The Galaxy poll found Labor would lose 20-plus seats if an election were held now, with the Coalition ahead 53 per cent to 47 per cent on a two-party preferred basis.

But Labor's primary vote had crept up to 35 per cent, compared with 31 per cent in June and 30 per cent in April.

The primary vote is still down on the 38 per cent at the last election, which produced a hung parliament.

The Coalition's primary vote was down two to 47 per cent, with a one-point drop in support for the Greens to 11 per cent.

http://heraldsun.com.au/news/opposition-leader-tony-abbotts-support-plummets-with-malcolm-turnbull-preferred-as-coalition-head/story-e6frf7jo-1226510202909

Quote:

Mr Abbott has lost support of even the majority of Coalition voters to stay in the job, and Ms Gillard is facing her greatest loss of public trust since the broken promise on the carbon tax. ''Aside from the speculation about another leadership challenge, Julia Gillard's other problem is the lack of trust,'' Galaxy CEO David Briggs said of the poll. ''Many voters continue to maintain the rage for Kevin Rudd. ''Voters are unimpressed by the leadership of both the Labor Party and the Coalition and believe that there are better options than Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott.''

Telling signs isn't it - Get rid of Tony. Get rid of Julia.  We might actually get back to some decent politics. 

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:37am:

Quote: Mr Abbott has lost support of even the majority of Coalition voters to stay in the job, and Ms Gillard is facing her greatest loss of public trust since the broken promise on the carbon tax. ''Aside from the speculation about another leadership challenge, Julia Gillard's other problem is the lack of trust,'' Galaxy CEO David Briggs said of the poll. ''Many voters continue to maintain the rage for Kevin Rudd. ''Voters are unimpressed by the leadership of both the Labor Party and the Coalition and believe that there are better options than Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott.'' Telling signs isn't it - Get rid of Tony. Get rid of Julia.  We might actually get back to some decent politics.

Nice thought, but I doubt it.

Without purging both parties Faceless men it would be same policies different salesperson >:(

Good news but I'm a little confused why these polls'are so different from one another.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:42am:

Nice thought, but I doubt it. Without purging both parties Faceless men it would be same policies different salesperson >:(

Very true.

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:48am:

Good news but I'm a little confused why these polls'are so different from one another.

Good news that our politics is in such a disarray where both leaders are bugger** and the parties are run by faceless men who only look after their own interests as opposed to the nations?  Yeh.  Well done matty.

Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level.

someone give that enlightened head kicker dsmithy70 the job - he'll make the difference....
:D :D :o :P

Shane B wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:55am:

Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level.

That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party.

I love the way non liberal people try to tell liberals who their leader should be....crazy...?
:D :D ;D ;D

If one side of the other don't start to act and make policys that work, we will have a situation of a lot of new candidates winiing seats in parliment, then we won't have a two party system we will have mutitude of partys and another HUNG parliment, with candidate having to decice who to affliate too.

happened in qld a few yaers ago when one nation held the balance of power.

There will be labor party Members that lose there seats and lib/ nats members that also lose there seats.

Hardly a good thing.

Yes but the same people trying to tell the liberals who their leader should be are not suggesting the Labor party do us a favor and remove that hardline totalitarian d1ckhead Gillard....Crazy...? :D :D :P

Prevailing wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 11:07am:

Yes but the same people trying to tell the liberals who their leader should be are not suggesting the Labor party do us a favor and remove that hardline totalitarian d1ckhead Gillard....Crazy...? :D :D :P

learn to read.

Shane B wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:55am:

Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level.

Cool back to what it was before the lying little rodent and a party that Menzies created.

Prevailing wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 11:07am:

Yes but the same people trying to tell the liberals who their leader should be are not suggesting the Labor party do us a favor and remove that hardline totalitarian d1ckhead Gillard....Crazy...? :D :D :P

Haven't you got a job yet?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:58am:

Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party.

What particular policies/ideals do you see as "ultra' conservative?

Annexing OZ to keep brown boat people away?

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 11:34am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. What particular policies/ideals do you see as "ultra' conservative? Annexing OZ to keep brown boat people away?

Yep and labor should hang their heads in shame for following the Howard and tony ideals.  But also the lack of initiative on climate change, broadband, and just the general nonsense that all social and economic policies are about keeping what is now and "reducing tax".  Apparently everything can be solved by simply keeping to what is now, as opposed to actually implementing improvements.

The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 11:40am:

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:34am: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. What particular policies/ideals do you see as "ultra' conservative? Annexing OZ to keep brown boat people away? Yep and labor should hang their heads in shame for following the Howard and tony ideals.  But also the lack of initiative on climate change, broadband, and just the general nonsense that all social and economic policies are about keeping what is now and "reducing tax".  Apparently everything can be solved by simply keeping to what is now, as opposed to actually implementing improvements.

Personal Responsibility also was a pillar of the party of Menzies, now under Abbott its give me a handout.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 11:55am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:40am: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:34am: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. What particular policies/ideals do you see as "ultra' conservative? Annexing OZ to keep brown boat people away? Yep and labor should hang their heads in shame for following the Howard and tony ideals.  But also the lack of initiative on climate change, broadband, and just the general nonsense that all social and economic policies are about keeping what is now and "reducing tax".  Apparently everything can be solved by simply keeping to what is now, as opposed to actually implementing improvements. Personal Responsibility also was a pillar of the party of Menzies, now under Abbott its give me a handout.

Yep, we've got conservative socialism - "I'll pay tax as long as you give me a handout in return."  Last I checked it wasn't meant to work that way.

Just the fact that people could go crazy and have a c-section to try and grab the baby bonus shows how bad the handout ideology has become. Instead of people wanting that money spent on furthering education for their kids in the long term, they want it in the short term for what?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:58am:

Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party.

If Turnball becomes opposition leader it will push many people further to the right.
Turnball may be pro-business, but he's not a social conservative at all.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:00pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. If Turnball becomes opposition leader it will push many people further to the right. Turnball may be pro-business, but he's not a social conservative at all.

Perhaps provide examples with that?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:00pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. If Turnball becomes opposition leader it will push many people further to the right. Turnball may be pro-business, but he's not a social conservative at all. Perhaps provide examples with that?

I've seen him on QandA a number of times, and he was indistinguishable from the left of the Labor party.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:00pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. If Turnball becomes opposition leader it will push many people further to the right. Turnball may be pro-business, but he's not a social conservative at all. Perhaps provide examples with that?

Perhaps you can provide examples of how having a Liberal Leader, sticking to the founding principals of the party he is leading will push people further to the right?

And if these principals have become so obnoxious, why hasn't the National Party(the traditional conservative party) dissolved its alliance & become a party in its own right?

I mean it would stand to reason, the party of business & the conservative party never got enough votes on their own to defeat the party of the workers, so combined.
Now your saying there are more conservatives then just about anything so why do the Nationals remain the Liberals "Little Bitch"?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:02pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. If Turnball becomes opposition leader it will push many people further to the right. Turnball may be pro-business, but he's not a social conservative at all. Perhaps provide examples with that? I've seen him on QandA a number of times, and he was indistinguishable from the left of the Labor party.

So if Gillard says the skies blue, Abbott must argue it's green?
Perhaps he was indistinguishable because they were decent policies?

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:11pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:02pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. If Turnball becomes opposition leader it will push many people further to the right. Turnball may be pro-business, but he's not a social conservative at all. Perhaps provide examples with that? I've seen him on QandA a number of times, and he was indistinguishable from the left of the Labor party. So if Gillard says the skies blue, Abbott must argue it's green? Perhaps he was indistinguishable because they were decent policies?

Why would Gillard say the sky is blue - she won't even admit her hair is red

skippy. wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees.

It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954.

If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out.

;)

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:02pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. If Turnball becomes opposition leader it will push many people further to the right. Turnball may be pro-business, but he's not a social conservative at all. Perhaps provide examples with that? I've seen him on QandA a number of times, and he was indistinguishable from the left of the Labor party.

he is a self made millionaire..he knows all about saying the right thing at the right time..

very canny if you like that type of thing. he really is another rudd ... likes doing things his way and everyone else can go scratch themselves..

do we really want that all over again????? :(

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:11pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:02pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. If Turnball becomes opposition leader it will push many people further to the right. Turnball may be pro-business, but he's not a social conservative at all. Perhaps provide examples with that? I've seen him on QandA a number of times, and he was indistinguishable from the left of the Labor party. So if Gillard says the skies blue, Abbott must argue it's green? Perhaps he was indistinguishable because they were decent policies?

after

THERE WILL BE KNOW CARBON TAX UNDER A GOVT I LEAD..


I too would take a look if she said the sky is blue..

Maqqa wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:17pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:11pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:02pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. If Turnball becomes opposition leader it will push many people further to the right. Turnball may be pro-business, but he's not a social conservative at all. Perhaps provide examples with that? I've seen him on QandA a number of times, and he was indistinguishable from the left of the Labor party. So if Gillard says the skies blue, Abbott must argue it's green? Perhaps he was indistinguishable because they were decent policies? Why would Gillard say the sky is blue - she won't even admit her hair is red

Why would she, its not
Remember how you pointed this fact out from Tanners book to accuse her of more falsehoods.

To be a good liar/Fanboy Maqqa, you must have a good memory ;)

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:19pm:

skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;)

Good point, its much less than it was back then.

Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:31pm:

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians

There are over 50,000,000 displaced people right now, looking for help and new homes…..

Add to that the massive scale of localised environmental degradation…..

Add to that Australia was forging a new nation in 1954 and needed many, many people to assist….

And “abracadabra” Dsmithy turns inside out, whilst getting the race card stuck in it’s arze….

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:37pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians There are over 50,000,000 displaced people right now, looking for help and new homes….. Add to that the massive scale of localised environmental degradation….. Add to that Australia was forging a new nation in 1954 and needed many, many people to assist…. And “abracadabra” Dsmithy turns inside out, whilst getting the race card stuck in it’s arze….

1) Yes

2) Yes but are not environmental factors still in play?

3) So your advocating a capping of our population?

4) It's the Conservatives who continue to play the race card, we don't know who they are, they will breed us out, they won't live by our ways etc etc.

Whilst being made out to be a bleeding heart lefty is fun on this issue, I actually agree with Amanda Vanstone's solutions, no family reunion would be a big start.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:49pm:

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:37pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians There are over 50,000,000 displaced people right now, looking for help and new homes….. Add to that the massive scale of localised environmental degradation….. Add to that Australia was forging a new nation in 1954 and needed many, many people to assist…. And “abracadabra” Dsmithy turns inside out, whilst getting the race card stuck in it’s arze…. 1) Yes 2) Yes but are not environmental factors still in play? 3) So your advocating a capping of our population? 4) It's the Conservatives who continue to play the race card, we don't know who they are, they will breed us out, they won't live by our ways etc etc. Whilst being made out to be a bleeding heart lefty is fun on this issue, I actually agree with Amanda Vanstone's solutions, no family reunion would be a big start.

1 – OK

2 – Yes, that was my point, more in play than ever before.

3 – Look out for Grammar Borg – I’m saying the world can’t sustain an ever increasing population and “rich” countries just can’t keep pumping in money to keep people alive. It’s like subsidizing businesses doomed to fail.

4 – You played the race card. I said nothing about race you said “Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians” (though I note that Muslim is not a race)

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 1:03pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:49pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:37pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians There are over 50,000,000 displaced people right now, looking for help and new homes….. Add to that the massive scale of localised environmental degradation….. Add to that Australia was forging a new nation in 1954 and needed many, many people to assist…. And “abracadabra” Dsmithy turns inside out, whilst getting the race card stuck in it’s arze…. 1) Yes 2) Yes but are not environmental factors still in play? 3) So your advocating a capping of our population? 4) It's the Conservatives who continue to play the race card, we don't know who they are, they will breed us out, they won't live by our ways etc etc. Whilst being made out to be a bleeding heart lefty is fun on this issue, I actually agree with Amanda Vanstone's solutions, no family reunion would be a big start. 1 – OK 2 – Yes, that was my point, more in play than ever before. 3 – Look out for Grammar Borg – I’m saying the world can’t sustain an ever increasing population and “rich” countries just can’t keep pumping in money to keep people alive. It’s like subsidizing businesses doomed to fail. 4 – You played the race card. I said nothing about race you said “Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians” (though I note that Muslim is not a race)

FriYay, I don't think that smithy's point for 4. was directly at you but rather at the mindset of many conservatives.  You can't deny that the race card isn't played by many extremists. And one would wonder how many of the 50,000,000 we'd help if they were "more white."

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 1:03pm:

3 – Look out for Grammar Borg

Thats the 2nd time today I've been accused of being Borg, even though spelling was an issue the 1st time.
Are you Warrigal?


Quote:

Reply #21 - Today at 11:35am warrigal   Offline Gold Member Australian Politics Gender: male Posts: 582 ***** Quote I think Boag Dsmithy is just another Prevailing on this forum nothing makes sense Back to topic

I've been posting under this name for over 10 years & there's plenty here who'll back that up.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 1:49pm:

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 1:03pm: 3 – Look out for Grammar Borg Thats the 2nd time today I've been accused of being Borg, even though spelling was an issue the 1st time. Are you Warrigal? Quote: Reply #21 - Today at 11:35am warrigal   Offline Gold Member Australian Politics Gender: male Posts: 582 ***** Quote I think Boag Dsmithy is just another Prevailing on this forum nothing makes sense Back to topic I've been posting under this name for over 10 years & there's plenty here who'll back that up.

;D ;D

Nah, mate you made a grammar error and i was just alluding to Private Borg being the grammar teacher at OzP.

;)

No I am not Boag, nor am I Dsmithy

Are boag and I the only normal people here

We don't have to demean others here to have our say.

Boag must be busy today

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:09pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. If Turnball becomes opposition leader it will push many people further to the right. Turnball may be pro-business, but he's not a social conservative at all. Perhaps provide examples with that? Perhaps you can provide examples of how having a Liberal Leader, sticking to the founding principals of the party he is leading will push people further to the right? And if these principals have become so obnoxious, why hasn't the National Party(the traditional conservative party) dissolved its alliance & become a party in its own right? I mean it would stand to reason, the party of business & the conservative party never got enough votes on their own to defeat the party of the workers, so combined. Now your saying there are more conservatives then just about anything so why do the Nationals remain the Liberals "Little Bitch"?

Just as the disaffected Labor members go to the Greens, the disaffected Liberals will try and push the party to the right in contradistinction to Turnball, or leave and join Family First or a similar type party. Turnball will just turn the party into Labor but with more business friendly policies. I doubt conservatives will sit by and allow this to happen.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:31pm:

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians

Do you have a problem with white people?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 2:22pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians Do you have a problem with white people?

That is the lamest argument.  Its not about us or them.  A person who doesnt like xenophobia is not anti white; unless you're suggesting in your opinion all white people are xenophobes? Being as white as one can be, I can assure you that your logic is flawed.

Galaxy is showing a drop in Abbotts popularity and a rise in Labors vote.
If the polls keep trending in the same direction Abbott wont even make the election in 12 mths time and the Libs will lose by 20 seats  ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 2:26pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:22pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians Do you have a problem with white people? That is the lamest argument.  Its not about us or them.  A person who doesnt like xenophobia is not anti white.

The question, or should I say, accusation, against conservatives is that they're racist toward 'brown people.' Why can't the same accusation be made against lefty types on white people? Afterall, they seem to think that too many white people is a bad thing.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 2:32pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:26pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:22pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians Do you have a problem with white people? That is the lamest argument.  Its not about us or them.  A person who doesnt like xenophobia is not anti white. The question, or should I say, accusation, against conservatives is that they're racist toward 'brown people.' Why can't the same accusation be made against lefty types on white people? Afterall, they seem to think that too many white people is a bad thing.

who thinks that? I'm a "leftie" and I don't care what colour the skin is. It's colour (or more correctly, shade). Big whoop.

A person not caring about skin colour does not mean it's a person who doesn't like white people.  Once again, your logic is heavily flawed.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 2:32pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:26pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:22pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians Do you have a problem with white people? That is the lamest argument.  Its not about us or them.  A person who doesnt like xenophobia is not anti white. The question, or should I say, accusation, against conservatives is that they're racist toward 'brown people.' Why can't the same accusation be made against lefty types on white people? Afterall, they seem to think that too many white people is a bad thing.

Conservatives are not racist but hard line, right wing, ultra conservatives like the ones running the Federal Liberal Party certainly are.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 2:33pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:32pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:26pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:22pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians Do you have a problem with white people? That is the lamest argument.  Its not about us or them.  A person who doesnt like xenophobia is not anti white. The question, or should I say, accusation, against conservatives is that they're racist toward 'brown people.' Why can't the same accusation be made against lefty types on white people? Afterall, they seem to think that too many white people is a bad thing. who thinks that? I'm a "leftie" and I don't care what colour the skin is. It's colour (or more correctly, shade). Big whoop. A person not caring about skin colour does not mean it's a person who doesn't like white people.  Once again, your logic is heavily flawed.

If skin colour means nothing then you should have no problem with white people making decisions and determining their future.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 2:36pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:33pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:32pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:26pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:22pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians Do you have a problem with white people? That is the lamest argument.  Its not about us or them.  A person who doesnt like xenophobia is not anti white. The question, or should I say, accusation, against conservatives is that they're racist toward 'brown people.' Why can't the same accusation be made against lefty types on white people? Afterall, they seem to think that too many white people is a bad thing. who thinks that? I'm a "leftie" and I don't care what colour the skin is. It's colour (or more correctly, shade). Big whoop. A person not caring about skin colour does not mean it's a person who doesn't like white people.  Once again, your logic is heavily flawed. If skin colour means nothing then you should have no problem with white people making decisions and determining their future.

I have no problem with any person determining their own individual future (and to some extent members of their families).   

But see this is where you get lost a little - any person has the right to choose their own individual future, but society is a collective and as a collective society must allow ALL individuals the right to choose their own individual future.

Australia should tear up the US military alliance and focus on regional relationships... 8-) 8-)

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 12:19pm:

skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;)

yea, they were just a couple of million white jews then hey numnuts? xenophobic moron.

skippy. wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 2:57pm:

FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) yea, they were just a couple of million white jews then hey numnuts? xenophobic moron.

And the thread ends…….

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 2:40pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:36pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:33pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:32pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:26pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:22pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians Do you have a problem with white people? That is the lamest argument.  Its not about us or them.  A person who doesnt like xenophobia is not anti white. The question, or should I say, accusation, against conservatives is that they're racist toward 'brown people.' Why can't the same accusation be made against lefty types on white people? Afterall, they seem to think that too many white people is a bad thing. who thinks that? I'm a "leftie" and I don't care what colour the skin is. It's colour (or more correctly, shade). Big whoop. A person not caring about skin colour does not mean it's a person who doesn't like white people.  Once again, your logic is heavily flawed. If skin colour means nothing then you should have no problem with white people making decisions and determining their future. I have no problem with any person determining their own individual future (and to some extent members of their families).    But see this is where you get lost a little - any person has the right to choose their own individual future, but society is a collective and as a collective society must allow ALL individuals the right to choose their own individual future.

You'll slip up in time. All lefties do. Deep down they resent it that white people have it so good and that non-whites have to play catch up. You can run, but you can't hide from yourself.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:58am:

Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party.

The major reason was pathetically unpopular last time around was that he was viewed as Labor-lite. He supports more labor policies than he does liberal ones. Thats why he was so disliked by the electorate.

gold_medal wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 5:37pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:58am: Shane B wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:55am: Liberals with Turnbull as leader would see Australia having no major conservative political party at the Federal level. That's a bad thing how?  And not entirely true.  Turnbull as leader would mean a conservative centrist party.  Abbott as leader means "as ultra as one can get in Australia" conservative party. The major reason was pathetically unpopular last time around was that he was viewed as Labor-lite. He supports more labor policies than he does liberal ones. Thats why he was so disliked by the electorate.

Don't rewrite history.  He was disliked because he was got caught out by the Gretchin dumb affair.  And Rudd was still in his extended honeymoon. 

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 4:57pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:40pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:36pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:33pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:32pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:26pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 2:22pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:31pm: FriYAY wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 12:19pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 11:47am: The conga line of xenophobic dicks try to make out it is normal practice for this country to normalise discrimination against boat people ,but we know this obscene practice did not begin until that filth known as the lying little rodent introduces it. Up until then both major parties accepted refugees in the manner in which it is expected of us after Menzies signed the 1952 convention on refugees. It would do the conga line of morons well to realise this isn’t 1954. If you think the refugee problem now is the same as 1954, then your head would be so far up your arse you would turn in side out. ;) Good point, its much less than it was back then. Only now it's brown Muslim people instead of white English/Olive skinned Greeks & Italians Christians Do you have a problem with white people? That is the lamest argument.  Its not about us or them.  A person who doesnt like xenophobia is not anti white. The question, or should I say, accusation, against conservatives is that they're racist toward 'brown people.' Why can't the same accusation be made against lefty types on white people? Afterall, they seem to think that too many white people is a bad thing. who thinks that? I'm a "leftie" and I don't care what colour the skin is. It's colour (or more correctly, shade). Big whoop. A person not caring about skin colour does not mean it's a person who doesn't like white people.  Once again, your logic is heavily flawed. If skin colour means nothing then you should have no problem with white people making decisions and determining their future. I have no problem with any person determining their own individual future (and to some extent members of their families).    But see this is where you get lost a little - any person has the right to choose their own individual future, but society is a collective and as a collective society must allow ALL individuals the right to choose their own individual future. You'll slip up in time. All lefties do. Deep down they resent it that white people have it so good and that non-whites have to play catch up. You can run, but you can't hide from yourself.

Actually I think you'll find the problem is that xenophobes for some reason fear different people may impact the things they have. Us lefties only want all, no matter what shade of skin they have, to have the same opportunities.

I don't like Turnbull that much. I would much rather Abbott became PM. However it doesn't matter what the Libs say or do they will always get my vote. I have been voting Liberal since I started voting 19 years ago and always will no matter what.

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 9:25pm:

I don't like Turnbull that much. I would much rather Abbott became PM. However it doesn't matter what the Libs say or do they will always get my vote. I have been voting Liberal since I started voting 19 years ago and always will no matter what.

but you're 21.    :-?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 9:28pm:

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:25pm: I don't like Turnbull that much. I would much rather Abbott became PM. However it doesn't matter what the Libs say or do they will always get my vote. I have been voting Liberal since I started voting 19 years ago and always will no matter what. but you're 21.    :-?

In my dreams.

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 9:35pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:28pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:25pm: I don't like Turnbull that much. I would much rather Abbott became PM. However it doesn't matter what the Libs say or do they will always get my vote. I have been voting Liberal since I started voting 19 years ago and always will no matter what. but you're 21.    :-? In my dreams.

so that's always been a lie, then?  :-?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:18pm:

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:35pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:28pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:25pm: I don't like Turnbull that much. I would much rather Abbott became PM. However it doesn't matter what the Libs say or do they will always get my vote. I have been voting Liberal since I started voting 19 years ago and always will no matter what. but you're 21.    :-? In my dreams. so that's always been a lie, then?  :-?

Don't accuse me of lying mate. I've never said that I am 21.

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:33pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:18pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:35pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:28pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:25pm: I don't like Turnbull that much. I would much rather Abbott became PM. However it doesn't matter what the Libs say or do they will always get my vote. I have been voting Liberal since I started voting 19 years ago and always will no matter what. but you're 21.    :-? In my dreams. so that's always been a lie, then?  :-? Don't accuse me of lying mate. I've never said that I am 21.

you're right, it's been a year almost - 22.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 10:38pm:

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:33pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 10:18pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:35pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:28pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 5th, 2012 at 9:25pm: I don't like Turnbull that much. I would much rather Abbott became PM. However it doesn't matter what the Libs say or do they will always get my vote. I have been voting Liberal since I started voting 19 years ago and always will no matter what. but you're 21.    :-? In my dreams. so that's always been a lie, then?  :-? Don't accuse me of lying mate. I've never said that I am 21. you're right, it's been a year almost - 22.

Try 37.

Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader.

skippy. wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 12:01pm:

Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader.

Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election.

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 1:04pm:

skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election.

Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy.

skippy. wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 1:14pm:

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:04pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election. Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy.

LOL I've got this one stored for Mel

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1297908144/0#13

Can't decide if I should have her send the money to Labor or Bob Browns charity :D

skippy. wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 1:14pm:

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:04pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election. Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy.

Back to this 'matty' thing again I see. Well no I will be here rubbing all of your left-wing noses in it. Now let's see you try to counter this:

Both parties have 71 seats down from 72 each because of Slipper and Thomson. The Coalition will regain Fisher pick up Lyne New England and Dobell. That's already 75 and then you have to include Crook and Katter bringing it to 77. Game set match. I am also over 90% sure that Swan is gone too. I am in his electorate and you should come here and talk to some of us locals about how we feel. So feel free to tell me how Labor/Independent/Green all really the same thing thse says have any hope of winning/retaining Dobell Lyne New England Lilley or Fisher let alone picking up seats.

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 1:54pm:

skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:14pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:04pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election. Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy. Back to this 'matty' thing again I see. Well no I will be here rubbing all of your left-wing noses in it. Now let's see you try to counter this: Both parties have 71 seats down from 72 each because of Slipper and Thomson. The Coalition will regain Fisher pick up Lyne New England and Dobell. That's already 75 and then you have to include Crook and Katter bringing it to 77. Game set match. I am also over 90% sure that Swan is gone too. I am in his electorate and you should come here and talk to some of us locals about how we feel. So feel free to tell me how Labor/Independent/Green all really the same thing thse says have any hope of winning/retaining Dobell Lyne New England Lilley or Fisher let alone picking up seats.

Aren't you from Sydney?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 1:55pm:

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:54pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:14pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:04pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election. Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy. Back to this 'matty' thing again I see. Well no I will be here rubbing all of your left-wing noses in it. Now let's see you try to counter this: Both parties have 71 seats down from 72 each because of Slipper and Thomson. The Coalition will regain Fisher pick up Lyne New England and Dobell. That's already 75 and then you have to include Crook and Katter bringing it to 77. Game set match. I am also over 90% sure that Swan is gone too. I am in his electorate and you should come here and talk to some of us locals about how we feel. So feel free to tell me how Labor/Independent/Green all really the same thing thse says have any hope of winning/retaining Dobell Lyne New England Lilley or Fisher let alone picking up seats. Aren't you from Sydney?

You're the same dimwit who was saying I was 21 last night. I am from Banyo in Qld and 38 dickhead.

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 1:56pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:55pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:54pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:14pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:04pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election. Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy. Back to this 'matty' thing again I see. Well no I will be here rubbing all of your left-wing noses in it. Now let's see you try to counter this: Both parties have 71 seats down from 72 each because of Slipper and Thomson. The Coalition will regain Fisher pick up Lyne New England and Dobell. That's already 75 and then you have to include Crook and Katter bringing it to 77. Game set match. I am also over 90% sure that Swan is gone too. I am in his electorate and you should come here and talk to some of us locals about how we feel. So feel free to tell me how Labor/Independent/Green all really the same thing thse says have any hope of winning/retaining Dobell Lyne New England Lilley or Fisher let alone picking up seats. Aren't you from Sydney? You're the same dimwit who was saying I was 21 last night. I am from Banyo in Qld and 38 dickhead.

But a year ago you were 21 from Sydney.  How'd you get so old so fast?  And why did you move for?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 1:59pm:

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:56pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:55pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:54pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:14pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:04pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election. Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy. Back to this 'matty' thing again I see. Well no I will be here rubbing all of your left-wing noses in it. Now let's see you try to counter this: Both parties have 71 seats down from 72 each because of Slipper and Thomson. The Coalition will regain Fisher pick up Lyne New England and Dobell. That's already 75 and then you have to include Crook and Katter bringing it to 77. Game set match. I am also over 90% sure that Swan is gone too. I am in his electorate and you should come here and talk to some of us locals about how we feel. So feel free to tell me how Labor/Independent/Green all really the same thing thse says have any hope of winning/retaining Dobell Lyne New England Lilley or Fisher let alone picking up seats. Aren't you from Sydney? You're the same dimwit who was saying I was 21 last night. I am from Banyo in Qld and 38 dickhead. But a year ago you were 21 from Sydney.  How'd you get so old so fast?  And why did you move for?

Show me proof dickhead.

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 2:00pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:59pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:56pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:55pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:54pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:14pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:04pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election. Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy. Back to this 'matty' thing again I see. Well no I will be here rubbing all of your left-wing noses in it. Now let's see you try to counter this: Both parties have 71 seats down from 72 each because of Slipper and Thomson. The Coalition will regain Fisher pick up Lyne New England and Dobell. That's already 75 and then you have to include Crook and Katter bringing it to 77. Game set match. I am also over 90% sure that Swan is gone too. I am in his electorate and you should come here and talk to some of us locals about how we feel. So feel free to tell me how Labor/Independent/Green all really the same thing thse says have any hope of winning/retaining Dobell Lyne New England Lilley or Fisher let alone picking up seats. Aren't you from Sydney? You're the same dimwit who was saying I was 21 last night. I am from Banyo in Qld and 38 dickhead. But a year ago you were 21 from Sydney.  How'd you get so old so fast?  And why did you move for? Show me proof dickhead.

Just like Matty always wanting "proof".

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 2:09pm:

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 2:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:59pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:56pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:55pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:54pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:14pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:04pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election. Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy. Back to this 'matty' thing again I see. Well no I will be here rubbing all of your left-wing noses in it. Now let's see you try to counter this: Both parties have 71 seats down from 72 each because of Slipper and Thomson. The Coalition will regain Fisher pick up Lyne New England and Dobell. That's already 75 and then you have to include Crook and Katter bringing it to 77. Game set match. I am also over 90% sure that Swan is gone too. I am in his electorate and you should come here and talk to some of us locals about how we feel. So feel free to tell me how Labor/Independent/Green all really the same thing thse says have any hope of winning/retaining Dobell Lyne New England Lilley or Fisher let alone picking up seats. Aren't you from Sydney? You're the same dimwit who was saying I was 21 last night. I am from Banyo in Qld and 38 dickhead. But a year ago you were 21 from Sydney.  How'd you get so old so fast?  And why did you move for? Show me proof dickhead. Just like Matty always wanting "proof".

Of what? The reason I want proof is because you are claiming that I am things that I am not and not providing any proof to back up these wrong accusations.

Unless you plan to scan and post your license and photo you have no proof & neither does Alevine.

Can't you spot a fishing expedition when ones on?

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 2:15pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 2:09pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 2:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:59pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:56pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:55pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:54pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:14pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:04pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election. Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy. Back to this 'matty' thing again I see. Well no I will be here rubbing all of your left-wing noses in it. Now let's see you try to counter this: Both parties have 71 seats down from 72 each because of Slipper and Thomson. The Coalition will regain Fisher pick up Lyne New England and Dobell. That's already 75 and then you have to include Crook and Katter bringing it to 77. Game set match. I am also over 90% sure that Swan is gone too. I am in his electorate and you should come here and talk to some of us locals about how we feel. So feel free to tell me how Labor/Independent/Green all really the same thing thse says have any hope of winning/retaining Dobell Lyne New England Lilley or Fisher let alone picking up seats. Aren't you from Sydney? You're the same dimwit who was saying I was 21 last night. I am from Banyo in Qld and 38 dickhead. But a year ago you were 21 from Sydney.  How'd you get so old so fast?  And why did you move for? Show me proof dickhead. Just like Matty always wanting "proof". Of what? The reason I want proof is because you are claiming that I am things that I am not and not providing any proof to back up these wrong accusations.

Sorry Matty.

Man you'd think Matty would at least make his sock a little smarter.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 2:19pm:

Man you'd think Matty would at least make his sock a little smarter.

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 2:24pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 2:19pm: Man you'd think Matty would at least make his sock a little smarter. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Nor does it change its tune. I can hear the whiny little bitch tone in Mattys voice from here, he thinks we're all as stupid as he is.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 2:18pm:

Unless you plan to scan and post your license and photo you have no proof & neither does Alevine. Can't you spot a fishing expedition when ones on?

I don't need proof I've made no wrongful accusations.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 2:19pm:

sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 2:15pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 2:09pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 2:00pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:59pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:56pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:55pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:54pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:14pm: sexy_beast wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 1:04pm: skippy. wrote on Nov 6th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Wow the swing  is definitely on, six months ago longwhinydribbler and co were saying Labor would lose fifty seats and end up in a tarago. now this poll, which is out of step with most that have Labor even closer, says Labor would only lose 20 seats. This swing is terminal for the conga line, I'll call it now, even with Gillard as leader, Labor will win the next election, as long as phony tony stays on as Liberal leader. Labor came back from a 50 seat majority to about 20 last year then fell back again. Who says the same thing won't happen again? And I can't wait to rub your face in it next year. I am bookmarking this page and bumping it after the next election. Feel free,Matty, though I expect by then you will be well and truly hidden under your rock and/or posting under yet another sock as a result of being the forums whipping boy. Back to this 'matty' thing again I see. Well no I will be here rubbing all of your left-wing noses in it. Now let's see you try to counter this: Both parties have 71 seats down from 72 each because of Slipper and Thomson. The Coalition will regain Fisher pick up Lyne New England and Dobell. That's already 75 and then you have to include Crook and Katter bringing it to 77. Game set match. I am also over 90% sure that Swan is gone too. I am in his electorate and you should come here and talk to some of us locals about how we feel. So feel free to tell me how Labor/Independent/Green all really the same thing thse says have any hope of winning/retaining Dobell Lyne New England Lilley or Fisher let alone picking up seats. Aren't you from Sydney? You're the same dimwit who was saying I was 21 last night. I am from Banyo in Qld and 38 dickhead. But a year ago you were 21 from Sydney.  How'd you get so old so fast?  And why did you move for? Show me proof dickhead. Just like Matty always wanting "proof". Of what? The reason I want proof is because you are claiming that I am things that I am not and not providing any proof to back up these wrong accusations. Sorry Matty. Man you'd think Matty would at least make his sock a little smarter.

No proof and no answer to my question of how Labor would win.

Stop trying, struggling and striving...it only encourages them... :) :)

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 2:18pm:

Unless you plan to scan and post your license and photo you have no proof & neither does Alevine. Can't you spot a fishing expedition when ones on?

dont you get tired of this constant baiting childish behavior.smithy?.. I know it changes the topic when the ill bred find it goes against the grain of their beliefs.  or their comprehension even..

but boy they sure know how to stuff up the boards..pathetic..

whats age got to do with anything..who cares if he/she isnt who they claim to be last I heard there is no law against lying on a forum about your age or who you are..

havent you noticed its the same ones over and over...why come into a topic if you dont want to talk about said topic.?????????

its so childish.. and BORING.. I want to scribble all through those stupid stupid remarks..

>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

The polls are 50/50 a year out from an election and Abbott is as unpopular as herpes at an Alan Jones bunga bunga party.
As their lies have been exposed the polls are trending away from the hard liners so a Labor victory is within reach providing they put the usual strategies in place leading up to the election.