Polls Thread Mk III

Remove this Banner Ad

Prahran went from Libs to Green in 2014. Its staunch LNP territory.

There really arent many LNP seats to lose in Melbourne anymore.
Maybe the Greens do well there because it's a second rate legislature in a second rate city.

As stated, where the real wealth and power is the Greens have no chance.
 
Maybe the Greens do well there because it's a second rate legislature in a second rate city.

As stated, where the real wealth and power is the Greens have no chance.

Where in Australia would there be more wealth and power than Melbourne? Maybe marginaly in Sydney? Which now also has green seats?

You seem to be reading things backwards.
 
Where in Australia would there be more wealth and power than Melbourne? Maybe marginaly in Sydney? Which now also has green seats?

You seem to be reading things backwards.
Not marginally at all.

Walk around Vaucluse or Mosman and compare to Melbourne.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Maybe the Greens do well there because it's a second rate legislature in a second rate city.

As stated, where the real wealth and power is the Greens have no chance.

You know the LNP need more than a few seats in Sydney to win government though right?

And corporate interests are more than happy to switch to the ALP, and do.

My point stands, the LNP are being wedged from both ends.
 
You know the LNP need more than a few seats in Sydney to win government though right?
Who cares? No party has a social base any more.

My point stands, the LNP are being wedged from both ends.
Which is why their primary vote consistently remains the strongest of all parties.

You would have to be pretty thick to think walking around various wealthy neighbourhoods is any indication of anything.

Most major change in Australian politics happens in Melbourne and Adelaide.

Sydney is a shithole.
Where is most of the power and wealth in Australia located? Hint: it's not Melbourne. It either resides in Sydney in the form of property barons like Triguboff or Lowy, or is found in Perth in the form of rent-seeking mining magnates like Rinehart and Forrest.

Even tech wealth like Teoh and Atlassian founders live in Sydney.

Melbourne is second rate.
 
Who cares? No party has a social base any more.


Which is why their primary vote consistently remains the strongest of all parties.


Where is most of the power and wealth in Australia located? Hint: it's not Melbourne. It either resides in Sydney in the form of property barons like Triguboff or Lowy, or is found in Perth in the form of rent-seeking mining magnates like Rinehart and Forrest.

Even tech wealth like Teoh and Atlassian founders live in Sydney.

Melbourne is second rate.

The ALP have no social base?

Lol you're off your nut.

Nobody cares about your insecurities over Melbourne. If you want to fellate a wealthy or powerful person just go do it, you dont need our approval.

This is the polls thread, * off with your stupid crap.
 
The ALP have no social base?

Lol you're off your nut.

Nobody cares about your insecurities over Melbourne. If you want to fellate a wealthy or powerful person just go do it, you dont need our approval.

This is the polls thread, **** off with your stupid crap.
You're obviously wrong, hence this reaction.

I'll leave you to stew.
 
Neoliberalism is right wing as **** economically, spot on. It is capitalism with some social progression. Capitalism for rich kids who want to appear cool and working class. Maybe have a black friend, maybe even shag a bloke one time. Heaps of drugs.

So yeah should have clarified, generally that is the politics of the wealthy. So corporates get behind their social causes because of three things:

It doesn't cost them anything to get behind it

They lose money if they piss off their consumer base

Who cares what the rednecks and bible bashers think? They are too stupid to have enough money to matter as consumers
 
Wrong!

Greens do as does Labor and possibly the Nats.

Libs don't, they have a political (mates) base only.
Labor's political base was the unions, which is a shadow of what it once was.

The Greens have as big a social base as the LNP.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

How do the Greens have a bigger social base than the Liberals when they have at best a quarter of the vote?
Re-read my first reply and you might get it.
There is a distinction between social base and political (mates rate) base.
 
Not marginally at all.

Walk around Vaucluse or Mosman and compare to Melbourne.

You see, you ignored the core of my point. Whether you are right or wrong, Sydney still has greens seats.

And if you think Perth is anywhere near as economically or politically powerful as Melbourne, just because it has a few magnates, then I think youve been toiling in the sun a bit long.
 
No there isn't.
Yes there is.

Take for example the Greens (Victoria can't speak of other states), social gathering, regular updates both email and on phone, very active recruiting, lots of volunteers to man booths, very active in social issues and marches.

Labor easier because of their Union affiliations.

Ask a Liberal member and see what they do with their membership and compare.
 
You see, you ignored the core of my point. Whether you are right or wrong, Sydney still has greens seats.
There is only one Greens member in the House of Representatives - in the federal division of Melbourne.

And if you think Perth is anywhere near as economically or politically powerful as Melbourne, just because it has a few magnates, then I think youve been toiling in the sun a bit long.
I never said it was political powerful as Melbourne, simply because it has a smaller population. That said, the mining magnates have more influence than anyone in Melbourne.

I would have thought the lessons from the dumping of Rudd and the election in 2010 would have been instructive. Suppose not.
 
Ask a Liberal member and see what they do with their membership and compare.
Err. Social base isn't about members and rabble rousing. It's about people who will naturally vote for you because of direct affiliation with your politics. Every two bit conveyancer, real estate agent, or shifty small businessman in the suburbs is a natural fit for the Liberals, and always have been.
 
Err. Social base isn't about members and rabble rousing. It's about people who will naturally vote for you because of direct affiliation with your politics. Every two bit conveyancer, real estate agent, or shifty small businessman in the suburbs is a natural fit for the Liberals, and always have been.
A very good way of recruiting and maintaining members one would think. isn't that what it is all about?

There was an article sometime last year where the Liberals were concerned as membership was not only down, but difficult to recruit.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top