Is Labor doomed for oblivion, or can Albo…

Bill Shorten took over as leader of Australian Labor Party in 2013…

Equine Hypocrisies: Racehorses for the Knackery

It was always a probable fact: the dark consequences of having what…

Government Funding and the Free Press

By Jay Smith  In the domain of politics and state government, the relationship…

Protest tactics matter

By 2353NM  Those that demonstrated around the world for ‘Extinction Rebellion’ recently have…

Sometimes Even Censorship Doesn't Help...

Most of you probably saw Monday's papers which contained words interrupted by…

Ted and Edie dance the Rumba

“I saw it happen an’ that’s how I knows it … and…

Morality

By RosemaryJ36  I think we will all go to hell in a hand-basket,…

Surplus to requirements, ScoMo?

Applause, stamping, hoots and catcalls resound up and down our wide brown…

«
»
Facebook

The NSW Result, Mark Latham And Why This Means That We’ll Have A Terrible PM After May!

Ok, first things first. I’m not advising that anyone bet on politics, but the media have a vested interest in telling us that elections will be close because they want us to get interested in the coverage. In Victoria last year, the media was telling us that it would be close, but some betting markets paid out the day before.

I ALWAYS check the betting markets when it comes to elections. They’re not infallible, but they always tell you the truth about expectations. Nobody, for example will give me 100-1 on Bill Shorten being PM after the next election, even after they’ve said that they just don’t think he’ll win. Several months ago, the betting markets told us that the Liberals would most likely be returned, with Labor a slight chance of winning. After Luke Foley ceased to be leader, there was a period where Labor’s odds firmed to the point that the markets were telling us they really didn’t know who’d win. Last week, the odds firmed to the point that anyone who used the odds as a predictor knew that a Liberal win was very, very likely.

I mention this because I’m sure that some people will now be saying that the NSW result is the turning point and that Labor may very well lose the coming election and that it’s terrible and people are terrible and how could people vote for the Liberals and they deserve everything they get and…

But let’s talk a deep breath and look at the current odds: Labor $1:18, Coalition $5, Greens $200, One Nation $250…

Now I am aware that Donald Trump was elected and Britain voted for Brexit and Jeff Kennett lost in 1999, so don’t withdraw your life savings and put them all on Labor, but it’s probably a safer bet than Winx because she’s a horse and, if she loses her jockey, she can’t win the race, whereas if Labor did buck Bill Shorten off, they’d be able to get someone else to remount and canter to the finish line.

Now I can’t let the NSW election result be forgotten without mentioning the “extraordinary personal triumph” (to quote Alan Jones, which is mandatory in NSW) of Mark Latham. He was standing for One Nation but, in spite of that, he managed to get elected. I mean, was that why it was a “personal triumph”? I’m sure that Pauline would like to think that he was riding on her coat-tails… in a totally non-sexual harassment sort of way… Or was it the fact that he managed to overcome the handicap of a thoroughly objectionable personality?

I guess I shouldn’t say that he has an objectionable personality. Some people may like him, just like some people think Pauline Hanson is great. I read some comment on social media where a person said: “I’m not racist, I just admire Pauline because she speaks her mind.” I wanted to reply with: “You brain-dead halfwit, you piece of trash, you oxygen thief, I suspect that your parents probably wish they’d tried almost any other sexual position on the night you were conceived because it would have given one of the more intelligent sperm a chance to fertilise the egg” but I refrained, not because I was concerned about social media being either an echo chamber or a shouting match. but because I realised that speaking my mind like that would have said person admiring me so much because I speak my mind, that they may have encouraged me to form my own political party and name it after myself so that we could have “Rossleigh’s Other Nation” as alternative to “Pauline Hanson’s One Nation” and the semantic contradiction that would cause at election time would be enormous. Actually, when I think about it “Rossleigh’s One Nation” may be even more of a semantic contradiction and then it would confuse people because they’d wonder how there could be two “one nations” in the one nation…

Anyway, all things considered, I have to predict that, as things stand at the moment, we’ll have a terrible Prime Minister after May. I’ve heard Labor people tell me that Bill Shorten won’t make a good PM. And, according to Liberals, Bill has been responsible for all of Labor’s sins and misdemeanours going back to before he was born.

And, in spite of Scott Morrison sitting on God’s right hand… Yes, he is to the right, no matter what the media tell you… that demonic left-wing, social-climbing, Bill Shorten will be our next PM.

Unless the Liberals have another leadership change before then!

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

25 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Leon Hassall

    I am so looking forward to us lefties kick right wing behind.

  2. Diannaart

    Well, that’s not fair at all.

    A race horse doesn’t win if it doesn’t have a rider? If it finishes ahead of the rest of the field it should at least get an extra apple or two.

    And it’s really not fair we’ve not heard the last of Latham. 8 years FFS.

  3. Mike

    I too love that Pauline Hanson speaks her mind. When I choose to put One Nation last on the ballot paper I can be confident that its a good decision

  4. totaram

    Mike: Actually, Pauline has long ago realised that “appearing to speak one’s mind” is the crucial thing, even if it changes every once in a while, but then minds do change. She has a lovely business model going. You do realise that the government pays her “party” for every first preference vote that she gets. On top of that the people “who like her” also contribute to her coffers. You will admit it is much better than running a fish and chips shop (no offence to those that do), but where would you get to travel in your “own” plane and put it down to political work and expenses? You also get to hob-nob with the movers and shakers, get a gig on TV every week or so etc. So much more fun!

  5. terence mills

    Pauline realized what Latham has now realized : you can fool some of the people all of the time and that’s good enough to make a nice little earner out of the mugs we call the Australian taxpayer.

    You just have to pretend to be a right-wing reactionary, come up with some stupid policies, mix in a little racism and the occasional Muslim dog-whistling and bingo you’re getting gigs on Sky-after-dark and people are asking your opinion and talking about your preferences.

  6. LOVO

    Get over 4% of first preference votes and your onto a ‘nice little earner’….just ask Pauline and James… the CDP and Fred…. the SFF bunch of gunna’s….. FNQ Bob…. mayhap even the neo-Greens under De-Dick (the RW plant)… Family Farce and others
    As Totaram said “..lovely business model ” , one wonders if’n the price of democracy in today’s Australia is worth the $2.68 per 1st preference vote?
    Poor Fella my country 😔

  7. whatever

    Apparently there is a new saying in the bush, “The Nationals! Hide your daughter, and your water!”

  8. Josephus

    I understood that where permissible do not list Hanson and her ilk in your preferences at all. To do so is to give that lot some money in a cascade effect. That is, do not fill in all the boxes below the line, but only the number mandated. Is this advice relevant at federal level? ” Please explain.”

    Daly seems an idiot; this surely affected the Labor result in NSW. Oh wait, Latham…

  9. Kaye Lee

    Josephus, the money is paid only for first preference votes and only if the candidate gets more than 4% of the vote (I think)

  10. Michael Taylor

    All these people who claim that “Pauline speaks for me” are oblivious to the fact that she certainly doesn’t vote for them in the Senate.

  11. Kaye Lee

    Pauline talks about the things she doesn’t understand which are often things others do not understand. Rather than getting advice, informing herself so she can better inform others, she continues in ignorance. She is ripe pickings for overconfident men like Malcolm Roberts and James Ashby. She pretends she is strong but she instead displays the paranoia of the ignorant thinking everyone is out to get her and that people like Milo Yiannopolous and ‘Lord’ Monckton expose the lies in their crusade to ….ummmm….make money from ignorance?

    Pauline is continually out of her depth and she chooses the worst kind of people to listen to. They stoke her fears and stroke her ego.

  12. Henry Johnston

    Latham’s tenure in the NSW Upper House is eight years.Read it and weep. Why the NSW Upper House even exists is beyond me, but Latham now has a publicly-funded soap box to spout One Nation drivel until 2027!

  13. Old Codger

    Hi Alcibiades, Well I did persevere and watched to whole YouTube clip. It was tortuous. That poor rear admiral having to confront gross stupidity and somehow keep his cool! There she was totally out of her depth and desperately trying to sound knowledgeable about something as complex as submarine design in the presence of a genuine expert who had once been a submarine commander (HMAS Farncomb) and had also commanded frigates. The poor man was squirming in the face of such hubristic ignorance. She even wanted him to reveal secrets about the performance of the proposed submarines. And that is the standard we can expect in our science refuting coalition, with no respite. ‘Can a pump jet sub stay underwater for more than 20 minutes?’ How could that navy officer keep a straight face? I suspect more than one tot of rum followed that nonsense.

  14. Wam

    Great read and I am one who believed the woman would struggle but the incumbency factor is strong in every election and strengthened by a last minute set of brain fades by labor.

    Shorten’s performance in debunking the budget may overcome some of incumbency but he needs to be careful, avoid the shock jocks and prepare the answers to the debt questions (emphasise the rabbott’s and the 3 amigo treasurers’ (hockey, scummo and the playboy)lies
    The media will test Albo on leadership but bill did well with his ‘Let the voters decide’ so there is consistency to be had because any hint of party disunity is the end. The approach must be to allow us to see the REAL need to change government.

    I hope that labor can do it but shorten et al need to be calm, consistent and strong.

    ps my mates are in Ballina are bitterly disappointed at labor 12.7% swing but it was not enough to defeat the loonies’ incumbent.

  15. David Bruce

    When Labor gets in at the next election they can finish off the work on the Australian Constitution which was initiated by Gough Whitlam in 1972.

    Every Labor PM since Gough has been associated with the Fabian Society and they have made changes to our original 1901 constitution without the INFORMED CONSENT of the Australian voters. They were ably assisted by Premier Wayne Goss from Queensland and his then department head, Kevin Rudd. By introducing the Reprint Act in Queensland, they allowed old legislation to be updated, rewritten and reworded.

    Don’t hold your breath for an election in May, there are some legislative issues to be resolved before an election can be announced.

    More details can be found on the Australian Constitution group pages on FB. Happy reading!

    BTW I don’t have much time for party politics as I realize Australia is not made up of a homogeneous society. Pauline does represent a section of our society who find it difficult to understand complexity.

  16. whatever

    The NSW Result is not much cheer for Scotty, ALP scores the largest share of the primary vote.

    Australian Labor Party 1,260,147 33%

    Liberal Party 1,238,723 32.5%

  17. Rossleigh

    Could you be a little more specific, David Bruce? What exactly are these “legislative issues”?
    The election will be on May 11th or whatever date Yo-yo Momo picks in May.

  18. corvus boreus

    m,
    Your ‘ mates’ main disappointment with the NSW election result, where a neo-con coalition with an agenda of gratuitous waste and destructive anti-environmental policies like increased land clearance and water theft were returned for another term, is that a LAB candidate didn’t unseat a GRN member in the seat of Ballina?
    Personally, as someone who takes environmental issues very seriously and has just been doomed to another term of coalition government with a racist / gun-nut crossbench, I find your constant repetition of your irrationally anti-green standpoint (LOONIES!!!) to be not only extremely tiresome but contextually contemptible

  19. Matters Not

    Yep the answers to those old school mathematical problems were never at the fore. As for dividing by zero – now that would blow her mind – if that was theoretically possible.

    As for eating spaghetti – seems like a bit too multicultural. Next it will be fried rice, eaten with chop sticks and a 散蓮華.

  20. paul walter

    Just watching Media Watch. These right-wing cranks are way out of line.

  21. Phil.

    Both Latham and Hanson should be in a straight jacket in a padded cell.

    A psychiatrist examining Latham for half an hour, would no doubt end up on the couch himself.

    We missed a bullet with him not making it to P.M. I will never forget the handshake with the Dork
    John Howard. I have no doubt Latham at the time, thought he must have hold of Howards flaccid
    penis. Oh dear I’ve just been put off eating my late supper. with that thought in my mind.

  22. corvus boreus

    wam,
    To give you a little grounding in reality, here are the results for Ballina;
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/nsw/2019/guide/ball/
    Note that there was only a 0.4% swing to the Labor candidate (not 12.7%) and a 4.3% swing to the incumbent Green member.
    Also note that, although Tamara Smith (GRN) scored a much higher primary vote than Asren Pugh (LAB), she still required a significant slice of flow-on preferences to see off the challenge of Ben Franklin (NATS).

    Question is, would you have preferred it if Ballina Labor voters had refused to direct their preferences to the candidate from the ‘loonies’ (as you so tediously insist on sledging them) and handed that seat to the coalition?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Return to home page
Scroll Up
%d bloggers like this: