSIRO that you can run a whole country on solar and wind is simply a lie," Mr Smith said.

"It is not true. They are telling lies. No country has ever been able to run entirely on renewables — that's impossible."

Thats the claim, he was proven wrong and now he's having a whinge.

And of course now he is trying to frame it differently.

But It isn't impossible.

As for Elon, well the poor guy bans people on X who make fun of him. Probably best to keep his nose out of it.

 

[Crow till I die]

Its funny, Tasmania and the countries that are 100% renewable (they don't specify the countries in the article) rely 'heavily' of hydroelectric power.

But they also say this

"Several detailed studies show that [getting to] 100 per cent renewables based mostly on solar and wind is quite straightforward, provided that enough transmission and storage is built."

Several details studies say...hmmm. So without Hydro, there are no countries that run solely on wind and solar but it might be possible. Sounds like Dick smith is not far off the mark then.

For the record I am all for building Hydro to supplement the power supply, but I am not against Nuclear also to supplement the power supply..no idea why people would not want a combination of Nuclear, wind, solar and Hydro - sounds like it would be quite robust long term.

 

[Crow till I die]

From that same article - a link

Chris Bowen says the average build time of a nuclear plant in the US has been 19 years. Is that correct?

Minister for Climate Change and Energy Chris Bowen says the average build time for a nuclear power plant in the United States has been nearly two decades. Is that correct? RMIT ABC Fact Check runs the numbers.

www.abc.net.au

The verdict​

Mr Bowen's claim is exaggerated.

According to a spokeswoman for his office, the minister's calculation only includes the three reactors constructed in the US between 1991 and 2022.

Although their average build time was 20.6 years, two additional reactors were connected to the grid in 2023 and 2024, with build times of 10.1 and 10.4 years.

So again, if that timeline is at all possible, why not have that AND wind and solar.

 

[Cap]

Its funny, Tasmania and the countries that are 100% renewable (they don't specify the countries in the article) rely 'heavily' of hydroelectric power.

But they also say this

"Several detailed studies show that [getting to] 100 per cent renewables based mostly on solar and wind is quite straightforward, provided that enough transmission and storage is built."

Several details studies say...hmmm. So without Hydro, there are no countries that run solely on wind and solar but it might be possible. Sounds like Dick smith is not far off the mark then.

For the record I am all for building Hydro to supplement the power supply, but I am not against Nuclear also to supplement the power supply..no idea why people would not want a combination of Nuclear, wind, solar and Hydro - sounds like it would be quite robust long term.

i don't think anyone on this forum is against Nuclear in theory


It just doesn't make sense here at all from a $$$ perspective.

I thought SA was looking at pumped Hydro, but we are the driest state in the driest continent. Cant see Tasmanian style Hydro working anywhere as much as we would like.

I always thought Geothermal would be a goer, seemed to go nowhere.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Tasmanian election results interesting...

Libs 13
ALP 10
Greens 4
Lambies 2
Independents 2 (think they are aligned to Libs)
To be decided 4

So the Liberal minority government will need more than their aligned Independents to form government... so where does this leave the AFL stadium?

Rockliff claims victory in Tasmanian election, despite falling short of majority

Tasmanian Premier Jeremy Rockliff claims victory and a fourth term in government for the Liberal Party, despite ABC projections showing the party well short of a majority.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Tasmanian election results interesting...

Libs 13
ALP 10
Greens 4
Lambies 2
Independents 2 (think they are aligned to Libs)
To be decided 4

So the Liberal minority government will need more than their aligned Independents to form government... so where does this leave the AFL stadium?

Rockliff claims victory in Tasmanian election, despite falling short of majority

Tasmanian Premier Jeremy Rockliff claims victory and a fourth term in government for the Liberal Party, despite ABC projections showing the party well short of a majority.

www.abc.net.au

Governing with Independents in a coalition is a poison pill. Ask Julia Gillard.

 

[Vader]

Its funny, Tasmania and the countries that are 100% renewable (they don't specify the countries in the article) rely 'heavily' of hydroelectric power.

But they also say this

"Several detailed studies show that [getting to] 100 per cent renewables based mostly on solar and wind is quite straightforward, provided that enough transmission and storage is built."

Several details studies say...hmmm. So without Hydro, there are no countries that run solely on wind and solar but it might be possible. Sounds like Dick smith is not far off the mark then.

For the record I am all for building Hydro to supplement the power supply, but I am not against Nuclear also to supplement the power supply..no idea why people would not want a combination of Nuclear, wind, solar and Hydro - sounds like it would be quite robust long term.

A - Hydro is regarded as a renewable, and always has been. Renewable energy is not just wind & solar.

As for why people don't want nuclear... it's horrendously expensive to build, too expensive to operate, creates large volumes of nuclear waste (noting that we still don't have a permanent storage facility for the limited volume of waste produced by Lucas Heights), small modular reactors don't exist and large reactors represent a massive risk to the network, and the timeframe for it's introduction is about 10-15 years too late to be useful. Nuclear energy just makes no sense in an Australian context.

 

[Crow till I die]

A - Hydro is regarded as a renewable, and always has been. Renewable energy is not just wind & solar.

As for why people don't want nuclear... it's too expensive to build, too expensive to operate, creates large volumes of nuclear waste (noting that we still don't have a permanent storage facility for the limited volume of waste produced by Lucas Heights), and the timeframe for it's introduction is about 10-15 years too late to be useful. Nuclear energy just makes no sense in an Australian context.

Fully aware of that, but the inference here is wind and solar being the push to 100% renewables. Those countries (not nominated in the article) and Tasmania are heavily reliant on Hydro which as has been noted is not really viable for mainland Australia as an energy supply of that magnitude. At the moment 100% provision from wind and solar anywhere is theoretical although not to say down the track its not possible.

Still not convinced that we can't have wind, solar and nuclear - why limit it to just wind and solar and with technology advances, storage for nuclear waste is surely not insurmountable.

 

[Vader]

Fully aware of that, but the inference here is wind and solar being the push to 100% renewables. Those countries (not nominated in the article) and Tasmania are heavily reliant on Hydro which as has been noted is not really viable for mainland Australia as an energy supply of that magnitude. At the moment 100% provision from wind and solar anywhere is theoretical although not to say down the track its not possible.

That has never EVER been the case... hence Snowy 2.0, and numerous other (much) smaller hydro projects under consideration. Nobody has ever suggested that wind & solar alone are/were the answer, it was always wind & solar with storage. Not sure where you got that particular misconception from?

Still not convinced that we can't have wind, solar and nuclear - why limit it to just wind and solar and with technology advances, storage for nuclear waste is surely not insurmountable.

Waste is arguably the least of the problems with nuclear power. It makes no logistical or commercial sense in the Australian context.

 

[Crow till I die]

That has never EVER been the case... hence Snowy 2.0, and numerous other (much) smaller hydro projects under consideration. Nobody has ever suggested that wind & solar alone are/were the answer, it was always wind & solar with storage. Not sure where you got that particular misconception from?

Waste is arguably the least of the problems with nuclear power. It makes no logistical or commercial sense in the Australian context.

Where would we run a hydro pland here in SA?

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Where would we run a hydro pland here in SA?

Torrens Lake at the weir or maybe we can have the Morialta Falls hydro electric project.

 

[Crow till I die]

Torrens Lake at the weir or maybe we can have the Morialta Falls hydro electric project.

6th creek. It can power my house and that would be just about all

 

[Vader]

Where would we run a hydro pland here in SA?

There are a lot of disused mine sites which they're looking at converting to hydro plants, all around the country. We're not talking a mega scale hydro system, like the Snowy, but it should work if you have enough of them. I suspect hydro plants will end up being almost ubiquitous, like solar & wind are already becoming.

 

[Cap]

Always great that everyone is given the opportunity to vote.

Makes it interesting too.

 

[Slippery Pete]

They are losers who are actually more comfortable being in opposition.