All Activity

The Demographics bloke mentioned Malcolm Turnbull in the context of a centrist party but I have no idea whether he's still interested in active politics or not. The Lib/Nat coalition won't go back to the centre under the current leadership team. Angus Taylor and Matt Canavan as parlimentary leaders and Tony Abbott party president, plus Peta Credin's husband has taken on the role as temporary Victorian party president. It will leave space in the centre and a few unsatisfied Liberal moderates.

Teals are still discussing whether to form a party too. If they did I could picture a few moderate Libs jumping ship. And Teals would poll a lot better than PHONey in urban electorates.

I was listening to the bloke from the Demographics Group tonight on the ABC radio and he was talking about the decline of the major parties. As he said, it's happening in a lot of other places around the world as well. The primary vote of the majors is at historic lows and a couple of opinion polls have even put the federal Labor primary vote below the 30% mark. He was of the belief One Nation would become the official opposition after the next election and that eventually a new centrist party would likely emerge. I think he and a lot of other commentators are jumping the gun on the One Nation as official opposition thing. For sure, recent poll projections show the Nationals without a seat, the Libs with about twelve, Labor with a majority of one or in minority and One Nation with fifty plus seats. But that's on current opinion polls and there's almost two years to go to an election. A lot can happen in that time. Labor could unravel, the coalition could get their act together and win voters back, and One Nation could continue to rise or they could implode and fizzle out. It's still early days. The end of the two major party system seems to be the talk of the town among commentators; I guess time will tell.

Thanks, I'm glad you cleared that one up otherwise there would be a lot of stupid people on Anzac Day. But then again, parliament house flys a really big flag and they're not the sharpest tools in the shed.

No, I was responding to GON's comment about people supporting one nation. If there's a large crossover in the Venn diagram of PHONeys and flag wavers then I guess the (MAGA) cap may fit, but I know correlation<>causation.

Not sure what you're referring to there Marty. I hope you don't mean people are stupid for flying the Australin Flag. Using quotes can make a post intention a bit clearer.

All it means is Australia has stupid people, just like the US. They have a greedy narcissistic psychopath in the oval Office, busily stealing everything that isn't nailed down for himself, his family and criminals who rioted in the Capitol. That anyone here would want the same thing is a poor reflection on their mental processes.

Yes correct Pete, that's pretty much what I'm saying.

I miss the huntsman spiders around the place and have only seen one in the last four or five years. I used to have lots of them, but it's all wolf spiders now. I think they've nearly wiped the huntsmen out.

Wille, what you are saying is that we must continue to get involved in the US conflicts as we have done in the past, in the hope that they MIGHT come to our aid in the highly unlikely event of us being invaded. The US has not historically behaved in the way that NATO (for instance) has a binding defense agreement to come to the aid of invaded members. Meanwhile we have repeatedly rushed to the aid of US involvrment in other wars. But none of those were cases of US being invaded. Do they owe us anything? I wouldn't count on it. I do not believe the US would do a great deal to help us if we really needed help. The US once said they would help Ukraine if Russia threatened it. Look how that turned out.

Yes, it's a fact of life. It would be ignorant of us to think there was some high moral stance in them coming to our aid. They wouldn't be doing it because they think we're really nice people, or because they felt sorry for us. We would be the same if the shoe was on the other foot and we were the world's biggest power. We would want something in return the same as them. It's all transactional. I think it would have been much the same in WW2.

You can probably add rare earths to that list as well. The point is their motivation for defending us would be their military and commercial interests here, while our interests in defending them in places like Vietnam and Iraq were mainly about staying in their good books.

Aside from military assets, the US is heavily invested in Australia with more than 1,000 US companies operating here. 1.6 trillion in bilateral investment between the two countries, 70 billion annual bilateral trade, the US is our biggest foreign investor at about a quarter of our foreign investment, so there's plenty of interest here for them to help us defend the place. It wouldn't all be about military asets and bases.

The ANZUS alliance is non binding and doesn't mandate automatic armed intervention. What that means is if we didn't have U.S.assets here that are in their interests to defend, we'd be rooted in the event of a capable force attacking us. That means it's in our interests to allow them to have defendable interests here. The situation is that Australia is militarily weak, the U.S. is not a charity, and we need to give them something if we're asking for something.

And we don't need to pretend to buy non existent submarines, for that.

The US will only defend us if it's in their own interests. They probably would if Australia was attacked but mainly to protect their intelligence assets and forward bases, not us.

I don't have a problem with it at the level and numbers it is now. They're our major defence ally and it would be a bit rich to tell them we don't want them on our soil but still expect them to spill blood for us in the event we are attacked. Any defence alliance is a two way street and has to be mutually beneficial with all parties paying their dues. The U.S. has bases all over the world and the amount we have here is buggar all compared to a lot of other countries. The reality is we don't have the capabilities to defend ourselves against a major adversary, hence the alliance with the U.S.. We have to pull our weight in the alliance and not expect to bludge off them.

Same thing in this district, a lot more noticeable in the last twelve months. Mostly younger people doing it.

Setting a pretty Poor example. Nev

meanwhile... Poorline the battlers pollie and Barnyard are on the worlds richest cruiseship for billionares, and claim it on expenses. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/may/28/pauline-hanson-barnaby-joyce-one-nation-bill-taxpayers-flights-private-events-gina-rinehart-ntwnfb

Lately, I'm seeing more and more private Australian flags flying out here in my district ... that can only mean one thing, a public display of support for One Nation, and BRS perhaps.

Vassal? No, I think Australia has never shaken itself free from colonialism. Used to be a colony of the 'old country', now we are a colony of USA.

We are fortunate in our relativly isolated geographical location. However, we collectively accept law being used to suppress whistleblowers, and accept subservience to powers such as the USofA. We should be outraged but unfortunataly our collective apathy dilutes our ethics. My own apathy has diluted my own anger to the point that I couldn't be bothered writing a nastygram to a polly any more.

A vassal state is a nation that is nominally independent but has its sovereignty significantly limited by a more powerful, dominant state. While it often manages its own internal affairs, it relies on the dominant power for protection and is subservient in matters of foreign policy, defense, and trade. I am furious at what our Governments, on both sides, have allowed to happen. Without telling us, they have made Australia a target in any confllct in the Indo-Pacific region. It's probably a case of "out of sight, out of mind" since much of what is depicted in this video occurs in the sparsely inhabited northern regions of the country.

I liked one comedian's take on why Trump didn't fly to the Bahamas for his son's wedding... Flying to an island makes him miss his mate Jeffrey.