What would a Dutton Liberal leadership mean for the Liberals and the country?

[Gough]

Oh dear.
The Liberal party will need to swing hard right and be much more racist. Perhaps they can propose legislating public stoning for women fleeing domestic violence.

Such is the modern conservative, the Tories seem to have put all the failings of modern Britain down to them not being right wing enough for the past fourteen years.

 

[peetoo]

Such is the modern conservative, the Tories seem to have put all the failings of modern Britain down to them not being right wing enough for the past fourteen years.

They endured artificial austerity for no gain at all. Staggering. I read the govt made the thatcher govt look like a drunken sailor on shore leave

 

[The Punter]

In Australia, it is always the difference between the winner's 2PP percentage and 50% that is described as the margin. Never seen it done here the other way.

 

[HurleyHepsHird]

Peter Dutton flew to Perth for one hour at lavish Gina Rinehart birthday party then back to cost-of-living campaign in Dunkley

Opposition leader’s latest trip west to celebrate with the billionaire raises questions among Labor MPs and his usual media supporters

www.theguardian.com

Real man of the people is ol Dutto.

 

[Kyptastic]

I'd put money on Peter Dutton dropping all this nuclear talk by the time the election rolls around. There's no way he's smart enough to mount a coherent argument for it and it's going to start hurting them electorally.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

I'd put money on Peter Dutton dropping all this nuclear talk by the time the election rolls around. There's no way he's smart enough to mount a coherent argument for it and it's going to start hurting them electorally.

Yeah but he seems dumb enough not to realise it.

 

[Gavin Excell]

I'd put money on Peter Dutton dropping all this nuclear talk by the time the election rolls around. There's no way he's smart enough to mount a coherent argument for it and it's going to start hurting them electorally.

It's brave that's for sure

 

[peetoo]

SMR is just a ruse to keep coal until the SMR are ‘ready’ So transparent

As if our lobby would actually allow nuclear to cut their lunch

 

[Xtreme]

Real man of the people is ol Dutto.

The people's champion

 

[QuietB]

I'd put money on Peter Dutton dropping all this nuclear talk by the time the election rolls around. There's no way he's smart enough to mount a coherent argument for it and it's going to start hurting them electorally.

It’s too late. They are not going to adopt renewables, so what is their energy policy going to be? Either way Labor will not drop it. It is a monumental misstep by Dutton.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Capability is almost 20 years away apparently

 

[QuietB]

Capability is almost 20 years away apparently

Liberals getting government back seems like 20 years away as well

 

[Demonic Ascent]

So they don't like windmills but they'll be happy with nuclear plants/reactors dotting the landscape? And where will the waste go, nowhere near the leafy inner suburbs I presume.

 

[QuietB]

So they don't like windmills but they'll be happy with nuclear plants/reactors dotting the landscape? And where will the waste go, nowhere near the leafy inner suburbs I presume.

I don't think Dutton gives two *s about the inner leafy suburbs. He will probably propose a nuclear power station in Edinburgh gardens.

This is one the fascinating things about his policy for mine - when Dutton does announce the various locations you can guarantee he go fulls Trump and just dumps everything in non LNP seats on purely partisan grounds.

Hunter is easy - that has always been Labor. La Trobe is a problem as that has always been conservative - but Dutton does not care about Vic maybe he just abandons it, maybe he moves the nuclear power plant to Aston?

Whatever he does it will be partisan and petty.

 

[Gough]

I don't think Dutton gives two *s about the inner leafy suburbs. He will probably propose a nuclear power station in Edinburgh gardens.

This is one the fascinating things about his policy for mine - when Dutton does announce the various locations you can guarantee he go fulls Trump and just dumps everything in non LNP seats on purely partisan grounds.

Hunter is easy - that has always been Labor. La Trobe is a problem as that has always been conservative - but Dutton does not care about Vic maybe he just abandons it, maybe he moves the nuclear power plant to Aston?

Whatever he does it will be partisan and petty.

This is not serious policy and shouldn't be treated like it is.

 

[QuietB]

This is not serious policy and shouldn't be treated like it is.

I'm not sure about that.

At first I believed it was just kicking the coal and gas problem down the road and I still largely believe that. Nuclear means we have coal and gas for another 10-20-30 years and that suits the USA (who owns everything) and the Liberals (who basically are the USA political arm in Australia) just fine.

But increasingly I think there is another motivation. If Australia can normalise nuclear energy, then maybe the Liberals can start talking about nuclear weapons. And the USA would love nothing more than Australia housing nuclear weapons on their behalf - particularly when the idiots at Liberal HQ agree to pay for them (ie. submarines which are nothing more than an extension of the US fleet).

We have Liberals leaving politics and joining defence companies left and right. They are all stuck in an information loop driven by US foreign policy.

None of this is good for Australia.

 

[nut]

Renewables are forcing prices down, some companies offering free electricity brween 11am to 2 pm because of the amount of renewable in the grid.
More renewables are being built everyday, and if/when snowy 2 is commissioned and more battery storage is built, will see further drops in prices.

 

[Gavin Excell]

I'm not sure about that.

At first I believed it was just kicking the coal and gas problem down the road and I still largely believe that. Nuclear means we have coal and gas for another 10-20-30 years and that suits the USA (who owns everything) and the Liberals (who basically are the USA political arm in Australia) just fine.

But increasingly I think there is another motivation. If Australia can normalise nuclear energy, then maybe the Liberals can start talking about nuclear weapons. And the USA would love nothing more than Australia housing nuclear weapons on their behalf - particularly when the idiots at Liberal HQ agree to pay for them (ie. submarines which are nothing more than an extension of the US fleet).

We have Liberals leaving politics and joining defence companies left and right. They are all stuck in an information loop driven by US foreign policy.

None of this is good for Australia.

It has no intention of going forward in any practical way.

 

[Gough]

It has no intention of going forward in any practical way.

Someone should move a private members bill to get rid of the ban on nuclear power in Australia and we'll see how serious Dutton is.

 

[peetoo]

I'm not sure about that.

At first I believed it was just kicking the coal and gas problem down the road and I still largely believe that. Nuclear means we have coal and gas for another 10-20-30 years and that suits the USA (who owns everything) and the Liberals (who basically are the USA political arm in Australia) just fine.

But increasingly I think there is another motivation. If Australia can normalise nuclear energy, then maybe the Liberals can start talking about nuclear weapons. And the USA would love nothing more than Australia housing nuclear weapons on their behalf - particularly when the idiots at Liberal HQ agree to pay for them (ie. submarines which are nothing more than an extension of the US fleet).

We have Liberals leaving politics and joining defence companies left and right. They are all stuck in an information loop driven by US foreign policy.

None of this is good for Australia.

Careful mate you’ll be deemed unpatriotic, even though it’s them that should be described so

 

[peetoo]

Also many coal station sites could be repurposed with solar and wing generation with pumped hydro storage….much quicker and cheaper than nuclear. As mentioned already grid connected

 

[Dont_be_a_Plonka]

 

[QuietB]

 

[barreness]

I'm not sure about that.

At first I believed it was just kicking the coal and gas problem down the road and I still largely believe that. Nuclear means we have coal and gas for another 10-20-30 years and that suits the USA (who owns everything) and the Liberals (who basically are the USA political arm in Australia) just fine.

But increasingly I think there is another motivation. If Australia can normalise nuclear energy, then maybe the Liberals can start talking about nuclear weapons. And the USA would love nothing more than Australia housing nuclear weapons on their behalf - particularly when the idiots at Liberal HQ agree to pay for them (ie. submarines which are nothing more than an extension of the US fleet).

We have Liberals leaving politics and joining defence companies left and right. They are all stuck in an information loop driven by US foreign policy.

None of this is good for Australia.

This is interesting analysis. Nuclear subs only make sense as MAD projection so they need the missiles, nuclear power only makes sense as a subsidy for weapon manufacture. You could be on to something here

To smart by half? didn't think the libs had this sort of long term thinking capability, does make sense though

 

[Not Important]

did ‘thug’ ever have it to lose? he’s a trump level reactionary and climate change denier.