-
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
I'm not holding the Greens up as having the best policy. Every policy is going to have some impact on the economy, as is doing nothing.
And the statement "wreck the economy" is completely unfounded, I might add, unless you believe they could turn things off tomorrow.
Some of the extreme Greens would turn off gas tomorrow and coal next week, which is madness and suits their kale-and-candles mentality.
The realities of metallurgical coal, manufacturing components, and associated carbon-based activities is with us for some time yet, and the collared Greens know that.
Wrecking the economy is sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending carbon trading isn't going to happen in a meaningful way. We've seen what the "offsets" market is like https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/23/australias-carbon-credit-scheme-largely-a-sham-says-whistleblower-who-tried-to-rein-it-in
-
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
Meh, Queenslanders are used to pollies like Bob Katter, Barnaby Joyce, Clive Palmer and Pauline The Racist Chipshop Lady. The Greens are the reserved, sensible option next to that lot.
Katter et al, as bad as they are, aren't calling for Australia to destroy its economy.
Debatable. Clive Palmer thinks he can unilaterally cap mortgage interest rates, and mad Bob would probably spend half the national budget on new roads for Kennedy.
UAP aren't going to get any Senate seats and Craig Kelly has lost Hughes. So not sure what influence Clive Palmer has here. Katter is one seat which he wins on first preference.
Exxon, Chevron etc paying $0 tax isn't a great look
Well that's bullshit. They do pay tax, unless you're one of the horde that think profit tax is the only tax, and investment and employment means nothing.
It is stated Greens policy to shut down all coal mines in Australia by 2030. Bandt even had the gall to pretend the budget would be better off. No mention about royalties, balance of trade, etc.
If you're a fan of extremist climate policies, then can I recommend the LNP's sitting in the corner cross-legged with your eyes closed chanting "Technology not taxes" for 15 years?
I'm not saying the Greens are all that, I'm not one of the 12%. But while theyll have a voice from the crossbench they're not going to the ones making the decisions. I find the fact that 12% went for them a lot less mad than 35% sticking with a party that's spent the last 9 years wallowing in corruption, undermining free speech and freedom of the press, and whose climate policies are literally worse than doing nothing. And that's not to mention the 9% who voted for the absolute cookers in the UAP / One Nation.
I
Is that the same LNP that committed to net zero by 2050? You do realise that taxing your way to net zero means a drag on the economy?
You do realise that committing to net zero in 30 years without a shadow of a shred of a plan about how to get there (other than chanting technology not taxes) is about as convincing as someone saying "make me the socceroos coach and I'll win the world cup by 2034"
We're miles away from meeting current modest commitments, and have no plan to change course. Not to mention that members of his own coalition are still saying net zero isn't settled, and the PM has a long track record of actively undermining climate change and general duplicity. Why would anyone take that "commitment" seriously?
The LNP policy of do nothing is already a drag on the economy. Business, particularly the energy sector, has been crying out for ages for clarity and leadership. Doing nothing means you need more drastic action later to get to the same target - failure to plan is not good for the economy, it's just means you're screwing the future economy harder.
So your defence of the Greens' policy to ruin our economy is to point to the LNP's hope that something else bridges the gap between its commitment to prioritising "clean hydrogen, ultra-low-cost solar, battery storage of renewable power and carbon capture and storage"?
Have I got that right?
Nope. My defence is "at least they've got a policy". LNP have no policy, no plan, and no credibility on climate. Tim Wilson is still lying about them having reduced emissions by 20% sonce 2013 - complete bullshit. You can stick words like "solar" and "battery" in your manifesto, but when you're still talking about "cancelling the weekend" and "might as well turn the lights off now" it counts for nothing.
Or put another way; your defence is "at least they've got a plan to ruin the economy". You keep bringing in the former government into it for some reason. I guess that's what the kids these days call "whataboutism"?
-
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
I'm not holding the Greens up as having the best policy. Every policy is going to have some impact on the economy, as is doing nothing.
And the statement "wreck the economy" is completely unfounded, I might add, unless you believe they could turn things off tomorrow.
Bandt's plan is to shutter all coal mines in Australia by 2030. Prior to the pandemic coal mining was worth over $5 billion to States, $70 billion in exports, ~170,000 well paid jobs in Australia. It also contributed ~70% of the electricity market.
What do you think would happen to the economy if it was suddenly removed?
-
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
I'm not holding the Greens up as having the best policy. Every policy is going to have some impact on the economy, as is doing nothing.
And the statement "wreck the economy" is completely unfounded, I might add, unless you believe they could turn things off tomorrow.
Bandt's plan is to shutter all coal mines in Australia by 2030. Prior to the pandemic coal mining was worth over $5 billion to States, $70 billion in exports, ~170,000 well paid jobs in Australia. It also contributed ~70% of the electricity market.
What do you think would happen to the economy if it was suddenly removed?
Uh... we use the same workforce to dig up the copious amounts of other minerals we have available in this country?
Go look at how many coal mines shut and open, displacing workers and ruining towns and lives in the process. Offshore companies laugh all the way to the bank.
What happens when thermal coal is no longer viable enough for those mines to stay open? Are the mine owners going to offer to support and transition those workers?
Like fuck.
-
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
I'm not holding the Greens up as having the best policy. Every policy is going to have some impact on the economy, as is doing nothing.
And the statement "wreck the economy" is completely unfounded, I might add, unless you believe they could turn things off tomorrow.
Bandt's plan is to shutter all coal mines in Australia by 2030. Prior to the pandemic coal mining was worth over $5 billion to States, $70 billion in exports, ~170,000 well paid jobs in Australia. It also contributed ~70% of the electricity market.
What do you think would happen to the economy if it was suddenly removed?
Uh... we use the same workforce to dig up the copious amounts of other minerals we have available in this country?
If they were required the workforce would've already expanded. This isn't some planned economy, creating full employment for the sake of it comrade.
Go look at how many coal mines shut and open, displacing workers and ruining towns and lives in the process. Offshore companies laugh all the way to the bank.
How many?
What happens when thermal coal is no longer viable enough for those mines to stay open? Are the mine owners going to offer to support and transition those workers?
Like fuck.
Coal will still be required on the world market for decades and any transition will be decades long too, not eight years.
-
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
Meh, Queenslanders are used to pollies like Bob Katter, Barnaby Joyce, Clive Palmer and Pauline The Racist Chipshop Lady. The Greens are the reserved, sensible option next to that lot.
Katter et al, as bad as they are, aren't calling for Australia to destroy its economy.
Debatable. Clive Palmer thinks he can unilaterally cap mortgage interest rates, and mad Bob would probably spend half the national budget on new roads for Kennedy.
UAP aren't going to get any Senate seats and Craig Kelly has lost Hughes. So not sure what influence Clive Palmer has here. Katter is one seat which he wins on first preference.
Exxon, Chevron etc paying $0 tax isn't a great look
Well that's bullshit. They do pay tax, unless you're one of the horde that think profit tax is the only tax, and investment and employment means nothing.
It is stated Greens policy to shut down all coal mines in Australia by 2030. Bandt even had the gall to pretend the budget would be better off. No mention about royalties, balance of trade, etc.
If you're a fan of extremist climate policies, then can I recommend the LNP's sitting in the corner cross-legged with your eyes closed chanting "Technology not taxes" for 15 years?
I'm not saying the Greens are all that, I'm not one of the 12%. But while theyll have a voice from the crossbench they're not going to the ones making the decisions. I find the fact that 12% went for them a lot less mad than 35% sticking with a party that's spent the last 9 years wallowing in corruption, undermining free speech and freedom of the press, and whose climate policies are literally worse than doing nothing. And that's not to mention the 9% who voted for the absolute cookers in the UAP / One Nation.
I
Is that the same LNP that committed to net zero by 2050? You do realise that taxing your way to net zero means a drag on the economy?
You do realise that committing to net zero in 30 years without a shadow of a shred of a plan about how to get there (other than chanting technology not taxes) is about as convincing as someone saying "make me the socceroos coach and I'll win the world cup by 2034"
We're miles away from meeting current modest commitments, and have no plan to change course. Not to mention that members of his own coalition are still saying net zero isn't settled, and the PM has a long track record of actively undermining climate change and general duplicity. Why would anyone take that "commitment" seriously?
The LNP policy of do nothing is already a drag on the economy. Business, particularly the energy sector, has been crying out for ages for clarity and leadership. Doing nothing means you need more drastic action later to get to the same target - failure to plan is not good for the economy, it's just means you're screwing the future economy harder.
So your defence of the Greens' policy to ruin our economy is to point to the LNP's hope that something else bridges the gap between its commitment to prioritising "clean hydrogen, ultra-low-cost solar, battery storage of renewable power and carbon capture and storage"?
Have I got that right?
Nope. My defence is "at least they've got a policy". LNP have no policy, no plan, and no credibility on climate. Tim Wilson is still lying about them having reduced emissions by 20% sonce 2013 - complete bullshit. You can stick words like "solar" and "battery" in your manifesto, but when you're still talking about "cancelling the weekend" and "might as well turn the lights off now" it counts for nothing.
Or put another way; your defence is "at least they've got a plan to ruin the economy". You keep bringing in the former government into it for some reason. I guess that's what the kids these days call "whataboutism"?
I guess you need to find a kid to explain what "whataboutism" means.
This discussion started because voodoo was shocked that 12% voted green. I said it was hardly surprising, given that people care about climate change and the general shittiness of the other choices. The sitting government is kinda relevant to a discussion about who people vote for doncha think? (They're not officially the former govt for a few days yet, but that's not the point)
-
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
Meh, Queenslanders are used to pollies like Bob Katter, Barnaby Joyce, Clive Palmer and Pauline The Racist Chipshop Lady. The Greens are the reserved, sensible option next to that lot.
Katter et al, as bad as they are, aren't calling for Australia to destroy its economy.
Debatable. Clive Palmer thinks he can unilaterally cap mortgage interest rates, and mad Bob would probably spend half the national budget on new roads for Kennedy.
UAP aren't going to get any Senate seats and Craig Kelly has lost Hughes. So not sure what influence Clive Palmer has here. Katter is one seat which he wins on first preference.
Exxon, Chevron etc paying $0 tax isn't a great look
Well that's bullshit. They do pay tax, unless you're one of the horde that think profit tax is the only tax, and investment and employment means nothing.
It is stated Greens policy to shut down all coal mines in Australia by 2030. Bandt even had the gall to pretend the budget would be better off. No mention about royalties, balance of trade, etc.
If you're a fan of extremist climate policies, then can I recommend the LNP's sitting in the corner cross-legged with your eyes closed chanting "Technology not taxes" for 15 years?
I'm not saying the Greens are all that, I'm not one of the 12%. But while theyll have a voice from the crossbench they're not going to the ones making the decisions. I find the fact that 12% went for them a lot less mad than 35% sticking with a party that's spent the last 9 years wallowing in corruption, undermining free speech and freedom of the press, and whose climate policies are literally worse than doing nothing. And that's not to mention the 9% who voted for the absolute cookers in the UAP / One Nation.
I
Is that the same LNP that committed to net zero by 2050? You do realise that taxing your way to net zero means a drag on the economy?
You do realise that committing to net zero in 30 years without a shadow of a shred of a plan about how to get there (other than chanting technology not taxes) is about as convincing as someone saying "make me the socceroos coach and I'll win the world cup by 2034"
We're miles away from meeting current modest commitments, and have no plan to change course. Not to mention that members of his own coalition are still saying net zero isn't settled, and the PM has a long track record of actively undermining climate change and general duplicity. Why would anyone take that "commitment" seriously?
The LNP policy of do nothing is already a drag on the economy. Business, particularly the energy sector, has been crying out for ages for clarity and leadership. Doing nothing means you need more drastic action later to get to the same target - failure to plan is not good for the economy, it's just means you're screwing the future economy harder.
So your defence of the Greens' policy to ruin our economy is to point to the LNP's hope that something else bridges the gap between its commitment to prioritising "clean hydrogen, ultra-low-cost solar, battery storage of renewable power and carbon capture and storage"?
Have I got that right?
Nope. My defence is "at least they've got a policy". LNP have no policy, no plan, and no credibility on climate. Tim Wilson is still lying about them having reduced emissions by 20% sonce 2013 - complete bullshit. You can stick words like "solar" and "battery" in your manifesto, but when you're still talking about "cancelling the weekend" and "might as well turn the lights off now" it counts for nothing.
Or put another way; your defence is "at least they've got a plan to ruin the economy". You keep bringing in the former government into it for some reason. I guess that's what the kids these days call "whataboutism"?
I guess you need to find a kid to explain what "whataboutism" means.
Yeah I'm used to adults calling it tu quoque or ad hominen fallacy.This discussion started because voodoo was shocked that 12% voted green.
Thanks for the re-cap. You've gone from calling Greens the 'reserved, sensible option' compared to Katter, Nationals, UAP and One Nation, despite none of them calling for such a clear and drastic measure. Then onto the Coalition. None of which actually addresses the point I made about their plan to shut down coal in this country.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
Did prepoll last night. Some fucking whack jobs running in my electorate
Got my democracy sausage around lunch time. Bit of a queue, but moved quickly enough and nice weather so in no rush.
Looked at who I would preference from least irritated by to eventual preferred winner, ensuring Greens go last. There are some genuine weirdos running. Not least of which are the Informed Medical Options Party, named as accurately as the Democratic People's Republic of Congo.
Click the link and check out the dumb shit they advocate for.
What was the vibe for Pocock when you went out?
Update; with near as makes no difference 50% of the votes counted, Pocock's running third. He's about 1800 behind the incumbent
SelsjSZelsjaZed. But in the likely event it comes to preferences you'd expect a healthy amount from the Greens and other Independents will carry him through. -
@gibbon-rib broooo, they're nuts!
They want to wipe student debt, have free education from pre-school right through uni, free dental and mental health on Medicare for all. And 100% renewables starting yesterday.
All paid for by taxing corporates and our billionaires. Both cohorts of which will I'm sure suck that up and stick around for the ride.
-
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib said in Aussie Politics:
Meh, Queenslanders are used to pollies like Bob Katter, Barnaby Joyce, Clive Palmer and Pauline The Racist Chipshop Lady. The Greens are the reserved, sensible option next to that lot.
Katter et al, as bad as they are, aren't calling for Australia to destroy its economy.
Debatable. Clive Palmer thinks he can unilaterally cap mortgage interest rates, and mad Bob would probably spend half the national budget on new roads for Kennedy.
UAP aren't going to get any Senate seats and Craig Kelly has lost Hughes. So not sure what influence Clive Palmer has here. Katter is one seat which he wins on first preference.
Exxon, Chevron etc paying $0 tax isn't a great look
Well that's bullshit. They do pay tax, unless you're one of the horde that think profit tax is the only tax, and investment and employment means nothing.
It is stated Greens policy to shut down all coal mines in Australia by 2030. Bandt even had the gall to pretend the budget would be better off. No mention about royalties, balance of trade, etc.
If you're a fan of extremist climate policies, then can I recommend the LNP's sitting in the corner cross-legged with your eyes closed chanting "Technology not taxes" for 15 years?
I'm not saying the Greens are all that, I'm not one of the 12%. But while theyll have a voice from the crossbench they're not going to the ones making the decisions. I find the fact that 12% went for them a lot less mad than 35% sticking with a party that's spent the last 9 years wallowing in corruption, undermining free speech and freedom of the press, and whose climate policies are literally worse than doing nothing. And that's not to mention the 9% who voted for the absolute cookers in the UAP / One Nation.
I
Is that the same LNP that committed to net zero by 2050? You do realise that taxing your way to net zero means a drag on the economy?
You do realise that committing to net zero in 30 years without a shadow of a shred of a plan about how to get there (other than chanting technology not taxes) is about as convincing as someone saying "make me the socceroos coach and I'll win the world cup by 2034"
We're miles away from meeting current modest commitments, and have no plan to change course. Not to mention that members of his own coalition are still saying net zero isn't settled, and the PM has a long track record of actively undermining climate change and general duplicity. Why would anyone take that "commitment" seriously?
The LNP policy of do nothing is already a drag on the economy. Business, particularly the energy sector, has been crying out for ages for clarity and leadership. Doing nothing means you need more drastic action later to get to the same target - failure to plan is not good for the economy, it's just means you're screwing the future economy harder.
So your defence of the Greens' policy to ruin our economy is to point to the LNP's hope that something else bridges the gap between its commitment to prioritising "clean hydrogen, ultra-low-cost solar, battery storage of renewable power and carbon capture and storage"?
Have I got that right?
Nope. My defence is "at least they've got a policy". LNP have no policy, no plan, and no credibility on climate. Tim Wilson is still lying about them having reduced emissions by 20% sonce 2013 - complete bullshit. You can stick words like "solar" and "battery" in your manifesto, but when you're still talking about "cancelling the weekend" and "might as well turn the lights off now" it counts for nothing.
Or put another way; your defence is "at least they've got a plan to ruin the economy". You keep bringing in the former government into it for some reason. I guess that's what the kids these days call "whataboutism"?
I guess you need to find a kid to explain what "whataboutism" means.
Yeah I'm used to adults calling it tu quoque or ad hominen fallacy.Then I guess you'll need to find an adult to explain what "tu quoque" abs "ad hominem" mean too, because I didn't say anything even remotely like that.
This discussion started because voodoo was shocked that 12% voted green.
Thanks for the re-cap. You've gone from calling Greens the 'reserved, sensible option' compared to Katter, Nationals, UAP and One Nation, despite none of them calling for such a clear and drastic measure. Then onto the Coalition. None of which actually addresses the point I made about their plan to shut down coal in this country.
Arming 13 year olds (boys only of course) with rifles to protect against a Chinese invasion? Denial of man made climate change? Anti-vax? Capping mortgage rates without consulting the RBA or the lenders? Yeah, I'd say the Greens were relatively sensible compared to those absolute loons.
Shutting down coal - I don't know the best speed to do this. In a fantasy world where the Greens won and gave 8 years notice, it would be a major shock. But it's hardly going to "destroy" or "ruin" the economy, that just sounds like Daily Telegraphesque pearl clutching. And anyway, it's not going to happen.
Coal exports are going to decline drastically whatever, so we around be planning for that. Yes there will always be a need for coal to make steel and busts of shitty PMs, but thermal coal for power will die.
Right now, we have mining companies making big donations to political parties, who then use public money to provide them with massive subsidies, and kick the climate change can down the road. Everything else aside, sure we can agree that is fucked?
-
@voodoo said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib broooo, they're nuts!
They want to wipe student debt, have free education from pre-school right through uni, free dental and mental health on Medicare for all. And 100% renewables starting yesterday.
All paid for by taxing corporates and our billionaires. Both cohorts of which will I'm sure suck that up and stick around for the ride.
Having dental & mental under Medicare sounds incredibly sensible. Free (or at least affordable) education is a great idea, as long as you can balance the budget. Making access to education merit rather than wealth based is fairer, and would presumably be a benefit to the economy. Renewables are great, as long as they're competitively priced and reliable then why wouldn't you want then?
I haven't looked at the Greens costings, so I don't know how they'd propose to pay for it. But I do know the LNP has pissed many, many billions of $ of our money up the wall on corruption and pork barrelling, buying water and land at grossly inflated prices (from liberal donors), handouts to friendly companies like News Corp (and liberal donors), offshore camps for refugees ($4.5m per year per refugee FFS), questionable military spending, and buggering up job keeper so badly that we used public money to help private companies get record profits during the pandemic. That's just off the top of my head, I've probably forgotten a load. I will give them credit for somehow keeping a straight face when saying they're the only ones we can trust with the economy.
If we cut out the bulk of the corruption and cock-ups I reckon we wouldn't need to tax the multinationals too much to balance the books.
-
@gibbon-rib reckon we have too many gaps to debate on the interweb mate. Let's park this for a few beers some day
-
@voodoo said in Aussie Politics:
@gibbon-rib reckon we have too many gaps to debate on the interweb mate. Let's park this for a few beers some day
I'm not sure that'll be any more conclusive. But it will have beer, so it's a good plan.
-
If Greens were serious about the future of the planet and cheap clean zero-carbon renewable energy, they would support and lobby the bleeding obvious instead of fighting against.
-
Good call. SMRs are a great solution.
The recent announcement through the trilateral AUKUS partnership that Australia will acquire nuclear submarines "means it's time to reconsider our ban on civil nuclear energy," AWU National Secretary Dan Walton said today. Walton described SMRs as a "logical progression" from the plan for nuclear submarines. "SMRs are at the core of the US and British plans to create zero-carbon economies. Australia should be following suit. We already have the uranium, why would we not develop the capacity to use it in safe and effective modern ways?" he said.
The question I have: will the submarines - due in about 20 years - get here before SMRs are viable in the market?
-
Looks like David Pocock might pinch the ACT Senate seat of the Liberals.
Forget the teals in the lower house, Dave may hold the balance of power in the Senate.
Surely his first action has to be looking at the 'supporting your body weight at the breakdown' law that has been his nemesis for so many years.
-
@dogmeat Thankfully in Australia we end up with a candidate the majority of the electorate prefers, even if they're way, way down the list of first preference.
I like to number all the boxes below the line, going from who I'd most want out of the least likely and working my way towards the best worst of the most likely winners. With one caveat; Greens always go last.
This election may go down in history as the one that finally splintered the dominance of the two major parties. Depending on the next three years (assuming Labor does get a majority this time), we may be looking at the last majority government.
Labor losing working class votes and inner city to the Greens. Liberals losing traditional soft liberals in upper middle class areas.
-
@barbarian said in Aussie Politics:
Looks like David Pocock might pinch the ACT Senate seat of the Liberals.
Forget the teals in the lower house, Dave may hold the balance of power in the Senate.
Surely his first action has to be looking at the 'supporting your body weight at the breakdown' law that has been his nemesis for so many years.
Never seemed to bother him. Just ask the Saffas.
-
Asked about Mr Dutton potentially becoming the new leader of the Liberal Party, Mr McGowan said he was not fit to be the Prime Minister someday. “He’s an extremist and I don’t think he fits with modern Australia at all,” the Premier told reporters on Monday. “He doesn’t seem to listen, he’s extremely conservative. I actually don’t think he’s that smart. “I’ve seen him present on things. I don’t really pick up there’s much there, as opposed to Scott Morrison.” ... Mr McGowan said he believed a major factor for WA voters in the election was the Liberal Party’s opposition to the hard border, which kept the state safe during the height of the pandemic. He said the Liberals essentially supported Mr Palmer’s fight to bring down the border for about two months before backing down. The Premier recalled he even received a phone call from Mr Morrison telling him the state would lose the court battle and should give up. “Hopefully, they’ve learned a lesson that Clive Palmer is a bit like kryptonite – you don’t want to touch him because inevitably with these things, particularly political things, it goes bad,” Mr McGowan said. “It was a terrible look and actually, not just a terrible look. It was just the wrong decision.” Mr McGowan said it was good that no one from the United Australia Party was elected. “I saw their actions on the polling booths. I saw how the Palmer people behave,” he said. “They’re misfits and losers and they scream and yell at voters. They shove things in people’s faces. “They are offensive and rude people, and I’m glad that Australians haven’t supported them.” Mr McGowan said to a lesser a degree the same could be said about One Nation supporters. “People screaming, yelling, bustling, harassing. They’re just misfits and losers,” he said.
Aussie Politics