The coalition will never win the federal government again.

Remove this Banner Ad

Footonddit

Cancelled
Jul 2, 2022
115
149
AFL Club
Melbourne
Haha Birmingham - "I would have wanted to vote for it [43% target] in a heartbeat. However, it doesn’t require legislation”.

He is dragged out to soften the LNP's image whilst doing sweet * all to actually moderate them. Just the usual politician doublespeak.
 

moistie

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 4, 2003
7,652
3,106
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Modern voters lol , Scomo was voted out because people had enough of him and the cost of living going up, lets not kid ourselves climate change and social issues were the reasons maybe for Greens voters, but they’re insignificant anyway who at the end of the day bent over to Albo.
Warringah, North Sydney, Mackellar, Wentworth, Kooyong, Goldstein and Curtin. Liberal heartland seats now held by conservative independents.

What's the one thing the independents policy platform had in common? Action on climate change.

But you keep telling yourself it's only Green voters that want action. Your party will listen and remain irrelevant, whittling away to a nub as a centrist conservative party takes its voters and seats.

Before long you will be the junior party to the Nationals and fighting One Nation and the UAP for the right wing nutter cross bench seats.

Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Evolved1

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 14, 2013
12,443
14,934
The lockdown state
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Phil Ivey
I don't see the only issue as climate change. The center of politics has shifted such that climate response, gay marriage, womens rights, and anti-religious views are mainstream in Australia.

An economically conservative party with mainstream social views would do well. The LNP have shifted so far to the religious right that they surely must think they're in 'Merica. Fix that and they'll be ok. If not, it will be a slow death.
 

QuietB

Hall of Famer
May 13, 2008
32,525
50,589
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
The Liberals are all in on censorship now - not sure what core values - other than women staying in the kitchen - they have left to be honest

 

Chief

In Mourning
Dec 1, 1999
114,034
96,723
Gates' Payroll
AFL Club
Carlton
a) Nobody needs to hear the CCPs lies. Dunno why they would give them a platform.

b) The CCP has a pretty big audience. Not like anything they say is getting more coverage than otherwise.
 

QuietB

Hall of Famer
May 13, 2008
32,525
50,589
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
a) Nobody needs to hear the CCPs lies. Dunno why they would give them a platform.

b) The CCP has a pretty big audience. Not like anything they say is getting more coverage than otherwise.
You might not like what they have to say but you still have to hear it.

I think it is quite interesting China we’re so forward - it is clearly a hissy fit in response to Taiwan.

Denying them a voice because you don’t like what they are going to say is censorship.

And the irony of the LNP asking for anyone to be censored is hilarious.
 

Donakebab

Premium Gold
May 18, 2009
33,803
45,938
Tempy Pub
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Detroit Red Wings
You might not like what they have to say but you still have to hear it.

I think it is quite interesting China we’re so forward - it is clearly a hissy fit in response to Taiwan.

Denying them a voice because you don’t like what they are going to say is censorship.

And the irony of the LNP asking for anyone to be censored is hilarious.

I listened to it live. The speech was really friendly, fluffy with tones of cooperation. Meanwhile the Q&A spoke the cold hard reality.

It was important to hear and is pleasing that it is one thing that galvanises almost all political parties in Australia.
 

Chief

In Mourning
Dec 1, 1999
114,034
96,723
Gates' Payroll
AFL Club
Carlton
You might not like what they have to say but you still have to hear it.
Nope.
I think it is quite interesting China we’re so forward - it is clearly a hissy fit in response to Taiwan.

Denying them a voice because you don’t like what they are going to say is censorship.

And the irony of the LNP asking for anyone to be censored is hilarious.
Point is that it's not really going to make a difference to how many people hear the CCPs lies so, meh.
 

Number37

Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
Oct 5, 2013
20,870
22,651
AFL Club
Sydney
a) Nobody needs to hear the CCPs lies. Dunno why they would give them a platform.

b) The CCP has a pretty big audience. Not like anything they say is getting more coverage than otherwise.

It's a dangerous game to pick and choose who should and shouldn't be given a platform.

If the Chinese ambassador wanted to give a speech on how much more stuff they want to buy from us, would you want that speech given no platform as well?
 

Chief

In Mourning
Dec 1, 1999
114,034
96,723
Gates' Payroll
AFL Club
Carlton
It's a dangerous game to pick and choose who should and shouldn't be given a platform.

If the Chinese ambassador wanted to give a speech on how much more stuff they want to buy from us, would you want that speech given no platform as well?
They could ******* well post a video online.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gethelred

Moderator
May 1, 2016
23,096
47,286
AFL Club
Carlton
a) Nobody needs to hear the CCPs lies. Dunno why they would give them a platform.
Might be politics.

Us: "Last mob were massive thundercampaigners, we'd like to repair the trading relationship and for that we need to soften both the diplomatic and public conversations."
Them: "Alright. We'll keep doing our thing and we aren't apologising, what are you offering?"
Us: "We aren't really going to deny reality, but we'll make public statements in the direction of returning relations to pre-Covid levels, and as a show of goodwill we'll have someone - maybe Keating, he's good for a quote - speak to the Press Gallery about how vital our relationship with China is. How does that sound?"
Them: "Hmm... I like it, but I'm not sure it goes quite far enough. See, that last mob - I agree, massive thundercampaigners - really whacked the Leader's nose out of joint, and I don't think you lot wheeling out an Aussie's going to cut it."
Us: "Who would you suggest?"
Them: "I'm personally in decent standing with the Leader, and I'm a little ambitious; chuck me on instead of Paul. You get your softening, the Leader gets to control the message more visibly, and I get my face on a camera as the key agent in softening relationships. We all get what we want."
Us: shrugs "Works for me. Need any notes on what to say?"
 

Number37

Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
Oct 5, 2013
20,870
22,651
AFL Club
Sydney
Might be politics.

Us: "Last mob were massive thundercampaigners, we'd like to repair the trading relationship and for that we need to soften both the diplomatic and public conversations."
Them: "Alright. We'll keep doing our thing and we aren't apologising, what are you offering?"
Us: "We aren't really going to deny reality, but we'll make public statements in the direction of returning relations to pre-Covid levels, and as a show of goodwill we'll have someone - maybe Keating, he's good for a quote - speak to the Press Gallery about how vital our relationship with China is. How does that sound?"
Them: "Hmm... I like it, but I'm not sure it goes quite far enough. See, that last mob - I agree, massive thundercampaigners - really whacked the Leader's nose out of joint, and I don't think you lot wheeling out an Aussie's going to cut it."
Us: "Who would you suggest?"
Them: "I'm personally in decent standing with the Leader, and I'm a little ambitious; chuck me on instead of Paul. You get your softening, the Leader gets to control the message more visibly, and I get my face on a camera as the key agent in softening relationships. We all get what we want."
Us: shrugs "Works for me. Need any notes on what to say?"

Isn't the question, Who is his address aimed at?
If it's the govt or parliamentarians then it's shitty diplomacy and shouldn't be enabled.
If it's the Australian people then I don't see the issue with it.
Isn't he just saying that Taiwan is a part of China that they are aiming to reintegrate?
 

Gethelred

Moderator
May 1, 2016
23,096
47,286
AFL Club
Carlton
Isn't the question, Who is his address aimed at?
If it's the govt or parliamentarians then it's shitty diplomacy and shouldn't be enabled.
If it's the Australian people then I don't see the issue with it.
Isn't he just saying that Taiwan is a part of China that they are aiming to reintegrate?
I don't think it's aimed in any single direction. The speech is aimed at the people, the speech and the Q&A at the media, the Q&A at the CCP and the rest of the world. We get our diplomatic 'win', the wheels keep getting greased, we can continue to ruminate behind the scenes against China within the South Pacific and they get to appear strong and magnanimous to a world audience.

In truth, outside the foreign minister I really don't think the rest of the parliament would care beyond being briefed and ensuring the trade relationship resumes functioning properly. The spice must flow.
 

QuietB

Hall of Famer
May 13, 2008
32,525
50,589
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Isn't the question, Who is his address aimed at?
If it's the govt or parliamentarians then it's shitty diplomacy and shouldn't be enabled.
If it's the Australian people then I don't see the issue with it.
Isn't he just saying that Taiwan is a part of China that they are aiming to reintegrate?
I'd suggest it was aimed squarely at the USA and Australia was simply doing is job as intermediary.

China would not speak that directly to the USA. But they will speak to the USA's sheriff however the hell they want.
 

Number37

Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
Oct 5, 2013
20,870
22,651
AFL Club
Sydney
I don't think it's aimed in any single direction. The speech is aimed at the people, the speech and the Q&A at the media, the Q&A at the CCP and the rest of the world. We get our diplomatic 'win', the wheels keep getting greased, we can continue to ruminate behind the scenes against China within the South Pacific and they get to appear strong and magnanimous to a world audience.

In truth, outside the foreign minister I really don't think the rest of the parliament would care beyond being briefed and ensuring the trade relationship resumes functioning properly. The spice must flow.

I'd suggest it was aimed squarely at the USA and Australia was simply doing is job as intermediary.

China would not speak that directly to the USA. But they will speak to the USA's sheriff however the hell they want.

IMO there is a difference between saying stuff to a group of people & the message to other people from the stuff you say.
Also IMO, China has always been very good at combining the 2.

I agree with QuietB to the extent that they're saying this stuff here, but the message is ultimately for the USA, coz we are not going to do s**t about s**t without the USA telling us/or leading us, with regards to China's actions.

I disagree with QuietB to the extent that they are clearly also sending a message to us...the message seems to be--- "we're not shying away from what we are doing and to be clear this is exactly what we are doing". It leaves us and the USA & pretty much anyone else with no room to later say "oh we didn't know they were going to do that, things have changed bla-bla-bla". China will just say, "we told ya, in your own press club, what we were going to do, it shouldn't come as a surprise".

For context, they did the same thing with the Uyghur issue. They told the world what they were going to do, after they did what they said they were going to do, people (political leaders) started saying we didn't know they were going to do that.
 

Rob R

Premiership Player
Aug 17, 2009
3,722
4,017
AFL Club
Hawthorn
This is the second most powerful nation on earth and Australia's biggest trading partner by a huge margin. We need to find a way to coexist with them.
Doesn't mean we have to adopt their demands to kowtow or ignore the barbaric behaviour of the psychopath who has arrested and murder his way to being appointed ruler for life.

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Remove this Banner Ad