Let's take the issue of AGW as an example.

Abbott voters have selected short term self interests over what is in the highest intent for Australia and Australians, working for world action on carbon pollution through example.

Are Abbott voters anti Australians.

poll

I chose none of. First of all it's nationalistic nonsense, but mostly I would have say that most people choose a party they believe will benefit Australia the most. They may not have evaluated all the policies, they might have strange ideas of what is beneficial, but I don't think you can accuse many voters of being against Australia.

____ wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 8:24am:

Let's take the issue of AGW as an example. Abbott voters have selected short term self interests over what is in the highest intent for Australia and Australians, working for world action on carbon pollution through example. Are Abbott voters anti Australians.

Many of them don't accept AGW. That does not make the right, but they are not trying to vote against the interests of the country, they see themselves as trying to prevent unnecessary economic damage.

Kytro wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 10:05am:

I chose none of. First of all it's nationalistic nonsense, but mostly I would have say that most people choose a party they believe will benefit Australia the most. .

Excuse me for my bluntness but that's  absolute bullsh it. Conservative voters do not care about what's best for Australia they care about what's best for themselves. If they thought about what's best for this nation they would care about social issues and climate change issues and our children's future, they don't, they only care about their own selfish hip pockets.

No more un-Australian than any other sheep in the paddock..... most of them are lower to middle class, but even when 'upper class' remain peasants at heart, yet somehow assume that by adhering to Tony's elitism for mega-bucks hoarders, they will be granted access into the same exclusive club.... somehow they will be created anew as 'better' than the 'slackers' and 'leaners' out there who work for a living when they can and without whom any business they run would not prosper.

DUM.

skippy. wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 10:23am:

Kytro wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:05am: I chose none of. First of all it's nationalistic nonsense, but mostly I would have say that most people choose a party they believe will benefit Australia the most. . Excuse me for my bluntness but that's  absolute bullsh it. Conservative voters do not care about what's best for Australia they care about what's best for themselves. If they thought about what's best for this nation they would care about social issues and climate change issues and our children's future, they don't, they only care about their own selfish hip pockets.

Excuse my bluntness but I call bullshit on your bullshit.  ;D

It seems to me that Kyrto was making a very valid and astute point and, further to this, your response actually highlighted the accuracy to some degree of Kyrto's analysis.

Your point above indicates that you have insight into what these people are actually thinking, psychic much? Don't worry, I see this all of the time from all political perspectives.

It seems that those holding strong, black and white ideological view points;

[list bull-blackball]

are incapable of realising that an alternate view point could be anything but self interest driven

are incapable or unwilling to review and reflect upon their own actions/choices or policies in any clear, open or honest way.

have an unreasonable need to denounce and/or defame their political opponents on a personal level - seemingly as a justification or "proof" of why they hold the ideology they do.


From my perspective, a dedicated and strong ideological position may well be seen by an individual as in the countries best interests, as such could not be described as Anti Australian. Ignorant, selfish and superficial they may be, but anti Australian is not a given. That, even if their policies are not necessarily good for Australia in the final wash up.

However, also as I see it, people who are rusted on to any ideological perspective without question are, by virtue of their unquestioning status, not actually for the best of Australia. We are never ever going to have Government that works for all of the population (you can please some of the people etc....). Currently, I don't believe for a moment that our political animals engaged in the act (yep, they're acting alright... politics = acting for uglies) of looking out for their own place at the public trough - no party can deny that with any voracity, nor can any individual party rusted on with any degree of validity.

This is the problem. Possibly it would be more apt to ask the question are our political choices to vote for Anti Australian? Of course, I already know the rusted ons will highlight that every other choice except their own is flawed, whilst their own choice is a beacon of hope.... That isn't Anti Australian though, that is simply rusted on apathy, ignorance and laziness.

Phemanderac wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 10:58am:

skippy. wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:23am: Kytro wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:05am: I chose none of. First of all it's nationalistic nonsense, but mostly I would have say that most people choose a party they believe will benefit Australia the most. . Excuse me for my bluntness but that's  absolute bullsh it. Conservative voters do not care about what's best for Australia they care about what's best for themselves. If they thought about what's best for this nation they would care about social issues and climate change issues and our children's future, they don't, they only care about their own selfish hip pockets. Excuse my bluntness but I call bullshit on your bullshit.  ;D It seems to me that Kyrto was making a very valid and astute point and, further to this, your response actually highlighted the accuracy to some degree of Kyrto's analysis. Your point above indicates that you have insight into what these people are actually thinking, psychic much? Don't worry, I see this all of the time from all political perspectives. It seems that those holding strong, black and white ideological view points; [list bull-blackball] are incapable of realising that an alternate view point could be anything but self interest driven are incapable or unwilling to review and reflect upon their own actions/choices or policies in any clear, open or honest way. have an unreasonable need to denounce and/or defame their political opponents on a personal level - seemingly as a justification or "proof" of why they hold the ideology they do. From my perspective, a dedicated and strong ideological position may well be seen by an individual as in the countries best interests, as such could not be described as Anti Australian. Ignorant, selfish and superficial they may be, but anti Australian is not a given. That, even if their policies are not necessarily good for Australia in the final wash up. However, also as I see it, people who are rusted on to any ideological perspective without question are, by virtue of their unquestioning status, not actually for the best of Australia. We are never ever going to have Government that works for all of the population (you can please some of the people etc....). Currently, I don't believe for a moment that our political animals engaged in the act (yep, they're acting alright... politics = acting for uglies) of looking out for their own place at the public trough - no party can deny that with any voracity, nor can any individual party rusted on with any degree of validity. This is the problem. Possibly it would be more apt to ask the question are our political choices to vote for Anti Australian? Of course, I already know the rusted ons will highlight that every other choice except their own is flawed, whilst their own choice is a beacon of hope.... That isn't Anti Australian though, that is simply rusted on apathy, ignorance and laziness.

Well excuse me but I call you out on your bullsh it and raise it. Feel free to point out anything I wrote that is not correct. ::)

____ wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 8:28am:

poll

Troll.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 12:16pm:

____ wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 8:28am: poll Troll.

Diddums ... losing in the poll. Poor anti australian abbott supporter.

skippy. wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 10:23am:

Kytro wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:05am: I chose none of. First of all it's nationalistic nonsense, but mostly I would have say that most people choose a party they believe will benefit Australia the most. . Excuse me for my bluntness but that's  absolute bullsh it. Conservative voters do not care about what's best for Australia they care about what's best for themselves. If they thought about what's best for this nation they would care about social issues and climate change issues and our children's future, they don't, they only care about their own selfish hip pockets.

While I am sure some people do vote purely in their own self interest, this isn't confined to any particular political group.

Like I said, many conservatives (an even others) don't accept climate change. I think they are wrong, but it's not evidence they are trying to damage the country.

Conservatives also believe in many cases that social security makes people weaker, and government assistance ends up creating dependence. Once again, I don't believe this is really the case either, but these beliefs are real.

If you can't understand how people think, you will misconstrue their actions.

skippy. wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 11:35am:

Phemanderac wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:58am: skippy. wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:23am: Kytro wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:05am: I chose none of. First of all it's nationalistic nonsense, but mostly I would have say that most people choose a party they believe will benefit Australia the most. . Excuse me for my bluntness but that's  absolute bullsh it. Conservative voters do not care about what's best for Australia they care about what's best for themselves. If they thought about what's best for this nation they would care about social issues and climate change issues and our children's future, they don't, they only care about their own selfish hip pockets. Excuse my bluntness but I call bullshit on your bullshit.  ;D It seems to me that Kyrto was making a very valid and astute point and, further to this, your response actually highlighted the accuracy to some degree of Kyrto's analysis. Your point above indicates that you have insight into what these people are actually thinking, psychic much? Don't worry, I see this all of the time from all political perspectives. It seems that those holding strong, black and white ideological view points; [list bull-blackball] are incapable of realising that an alternate view point could be anything but self interest driven are incapable or unwilling to review and reflect upon their own actions/choices or policies in any clear, open or honest way. have an unreasonable need to denounce and/or defame their political opponents on a personal level - seemingly as a justification or "proof" of why they hold the ideology they do. From my perspective, a dedicated and strong ideological position may well be seen by an individual as in the countries best interests, as such could not be described as Anti Australian. Ignorant, selfish and superficial they may be, but anti Australian is not a given. That, even if their policies are not necessarily good for Australia in the final wash up. However, also as I see it, people who are rusted on to any ideological perspective without question are, by virtue of their unquestioning status, not actually for the best of Australia. We are never ever going to have Government that works for all of the population (you can please some of the people etc....). Currently, I don't believe for a moment that our political animals engaged in the act (yep, they're acting alright... politics = acting for uglies) of looking out for their own place at the public trough - no party can deny that with any voracity, nor can any individual party rusted on with any degree of validity. This is the problem. Possibly it would be more apt to ask the question are our political choices to vote for Anti Australian? Of course, I already know the rusted ons will highlight that every other choice except their own is flawed, whilst their own choice is a beacon of hope.... That isn't Anti Australian though, that is simply rusted on apathy, ignorance and laziness. Well excuse me but I call you out on your bullsh it and raise it. Feel free to point out anything I wrote that is not correct. ::)

ROFL, fair enough, well except I already did in my post...

Was it TLDR?

Kytro wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 10:05am:

I chose none of. First of all it's nationalistic nonsense, but mostly I would have say that most people choose a party they believe will benefit Australia the most...

Do they? Or do they vote for the party that will benefit them personally the most?

Remember how John Howard would always announce handouts before an election?

John Howard was a cunning snake. He knew that many, if not most, vote with their wallet in mind, not the national interest.


Quote:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage.

Kytro wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 10:05am:

... but I don't think you can accuse many voters of being against Australia.

Wrong.

A large percentage of voters and politicians have been very much against the Australia that the diggers fought and died for during WWII.

They've been on a mission to wipe out the Australia that the diggers knew.

The mass immigration of incompatible races and religions.

The initiating and granting of government funds towards a 'Multicultural Australia' ... with it balkanising Australia into a patchwork of ethnic communities with their own professional lobbyists and their State and federal councils.

The elimination of Australian history in the classrooms. The dumping of English Grammar in the public schools.

The scrapping of the Australian Conservative Party.

The public monstering of anyone who dares to put his or her head up and call for the preservation of British Australia and the monarchy.

And a great deal more sedition and subterfuge upon the theme of withdrawing Australia from the Anglo-sphere ... (Abbott is not one of these).

Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 2:39pm:

Kytro wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:05am: ... but I don't think you can accuse many voters of being against Australia. Quote: Wrong. A large percentage of voters and politicians have been very much against the Australia that the diggers fought and died for during WWII. They've been on a mission to wipe out the Australia that the diggers knew. I am quite certain my Old Man who was one of those Diggers you refer to is quite happy with the way Australia is evolving.  He never did have much time for the Brits.  He reckoned he had even less after Singapore. [quote]The mass immigration of incompatible races and religions.

All those Chinese, Lebanese, Greeks, Germans, Italians, Vietnamese etc?  What was incompatable about them and their religions.


Quote:

The initiating and granting of government funds towards a 'Multicultural Australia' ... with it balkanising Australia into a patchwork of ethnic communities with their own professional lobbyists and their State and federal councils.

Both major parties are great fans of multiculturism, and so was my Old Man (he'd make an exception in the case of Poms, but you weren't referring to them, were you.)


Quote:

The elimination of Australian history in the classrooms. The dumping of English Grammar in the public schools.

When did this happen?  Both were still there in the 60s through to the 80s.


Quote:

The scrapping of the Australian Conservative Party.

Was that some rabid extreme right wing bunch of neo-nazis?


Quote:

The public monstering of anyone who dares to put his or her head up and call for the preservation of British Australia and the monarchy.

Monstering?  That Digger to which you refer was quite happy to see the end of the Brits arriving with their notion of self importance.


Quote:

And a great deal more sedition and subterfuge upon the theme of withdrawing Australia from the Anglo-sphere ... (Abbott is not one of these).

Yeas, it did take us a while to work out that, just like they did in WW2, the Brits cannot be relied upon to help us in need, and we have finally realised that we are in Asia, a very long way from Buckingham Palace.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 2:39pm:

The mass immigration of incompatible races and religions.

Herbert, if the lesson you learnt from WWII was that we need to shun other races, I think you are thinking of a different worldwide global conflict. 

Meanwhile .... back at the mosque ... speaking of voters being anti-Australian ...

"There are somewhere between 360,000 and 500,000 practising Muslims in Australia. Some clerics claim a much higher figure but we can never know the exact figure because census questions of “faith” are optional and in line with our 18C restriction. The US-based Pew Research Centre has forecast an increase of 80% in the number of Australia’s Muslims by 2030.

So, if we take today’s most conservative figure of 360,000, and if we conservatively assume that our Muslim population is only one-quarter that of Britain’s, then of those questioned in a recent survey, 1.5 per cent say they would find London-type bombings fully justified. Therefore 5,400 Australian Muslims approve of these atrocities.

Another 6 per cent (21,600) said they feel sympathy with the feelings and motives of those who, one day, will commit similar atrocities here. Similarly, some 8 per cent (28,800) of Australia’s Muslims believe they are justified in bringing our Western society to an end".

link

Aussie, if your father thinks/thought the Poms are the problem, then it might be time you had a quiet little chat to him about some of the unsavoury realities that have arrived with a 'Multicultual Australia'.

Break it gently to him, won't you.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 3:09pm:

Meanwhile .... back at the mosque ... speaking of voters being anti-Australian ... "There are somewhere between 360,000 and 500,000 practising Muslims in Australia. Some clerics claim a much higher figure but we can never know the exact figure because census questions of “faith” are optional and in line with our 18C restriction. The US-based Pew Research Centre has forecast an increase of 80% in the number of Australia’s Muslims by 2030. So, if we take today’s most conservative figure of 360,000, and if we conservatively assume that our Muslim population is only one-quarter that of Britain’s, then of those questioned in a recent survey, 1.5 per cent say they would find London-type bombings fully justified. Therefore 5,400 Australian Muslims approve of these atrocities. Another 6 per cent (21,600) said they feel sympathy with the feelings and motives of those who, one day, will commit similar atrocities here. Similarly, some 8 per cent (28,800) of Australia’s Muslims believe they are justified in bringing our Western society to an end". link

There's a bear in there.. And a red as well.. They're under my bed... And they're going to hell... Open wide come inside...it's play school.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 3:09pm:

Meanwhile .... back at the mosque ... speaking of voters being anti-Australian ... "There are somewhere between 360,000 and 500,000 practising Muslims in Australia. Some clerics claim a much higher figure but we can never know the exact figure because census questions of “faith” are optional and in line with our 18C restriction. The US-based Pew Research Centre has forecast an increase of 80% in the number of Australia’s Muslims by 2030. So, if we take today’s most conservative figure of 360,000, and if we conservatively assume that our Muslim population is only one-quarter that of Britain’s, then of those questioned in a recent survey, 1.5 per cent say they would find London-type bombings fully justified. Therefore 5,400 Australian Muslims approve of these atrocities. Another 6 per cent (21,600) said they feel sympathy with the feelings and motives of those who, one day, will commit similar atrocities here. Similarly, some 8 per cent (28,800) of Australia’s Muslims believe they are justified in bringing our Western society to an end". link Aussie, if your father thinks/thought the Poms are the problem, then it might be time you had a quiet little chat to him about some of the unsavoury realities that have arrived with a 'Multicultual Australia'. Break it gently to him, won't you.

Having passed on, he's just a tad too far away for that word in his ear.  As for Pickering's dog whistling, there are rat bags in all groups, including his own Family ~ his son is an alleged high flying drug dealer and associate  of the underworld.  He without sin and all that, wot?

Abbott Lies wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 2:19pm:

Do they? Or do they vote for the party that will benefit them personally the most? Remember how John Howard would always announce handouts before an election? John Howard was a cunning snake. He knew that many, if not most, vote with their wallet in mind, not the national interest.

I'll think you will find that most people think what benefits them benefits the nation.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 2:39pm:

Kytro wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:05am: ... but I don't think you can accuse many voters of being against Australia. Wrong. A large percentage of voters and politicians have been very much against the Australia that the diggers fought and died for during WWII. They've been on a mission to wipe out the Australia that the diggers knew. The mass immigration of incompatible races and religions.

Yes, people disagree about what they think Australia should be of course. I wasn't implying otherwise.

There is no "mass" immigration you speak of. Mostly Muslims and the middle east is what I expect you are talking about. They are not a significant proportion of the population at 2.2%.


Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 2:39pm:

The initiating and granting of government funds towards a 'Multicultural Australia' ... with it balkanising Australia into a patchwork of ethnic communities with their own professional lobbyists and their State and federal councils. The elimination of Australian history in the classrooms. The dumping of English Grammar in the public schools. The scrapping of the Australian Conservative Party.

The conservative party was registered due to lack of members, not a sinister plot. Like I said, some people think that multiculturalism is best for Australia while others disagree. This isn't about what is or isn't good, but about intention.


Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 2:39pm:

The public monstering of anyone who dares to put his or her head up and call for the preservation of British Australia and the monarchy. And a great deal more sedition and subterfuge upon the theme of withdrawing Australia from the Anglo-sphere ... (Abbott is not one of these).

I don't think to monarchy has anything to do with this. Nations change over time, it is inevitable and always will be, there is no way change can or will be be prevented. One way or another, change will come. Always has, always will.

Kytro wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 12:54pm:

Like I said, many conservatives (an even others) don't accept climate change. I think they are wrong, but it's not evidence they are trying to damage the country.

I think that is wrong ....

if considering they greater good, they would also have to consider the fact that their own personal opinion may be wrong, and they would have to err on the side of caution .... I personally feel that working weekends is for greedy shmucks ... but for the good of my family, I  do it anyway when I have to ..... not because I believe I should, but because my families well being takes priority over my opinions.

lib voters don't care about the greater good, they only care about their own opinion

John Smith wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 3:47pm:

Kytro wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 12:54pm: Like I said, many conservatives (an even others) don't accept climate change. I think they are wrong, but it's not evidence they are trying to damage the country. I think that is wrong .... if considering they greater good, they would also have to consider the fact that their own personal opinion may be wrong, and they would have to err on the side of caution .... I personally feel that working weekends is for greedy shmucks ... but for the good of my family, I  do it anyway when I have to ..... not because I believe I should, but because my families well being takes priority over my opinions. lib voters don't care about the greater good, they only care about their own opinion

An inability or lack of will to look at the evidence does not imply that ill will. Ideology is extremely powerful.

Fundamental attribution error.  Don't assume actions are driven by they type of person someone is over the circumstances.

Kytro wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 5:14pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 3:47pm: Kytro wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 12:54pm: Like I said, many conservatives (an even others) don't accept climate change. I think they are wrong, but it's not evidence they are trying to damage the country. I think that is wrong .... if considering they greater good, they would also have to consider the fact that their own personal opinion may be wrong, and they would have to err on the side of caution .... I personally feel that working weekends is for greedy shmucks ... but for the good of my family, I  do it anyway when I have to ..... not because I believe I should, but because my families well being takes priority over my opinions. lib voters don't care about the greater good, they only care about their own opinion An inability or lack of will to look at the evidence does not imply that ill will. Ideology is extremely powerful. Fundamental attribution error.  Don't assume actions are driven by they type of person someone is over the circumstances.

I'll concede that often they do it unknowingly ... but that doesn't make them any less anti Australian.

Well that poll and it's outcome is a complete joke.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 3:09pm:

Meanwhile .... back at the mosque ... speaking of voters being anti-Australian ... [i]"There are somewhere between 360,000 and 500,000 practising Muslims in Australia...The US-based Pew Research Centre has forecast an increase of 80% in the number of Australia’s Muslims by 2030.

An 80% increase by 2030 would mean what? That the current 2% of the population that is Muslim would increase to 3%?




Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 3:09pm:

our Muslim population is only one-quarter that of Britain’s, then of those questioned in a recent survey, 1.5 per cent say they would find London-type bombings fully justified. Therefore 5,400 Australian Muslims approve of these atrocities.

Quite a low number. If you asked Catholics or Jews the same question, you would almost certainly get a higher number.

Repeatedly, surveys have shown that Muslims are less likely than other religions to agree with the killing of civilians:


The following links have graphs that demonstrate that Muslims are the most peaceful religious group:


loonwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/kill-civilians-2.jpg?resize=600%2C287



The following survey by Gallup of religious folk found that North Americans and Europeans were far more likely to agree with killing civilians than Middle Easterners & North Africans:

images.huffingtonpost.com/2012-01-02-1.gif

images.huffingtonpost.com/2012-01-02-2.gif


Even amongst the non-religious, living amongst Muslims has a positive result:

images.huffingtonpost.com/2012-01-02-3.gif

images.huffingtonpost.com/2012-01-02-4.gif

images.huffingtonpost.com/2012-01-02-5.gif

Grendel wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 5:29pm:

Well that poll and it's outcome is a complete joke.

Yes Grendel, it's only important what you think ... what others think is irrelevant  :D :D :D

Kytro wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 10:05am:

I chose none of. First of all it's nationalistic nonsense, but mostly I would have say that most people choose a party they believe will benefit Australia the most. They may not have evaluated all the policies, they might have strange ideas of what is beneficial, but I don't think you can accuse many voters of being against Australia.

[smiley=thumbsup.gif]

John Smith wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 5:24pm:

Kytro wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 5:14pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 3:47pm: Kytro wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 12:54pm: Like I said, many conservatives (an even others) don't accept climate change. I think they are wrong, but it's not evidence they are trying to damage the country. I think that is wrong .... if considering they greater good, they would also have to consider the fact that their own personal opinion may be wrong, and they would have to err on the side of caution .... I personally feel that working weekends is for greedy shmucks ... but for the good of my family, I  do it anyway when I have to ..... not because I believe I should, but because my families well being takes priority over my opinions. lib voters don't care about the greater good, they only care about their own opinion An inability or lack of will to look at the evidence does not imply that ill will. Ideology is extremely powerful. Fundamental attribution error.  Don't assume actions are driven by they type of person someone is over the circumstances. I'll concede that often they do it unknowingly ... but that doesn't make them any less anti Australian.

I think it matters. Intent is important

____ wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 8:24am:

Let's take the issue of AGW as an example. Abbott voters have selected short term self interests over what is in the highest intent for Australia and Australians, working for world action on carbon pollution through example. Are Abbott voters anti Australians.

The ALP went to the election promising to "terminate" the carbon tax.

So don't forget to include everyone that voted for them in you retarded myopic thread.

;)

Kytro wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 12:54pm:

While I am sure some people do vote purely in their own self interest, this isn't confined to any particular political group. .

You are certainly correct in saying it isn't exclusive to conservatives but you only need to read the conservatives here to realise that they sure do corner the market, it does seem to be one of the things that the majority of conservative supporters have in common.

I typically do not vote in polls.

Had I voted in this one my answer would either be none of the above or the Liberals.

"None of the above" because they do not intentionally mean to undermine Australia. They think they are doing the right thing or not thinking at all.

"The Liberals" because their intentions may not outweigh the facts.

Grendel wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 5:29pm:

Well that poll and it's outcome is a complete joke.

The poll is ok but the outcome looks 'suss'  :-?

Swagman wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 11:20am:

Grendel wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 5:29pm: Well that poll and it's outcome is a complete joke. The poll is ok but the outcome looks 'suss'  :-?

How does it look sus? The numbers have steadily increased, not like last week when twenty votes piled onto the coaltion after Matty and his sox logged on. I bet the mods could confirm every vote came from a different IP address and none of them were proxies,I also bet they can't do the same about the coaltion favoured poll from last week though.

skippy. wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 3:01pm:

How does it look sus?

Just a vibe.  Twice as many respondents as usual.

Swagman wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 4:03pm:

skippy. wrote on Jul 14th, 2014 at 3:01pm: How does it look sus? Just a vibe.  Twice as many respondents as usual.

How are they voting ?

Dnarever wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 5:16pm:

Swagman wrote on Jul 14th, 2014 at 4:03pm: skippy. wrote on Jul 14th, 2014 at 3:01pm: How does it look sus? Just a vibe.  Twice as many respondents as usual. How are they voting ?

Currently
23 votes Conservative Libs
9 votes Greens
1 vote Palmers
3 votes None

Zero the rest

Swagman wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 11:20am:

Grendel wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 5:29pm: Well that poll and it's outcome is a complete joke. The poll is ok but the outcome looks 'suss'  :-?

There is more than one so-called Conservative party and many of the others come under Progressive yet there is also no Progressive option.

Grendel wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 5:50pm:

Swagman wrote on Jul 14th, 2014 at 11:20am: Grendel wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 5:29pm: Well that poll and it's outcome is a complete joke. The poll is ok but the outcome looks 'suss'  :-? There is more than one so-called Conservative party and many of the others come under Progressive yet there is also no Progressive option.

That's because no-one (other than you) uses the expression.

Aussie wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 5:54pm:

Grendel wrote on Jul 14th, 2014 at 5:50pm: Swagman wrote on Jul 14th, 2014 at 11:20am: Grendel wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 5:29pm: Well that poll and it's outcome is a complete joke. The poll is ok but the outcome looks 'suss'  :-? There is more than one so-called Conservative party and many of the others come under Progressive yet there is also no Progressive option. That's because no-one (other than you) uses the expression.

You mean YOU ARE STILL CLUELESS...  get educated you mron.
I read it all the time.
Do some reading.
Ask Julia or Bill if the Labor Party is the progressive Pary or not.  They said it often enough over the last 6 years...   just where have you been.  :D :D :D

Call them the Labor Party in that case.

(No emoticons were misused in the making of this Post.)

Aussie wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 5:59pm:

Call them the Labor Party in that case. (No emoticons were misused in the making of this Post.)

You r a fwit...  honestly
Then don't call some Australians Conservative then.
You use it you accept it then surely you must know how to use progressive and accept it too...
http://www.fourwinds10.net/resources/uploads/images/stupidity.jpg

Grendel wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 6:07pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2014 at 5:59pm: Call them the Labor Party in that case. (No emoticons were misused in the making of this Post.) You r a fwit...  honestly Then don't call some Australians Conservative then. You use it you accept it then surely you must know how to use progressive and accept it too... http://www.fourwinds10.net/resources/uploads/images/stupidity.jpg

I don't.  It is either Lib or LNP.

(No images were mis-used in the making of this Post.)

Aussie wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 6:40pm:

Grendel wrote on Jul 14th, 2014 at 6:07pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2014 at 5:59pm: Call them the Labor Party in that case. (No emoticons were misused in the making of this Post.) You r a fwit...  honestly Then don't call some Australians Conservative then. You use it you accept it then surely you must know how to use progressive and accept it too... http://www.fourwinds10.net/resources/uploads/images/stupidity.jpg I don't.  It is either Lib or LNP. (No images were mis-used in the making of this Post.)

I wasn't actually talking about you in particular fwit.
The fact you apparently don't understand Progressive and Conservative and don't understand that one is mentioned in the poll and the other isn't is not my problem.  The fact you lied about me not using the name Labor Party is just par for the course for you...
http://mu.ranter.net/wp-content/uploads/troll.jpg

Quote:

I wasn't actually talking about you in particular fwit.

Of course not, even though you quoted me, and made your reply directly to it.

(No images were mis-used in the making of this Post.)

Let me know when you understand what a progressive is....   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Grendel wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 7:32pm:

Let me know when you understand what a progressive is....   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Why ought anyone bother just to humour you?  Instead of deliberately going out of your way to appear an evah so clevah know-it-all, why not just do what we all do?  Leftard, Lefty, Left or ALP is the common usage.

(No emoticons were mis-used in the making of this Post.)