The Politics Thread 2021

[Northern Raider]

https://www.news.com.au/finance/money/c ... f6533582ac

This is disgusting.

Honestly, If NSW tried to pull this Bull I would vote that govt out of office.

Are QLDers that out of touch that they continue to support a government that not only bludges off NSW but now unashamadly lies to continue to bludge of NSW.

Honestly, the only disappointing this is NSW is being so soft about this, if I were NSW premier, I would consider further action (in whatever form that may be). Honestly, at the very least, moving forward NSW should not let anyone who resides in QLD fly in through sydney, atleast this way we dont continue to pay for something QLDers are not going to pay for.

If you cant even keep a promise with someone elses money, what kind of person are you.

Honestly, not much surprises me in politics any more, but this has disgusted me.

Don't blame me. It's Nickman that voted for them.

[zim]

I have it on good authority he shaves his head in an effort to look more like Murdoch, rather than the Pitbull he claims to admire.

[Dr Zaius]

https://www.news.com.au/finance/money/c ... f6533582ac

This is disgusting.

Honestly, If NSW tried to pull this Bull I would vote that govt out of office.

Are QLDers that out of touch that they continue to support a government that not only bludges off NSW but now unashamadly lies to continue to bludge of NSW.

Honestly, the only disappointing this is NSW is being so soft about this, if I were NSW premier, I would consider further action (in whatever form that may be). Honestly, at the very least, moving forward NSW should not let anyone who resides in QLD fly in through sydney, atleast this way we dont continue to pay for something QLDers are not going to pay for.

If you cant even keep a promise with someone elses money, what kind of person are you.

Honestly, not much surprises me in politics any more, but this has disgusted me.

It's pathetic really.

Needless border restrictions impacting on the welfare of thousands, appealing to Queensland parochialism in the lead up to an election.

Refusal to take their share of overseas returnees.

Happy to sit back and watch NSW take all of the risks and then political point score once the inevitable quarantine leak occurs.

And now refusing to pay their fair share of the cost of quarantining their citizens that they refused to bring home.

I'm well over the childish shenanigans of all of our state and federal leaders, but Queensland in particular has been despicable.

A strong federal leaders would have got all of these state jokers into a room eons ago, banged their heads together and told them to behave.

[gangrenous]

I also always see people drawing some false inverse equivalence between the ABC and Murdoch media, as if the latter is a mere counterweight.

This is absurd. ABC simply does not even come close to campaigning against the LNP. Whereas to suggest that Murdoch doesn’t campaign against Labor would be satire.

Absolutely, your whole post was good. But this point was spot on. Complete false equivalence.

Belongs in the same bin as “Biden does bad things too” and “hearing both sides of the climate debate”.

[gangrenous]

https://www.news.com.au/finance/money/c ... f6533582ac

This is disgusting.

That is the weakest excuse. Pay your debts and take it up with the person who your beef is with.

Interesting that there does seem to have been an agreement for funding your own arrivals which comes back to the discussion we had about the smaller states a while back. If they are paying a contribution then they may have been judged harshly.

[Botman]

It's not the be-all and end-all though, my whole points is that the "The Liberals only win because of Murdoch" argument that now seems to dominate all political discourse is just garbage. The pure incompetence of the Labor party needs to bear a large portion of the brunt here.

I don't think that we should understate the toxic effect that Murdoch has had on the political landscape though. Particularly climate change. No one person should hold that level of influence in media.

There is no doubt that Murdoch has a strangehold on print media and has certain AM radio and Sky News commentators in the pocket

My question is who under the age for 40 watches sky news, listens to talkback radio or reads newspapers?
Absolutely **** no one that i know, that's for sure. The only people i know that do ANY of that are over the age of 55!

I think the level of influence he actually has is overstated, and clearly the ALP and Greens agree with that, otherwise there would no reason for them to support this Google/Facebook thing, which serves only to raise the level of influence those forms of news media have.

[greeneyed]

The issue is that the print media has disproportionate influence over what’s run on other forms of media. What’s printed in newspapers runs on morning radio, television, shifts into talkback and then shapes a day’s debate. It’s no doubt because other media is more instant, and they often do not do the research themselves. Only two State capitals do not have a Murdoch monopoly in "print", and Sydney and Melbourne have a duopoly of Murdoch and Nine media.

Murdoch now broadcasts far right wing commentators on Sky News for free in regional Australia every evening wall to wall (via WIN TV). Sky News is now almost as lacking in journalistic credibility as Fox News in the US. There is virtually no private news media in Australia that is not right leaning, or extremely right wing, now. The extreme right wing media, that actually peddles outright false information (in the guise of commentary or “free speech”) is the most worrying thing for an democratic system. We are only part way down the path that the US media has taken.

[gangrenous]

Hear hear GE. Telling it like it is.

[zim]

I wish I could add more to the discussion than snark There's some very good posts in here.

[gangrenous]

Don’t worry zim. This thread hasn’t jumped the snark yet. You’re still very appreciated too.

[zim]

Don’t worry zim. This thread hasn’t jumped the snark yet. You’re still very appreciated too.

I'll have to watch some more sky news over the next few days so I can get in the mosh pit.

[greeneyed]

One of the other really worrying things is the way that Trump popularised the term "fake news". You now hear it parroted everywhere on social media, when people are provided information... credible, fact, science based information... which they simply just don't want to hear. Facts. Usually because of prejudice and a lack of ability for critical thought.

The term "fake news" was coined by Trump to discredit news that is actually fact based and credible. The network TV news services in the US, for example. News outlets with clear and firm journalistic standards. What we now have is a licence for people on "news outlets" to spread whatever misinformation they like. Things like... "Trump only lost the election due to election fraud." People go on about social media and false information spread by social media. But this stuff is spread by organisations that pretend to be real news media outlets. It is much more influential and pervasive.

Fox News has devised a formula, which basically simply spreads a mix of actual news and downright lies, to generate maximum viewers and revenues and aims to achieve a political end. And the frightening thing is... this model is spreading through the world.

[Botman]

I dont think those media outlets are impacting the election results the way you think
Small sample size and and anecdotal evidence caveats a plenty... but the only people i know that are engaging with any of those media outlets are the choir. And i dont think preaching to the choir moves the needle as far as elections go.

People, and particularly young people are not getting their news from television, radio, or print. It's just not happening. They're getting it from their personally cultivated social media feeds, which is why it is important that steps are being taken by those platforms to crack down on the disinformation peddled by the extreme right.

I think that's having a FAR FAR greater impact on elections across the political spectrum than anything else, and that includes here in Australia. And again, if those leaders on the left really thought this was a major issue, there is absolutely no reason they'd support this law to regarding Google/Facebook. They're telling you they dont really buy into that as an excuse.

ALP have a messaging problem. They have, frankly, a piss poor leader who you'd be forgiven if you forgot his name. The country needs to push forward with some progressive policies and we need an ALP governement to do that. Im far more concerned about that, than i am about the influence of media platforms with one foot in the grave have on people who dont consume it.

[Botman]

One of the other really worrying things is the way that Trump popularised the term "fake news". You now hear it parroted everywhere on social media, when people are provided information... credible, fact, science based information... which they simply just don't want to hear. Facts. Usually because of prejudice and a lack of ability for critical thought.

The term "fake news" was coined by Trump to discredit news that is actually fact based and credible. The network TV news services in the US, for example. News outlets with clear and firm journalistic standards. What we now have is a licence for people on "news outlets" to spread whatever misinformation they like. Things like... "Trump only lost the election due to election fraud." People go on about social media and false information spread by social media. But this stuff is spread by organisations that pretend to be real news media outlets. It is much more influential and pervasive.

Fox News has devised a formula, which basically simply spreads a mix of actual news and downright lies, to generate maximum viewers and revenues and aims to achieve a political end. And the frightening thing is... this model is spreading through the world.

This i 100% agree with
Its a very troubling trend

[Mickey_Raider]

ALP have a messaging problem. They have, frankly, a piss poor leader who you'd be forgiven if you forgot his name. The country needs to push forward with some progressive policies and we need an ALP governement to do that.

I find these sort of comments from the commentariat interesting. I find them interesting because often they are based on nothing much more than the "vibe" of the thing, rather than actually being able to articulate what it is they are looking for.

If the ALP decides to play its hand at, say, an ambitious climate change policy; it gets crucified for being a jobs killer and for alienating coal miners. And then coal miners are presented as a proxy for the working class across the board. And then they lose an election and react to it by gravitating more to the centre.

If it doesn't, and marches in lockstep with the LNP, it gets crucified by progressives for being "Liberal-lite", and "not standing for anything". Same principle if it runs a small target campaign, which was the consensus prescription after the 2019 loss. It will still be derided as being "weak" or "spineless".

In many ways it is really lose-lose.

I suspect that at the end of the day for a lot of people it is nothing more than a cosmetic popularity contest. If a charismatic. brilliant and witty leader was running the exact same plays Albo was now, no one would be lamenting the direction of the ALP.

I think that in regards to Albo, there has been a concerted destabilisation campaign against him which has failed and is fizzling out.

I would say Labor can still very much win the next election, probably in a minority government. I have heard that internal polling isn't good for the Coalition and they are tracking to lose seats in WA and QLD. Don't underestimate the effects that the federal LNP's attacks on very popular Labor state premiers has had. And I haven't even gotten started on the scandals and crises besetting the government over the last week or two.

[gangrenous]

Indeed Botman is here hand wringing about the state of the ALP like the LNP are doing such a bang up **** job. Albo’s absent as opposition leader. ScoMo was absent when he was supposed to be running the country in a **** disaster which his party exacerbated because they couldn’t engage in the reality of climate change.

[the bone]

I can’t agree with those dismissing the impact of the traditional media on elections. They set the agenda for what is discussed by society, they provide the headlines that less engaged people see, and they influence public opinion. People still watch TV, read newspapers (print or online), and catch stories from these outlets on social media (that’s what the legislation just debated was about after all).

[BJ]

What confuses me is that many Daily Telegraph readers I know are staunch Labor voters and Coalition voters I know wouldn’t dream of reading a Murdoch paper and are mainly ABC people.

[papabear]

I dont think those media outlets are impacting the election results the way you think
Small sample size and and anecdotal evidence caveats a plenty... but the only people i know that are engaging with any of those media outlets are the choir. And i dont think preaching to the choir moves the needle as far as elections go.

People, and particularly young people are not getting their news from television, radio, or print. It's just not happening. They're getting it from their personally cultivated social media feeds, which is why it is important that steps are being taken by those platforms to crack down on the disinformation peddled by the extreme right.

I think that's having a FAR FAR greater impact on elections across the political spectrum than anything else, and that includes here in Australia. And again, if those leaders on the left really thought this was a major issue, there is absolutely no reason they'd support this law to regarding Google/Facebook. They're telling you they dont really buy into that as an excuse.

ALP have a messaging problem. They have, frankly, a piss poor leader who you'd be forgiven if you forgot his name. The country needs to push forward with some progressive policies and we need an ALP governement to do that. Im far more concerned about that, than i am about the influence of media platforms with one foot in the grave have on people who dont consume it.

Thinking about progressive policies though:-
Marriage equality - LNP
Gun Control / semi automatic bans - LNP
GST - LNP

You have to go further back to get:-
Lowering tariffs - Labor
Deregulating mortgages - Labor

Oddly enough all those policies you would think would be achieved by the other side from a ideology sense. But the truth is all the policies were probably needed at the time. Like a stronger environment / carbon policy is now.

The simple problem labor has is a lack of trust in implementing any new tax like policy. A labor carbon policy at least in mind will do one of two things:-
1 - It wont raise any money or actually work.
2 - It will work in getting money off people but the government wont actually do anything worthwhile with the money or lower taxes elsewhere.

The best hope imo australia has re climate policy is two fold:-
1 - LNP get serious about promoting renewables through incentives etc.
2 - LNP implement a carbon price in conjunction with personal income tax relief.

Otherwise you have labor who no doubt can think of a good policy but have to move away from the notion that economic policy's primary focus is wealth redistribution.

[Botman]

Indeed Botman is here hand wringing about the state of the ALP like the LNP are doing such a bang up **** job. Albo’s absent as opposition leader. ScoMo was absent when he was supposed to be running the country in a **** disaster which his party exacerbated because they couldn’t engage in the reality of climate change.

Im not really interested in "whataboutism" because that's not going to get the LNP out.
Implying i think this current government are doing a good job is flatly incorrect.

The alp need to get their **** together and present a opposition that can take power back so we can move forward with progressive climate and social policies

It’s very possible, nay likely in this current culture, that this LNP government will outstink the ALP and they can win the next election because it becomes an “anyone but them” election

But that can’t be the plan for ALP. The ALP need to lift their game. Anyone truly believing they’re don’t has rocks in their heads

[BJ]

ALP keep fluffing their policy lines.

If they’d only hit negative gearing for portfolios over say $2 million and Tax Franking credits over a high threshold too, then it would have targeted the richer people.

[The Nickman]

One of the other really worrying things is the way that Trump popularised the term "fake news". You now hear it parroted everywhere on social media, when people are provided information... credible, fact, science based information... which they simply just don't want to hear. Facts. Usually because of prejudice and a lack of ability for critical thought.

The term "fake news" was coined by Trump to discredit news that is actually fact based and credible. The network TV news services in the US, for example. News outlets with clear and firm journalistic standards. What we now have is a licence for people on "news outlets" to spread whatever misinformation they like. Things like... "Trump only lost the election due to election fraud." People go on about social media and false information spread by social media. But this stuff is spread by organisations that pretend to be real news media outlets. It is much more influential and pervasive.

Fox News has devised a formula, which basically simply spreads a mix of actual news and downright lies, to generate maximum viewers and revenues and aims to achieve a political end. And the frightening thing is... this model is spreading through the world.

Yeah, I absolutely agree with this post, the term "fake news" is basically thrown around whenever anyone doesn't agree with anything. It's extremely worrying.

It's been my belief for a decade now that the sharing of genuine fake news was going to be the downfall of society, and I still believe it. I honestly believe the Christchurch massacre doesn't happen without people willingly sharing BS stories about mosques in Cardwell banning Christmas tree lights and the like.

[Northern Raider]

It's pretty simple. To oust a sitting government you need to present a desirable alternative. Rudd managed it to beat Howard. Since then Labor has continued to fail in that regard.

[The Nickman]

I dont think those media outlets are impacting the election results the way you think
Small sample size and and anecdotal evidence caveats a plenty... but the only people i know that are engaging with any of those media outlets are the choir. And i dont think preaching to the choir moves the needle as far as elections go.

People, and particularly young people are not getting their news from television, radio, or print. It's just not happening. They're getting it from their personally cultivated social media feeds, which is why it is important that steps are being taken by those platforms to crack down on the disinformation peddled by the extreme right.

I think that's having a FAR FAR greater impact on elections across the political spectrum than anything else, and that includes here in Australia. And again, if those leaders on the left really thought this was a major issue, there is absolutely no reason they'd support this law to regarding Google/Facebook. They're telling you they dont really buy into that as an excuse.

ALP have a messaging problem. They have, frankly, a piss poor leader who you'd be forgiven if you forgot his name. The country needs to push forward with some progressive policies and we need an ALP governement to do that. Im far more concerned about that, than i am about the influence of media platforms with one foot in the grave have on people who dont consume it.

Thinking about progressive policies though:-
Marriage equality - LNP
Gun Control / semi automatic bans - LNP
GST - LNP

You have to go further back to get:-
Lowering tariffs - Labor
Deregulating mortgages - Labor

Oddly enough all those policies you would think would be achieved by the other side from a ideology sense. But the truth is all the policies were probably needed at the time. Like a stronger environment / carbon policy is now.

The simple problem labor has is a lack of trust in implementing any new tax like policy. A labor carbon policy at least in mind will do one of two things:-
1 - It wont raise any money or actually work.
2 - It will work in getting money off people but the government wont actually do anything worthwhile with the money or lower taxes elsewhere.

The best hope imo australia has re climate policy is two fold:-
1 - LNP get serious about promoting renewables through incentives etc.
2 - LNP implement a carbon price in conjunction with personal income tax relief.

Otherwise you have labor who no doubt can think of a good policy but have to move away from the notion that economic policy's primary focus is wealth redistribution.

This is a very good post. I read an article recently about this saying basically all of the major progressive policies pushed through in this country have been by the liberals.

Sure, the ALP agitates for change, and that's great, but it's usually the libs that get it done.

I find that fascinating, it's probably more due to the libs sitting on their hands and blocking everything until it's time to finally make a change and it's politically unpopular to NOT make the change, but it is what it is.

[The Nickman]

It's pretty simple. To oust a sitting government you need to present a desirable alternative. Rudd managed it to beat Howard. Since then Labor has continued to fail in that regard.

Rudd beat Howard because of Work Choices though, no other reason. The ALP basically relies on the Liberals **** the bed that badly that people want change, they never actually offer a decent alternative.

Perhaps ScoMo will do that with this sex scandal cover up, who knows? I seriously doubt it though, and am still tipping him to be the first leader to go back-to-back since Little Johnny.

[-TW-]

Rudd also ran a blitzkrieg pr campaign

He was Kevin 07, he was on every talk show that he could get his hands on. He had a regular spot on Rove Live which was one of the top rating programs on TV at the time.



Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[The Nickman]

Rudd also ran a blitzkrieg pr campaign

He was Kevin 07, he was on every talk show that he could get his hands on. He had a regular spot on Rove Live which was one of the top rating programs on TV at the time.



Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

And still only won because of Work Choices.

[The Nickman]

Rudd also ran a blitzkrieg pr campaign

He was Kevin 07, he was on every talk show that he could get his hands on. He had a regular spot on Rove Live which was one of the top rating programs on TV at the time.



Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

And still only won because of Work Choices.

I am being a bit disingenuous here though, I do remember as a young bloke seeing Kevin Rudd and thinking he'd be prime minister one day, just as I said leading into the last federal election that Bill Shorten would never be one. I also firmly believe the same thing about Albanese, unless the Libs do something disastrous.

Same reason everytime the Labor party trotted out Kim Beazley again, you just knew they wouldn't win.

It's been proven time and time again that people vote in leaders, not parties.

[The Nickman]

Although I should caveat that with the note that I think Shorten would've beaten Dutton. That would've been a disastrous change for the Liberal Party.

[BJ]

Although I should caveat that with the note that I think Shorten would've beaten Dutton. That would've been a disastrous change for the Liberal Party.

You’re hypothetical doesn’t include the more likely scenario where Prime Minister Dutton doesn’t call an election when due, appoints himself Governor General and Australian King.

[The Nickman]

Although I should caveat that with the note that I think Shorten would've beaten Dutton. That would've been a disastrous change for the Liberal Party.

You’re hypothetical doesn’t include the more likely scenario where Prime Minister Dutton doesn’t call an election when due, appoints himself Governor General and Australian King.

And then devours all our souls.

[gangrenous]

I think arguing that media bias is not an issue because the ALP just have a messaging problem is to a large extent an example of circular logic.

Why do they have a messaging problem?
1. Because they actually have a messaging problem.
Sure. Look in this thread about “why didn’t they restrict franking credits to large portfolios?”. The response from Labor should have been “We already have. Pensioners are exempt, and the pension is means tested. It achieves the desired effect.”. On climate change someone else remarked that the obvious policy is for green energy + advertising your reskilling program for the mining/fossil fuel industry.

2. Because the messaging is largely controlled by entities that barrack for the other side.
Even if Labor were running perfect progressive policies and messaging, it largely goes out to the public through the filter of a predominantly right wing commercial media who distort that messaging. Who are willing to publish pieces with deliberate half truths and lies to distort the community conversation (hello arsonists 2019/2020 fires).

You say people elect leaders not parties. How is ScoMo any more likeable or leader material than Albo?! I mean I’m not a fan of either, but I don’t think that’s a slam dunk obvious Liberal win.

Look at other democracies like ours around the world. We’ve got the UK and the US in the similar grips of the right wing. Has the left wing messaging of parties simultaneously failed around the world? Or is the way our world is set up at the moment primed for right wing “messaging” that appeals directly to individualism and greed with little regard for truth. So it takes an exceptionally strong/charismatic leader from the left of politics to cut through, or the dramatic failure of the right to be temporarily removed? In the US Donald Trump was not far off re-election after being responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths.

Putting this down to poor messaging focuses on the small problem of the individual/party at the time, while overlooking the persisting structural imbalance that I believe exists in the political debate.

[Dr Zaius]

This is well worth a listen. It's from June last year and a reboot of one of their older podcasts. It talks about the complexity for social media platforms in policing posts/tweets. They updated it with the happenings of June last year and it gives a pretty stark prelude to the events of January
https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/ra ... evil-redux

[Mickey_Raider]

https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-eco ... MjnR5-zaYA

Gittins joins the likes of Garnaut, Kohler et al in endorsing the delightfully monikered Mickeynomics.

Putting self imposed restraints in place under the rationale of good governance is not tantamount to being “financially constrained.”

“But Lowe can’t suspend the truth that money is “fungible” – all dollars are interchangeable. Funding the deficit indirectly rather than directly may be important from the perspective of good governance, but from the perspective of the economic effect, they’re the same.

Back to the views of Professor Garnaut: “The fiscal deficits should be mainly funded directly or indirectly by the Reserve Bank, at least until full employment is in sight.”

[T_R]

2. Because the messaging is largely controlled by entities that barrack for the other side.
Even if Labor were running perfect progressive policies and messaging, it largely goes out to the public through the filter of a predominantly right wing commercial media who distort that messaging. Who are willing to publish pieces with deliberate half truths and lies to distort the community conversation (hello arsonists 2019/2020 fires).

Then use me as a control sample. I can't remember the last time I consumed commercial media (at least from this country), and I 100% believe that Labor have a very serious messaging problem indeed.