Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters.

A National ICAC, A Strong Renewable Energy Agenda, Under 1.5 Degrees in Dangerous Global Heating Policies, Ethical treatment towards the most vulnerable Australians and Refugees.

and so much more ...

http://greens.org.au/policy


Compared with the other parties, Greens have more to offer the currently undecided voters. And the past too show ~ What Greens commit to before an election, they carry out after the election.

Dinatalie was excellent today , well done .

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 7:58pm:

Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters.

they can ... but if they're true to form, they won't

Ethical is signing up with whatever party will offer them the most chance at seats, regardless of principle?

I am not persuaded.... double my pension, apologise for past wrongs,and set restitution in place via public apology and compensation for direct loss .. and then we can talk.

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 8:28pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters. they can ... but if they're true to form, they won't

We are talking Greens, not the ALP.

i.e There Will Be No Carbon Tax

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 8:53pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 8:28pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters. they can ... but if they're true to form, they won't We are talking Greens, not the ALP. i.e There Will Be No Carbon Tax

really? you want to bring up a greens policy as your argument?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 7:58pm:

Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters. A National ICAC, A Strong Renewable Energy Agenda, Under 1.5 Degrees in Dangerous Global Heating Policies, Ethical treatment towards the most vulnerable Australians and Refugees. and so much more ... http://greens.org.au/policy Compared with the other parties, Greens have more to offer the currently undecided voters. And the past too show ~ What Greens commit to before an election, they carry out after the election.

The regressive left represented by the greens offers nothing of value, and no reasonable solutions to Australia's issues.  Best thing to happen would be to see the greens obliterated.  What a pathetic party of no vision and massive stupidity.

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:05pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 8:53pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 8:28pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters. they can ... but if they're true to form, they won't We are talking Greens, not the ALP. i.e There Will Be No Carbon Tax really? you want to bring up a greens policy as your argument?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApCwoj35d3M

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:17pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters. A National ICAC, A Strong Renewable Energy Agenda, Under 1.5 Degrees in Dangerous Global Heating Policies, Ethical treatment towards the most vulnerable Australians and Refugees. and so much more ... http://greens.org.au/policy Compared with the other parties, Greens have more to offer the currently undecided voters. And the past too show ~ What Greens commit to before an election, they carry out after the election. The regressive left represented by the greens offers nothing of value, and no reasonable solutions to Australia's issues.  Best thing to happen would be to see the greens obliterated.  What a pathetic party of no vision and massive stupidity.

Spoken like a rusted on labor supporter.
Your post is unsubstantiated and anti democratic.

See you are not interested in winning over any undecided readers.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:22pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:17pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters. A National ICAC, A Strong Renewable Energy Agenda, Under 1.5 Degrees in Dangerous Global Heating Policies, Ethical treatment towards the most vulnerable Australians and Refugees. and so much more ... http://greens.org.au/policy Compared with the other parties, Greens have more to offer the currently undecided voters. And the past too show ~ What Greens commit to before an election, they carry out after the election. The regressive left represented by the greens offers nothing of value, and no reasonable solutions to Australia's issues.  Best thing to happen would be to see the greens obliterated.  What a pathetic party of no vision and massive stupidity. Spoken like a rusted on labor supporter. Your post is unsubstantiated and anti democratic. See you are not interested in winning over any undecided readers.

Not a labor supporter.  Each time you need to be reminded of this? What part of "the greens do not represent the true liberal left" is hard to understand? Your party and its core values are anti democratic and completely regressive to the ideals of the left.  If you don't understand this then please stop pretending to be politically active.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:05pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 8:53pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 8:28pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters. they can ... but if they're true to form, they won't We are talking Greens, not the ALP. i.e There Will Be No Carbon Tax really? you want to bring up a greens policy as your argument?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApCwoj35d3M

are you channeling armpit?

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:05pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 8:53pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 8:28pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters. they can ... but if they're true to form, they won't We are talking Greens, not the ALP. i.e There Will Be No Carbon Tax really? you want to bring up a greens policy as your argument?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApCwoj35d3M

Cmon greens you sound like one of those perennial imbeciles we encounter daily on here from the right when you post that video up , you know the video isn't complete and she said she would put a price on carbon

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 7:58pm:

Greens can offer an ethical

oh boy.. that's just too much..  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:28pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical oh boy.. that's just too much..  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

An unfair advantage for the Greens ?

Oh well. Turnbull might not be as dishonest as Abbott was, last election.

No cuts to the ABC + SBS etc etc.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 8:53pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 8:28pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical and progressive agenda for the currently undecided voters. they can ... but if they're true to form, they won't We are talking Greens, not the ALP. i.e There Will Be No Carbon Tax

The Fixed carbon price was Green policy and only technically a tax. It didn't work like a tax and was nothing like the carbon tax Abbott had suggested.

In fact the fixed carbon price was by far the best solution to the carbon dioxide emissions issue, far better than the very corruptible carbon trading options.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 7:58pm:

Greens can offer an ethical

How ethical was it to push Gillard into breaking her no carbon tax commitment ?

How ethical to abandon their green policies in grubby preference deals with the Lieberals ?

The issue being discussed was ethical

Labor, like the coalition, break election promises and execute first term leaders.

What the two olds try and sell the undecided voters for your vote ... will likely be dumped the other side of the election.

Greens are the ethical party.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:47pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical How ethical was it to push Gillard into breaking her no carbon tax commitment ? How ethical to abandon their green policies in grubby preference deals with the Lieberals ?

Greens didn't push Gillard. Labor were desperate for power.


As for preference deals, Labor preferencing away from the Greens in the Liberal held seats like Higgins ... a seat Greens could take from the Libs  ... Labor are planning on doing the same thing in other Melbourne seats.

Labor's grubby deal with the Libs?


Voters reject Labor MP push to preference Liberals: poll

Labor voters in Michael Danby's Melbourne Ports have rejected his push to preference the Liberals ahead of the Greens in the marginal seat, according to a new poll.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/voters-reject-labor-mp-push-to-preference-liberals-poll-20160413-go53na.html

Its time wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:27pm:

Cmon greens you sound like one of those perennial imbeciles we encounter daily on here from the right

and what is the difference between them and greenswin? the greens and the rightards are like two peas in a pod ... technically different but in reality they are the same.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:55pm:

Greens didn't push Gillard.

it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support.

you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:55pm:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:47pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Greens can offer an ethical How ethical was it to push Gillard into breaking her no carbon tax commitment ? How ethical to abandon their green policies in grubby preference deals with the Lieberals ? Greens didn't push Gillard. Labor were desperate for power. As for preference deals, Labor preferencing away from the Greens in the Liberal held seats like Higgins ... a seat Greens could take from the Libs  ... Labor are planning on doing the same thing in other Melbourne seats. Labor's grubby deal with the Libs? Voters reject Labor MP push to preference Liberals: poll Labor voters in Michael Danby's Melbourne Ports have rejected his push to preference the Liberals ahead of the Greens in the marginal seat, according to a new poll. http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/voters-reject-labor-mp-push-to-preference-liberals-poll-20160413-go53na.html

Considering that he was elected on Liberal preferences it is rather large slice of hypocrisy to expect Labor preferences.

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:59pm:

Its time wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:27pm: Cmon greens you sound like one of those perennial imbeciles we encounter daily on here from the right and what is the difference between them and greenswin? the greens and the rightards are like two peas in a pod ... technically different but in reality they are the same.

Boo Hoo. Rusted on labor posters don't like being challenged ... and shown up.

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:00pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy

The Greens were not going to support the coalition.
It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values.

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 9:59pm:

Its time wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:27pm: Cmon greens you sound like one of those perennial imbeciles we encounter daily on here from the right and what is the difference between them and greenswin? the greens and the rightards are like two peas in a pod ... technically different but in reality they are the same.

He is winding you up , as greens enjoys doing with just about every single one of his posts

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:05pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values.

Ethical values??  Your party supports human shields and children being taught to kill!!  Your party supports women being flogged for being raped. Your party supports apostates being killed.  Your party has no understanding of liberal values, ethical values, or just pure sensible democratic values.

Ethical values, the greens are bereft of them. 

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:05pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values.

Really?  As has been shown the greens do not have problems aligning themselves with coalition policies.  No conviction!

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:05pm:

The Greens were not going to support the coalition.

thats not what they were saying at the time  :D :D... don't try to change history. You should own it instead of being ashamed of the greens actions

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:05pm:

a party devoid of ethical values.

you mean like a party that claims to be all about the environment voting against an ETS? they're the sorts of ethical values you hold dear?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:08pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Ethical values??  Your party supports human shields and children being taught to kill!!  Your party supports women being flogged for being raped. Your party supports apostates being killed.  Your party has no understanding of liberal values, ethical values, or just pure sensible democratic values. Ethical values, the greens are bereft of them.

http://greens.org.au/policy

Like to point out your claims within the Greens Policies?

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:12pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: a party devoid of ethical values. you mean like a party that claims to be all about the environment voting against an ETS? they're the sorts of ethical values you hold dear?

Yep, the Greens ensured climate change policy debate would end up in the gutter and the result would be direct action stupidity.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:10pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Really?  As has been shown the greens do not have problems aligning themselves with coalition policies.  No conviction!

Sometimes Greens and the coalition positions are similar.

As we know, under 10% of the voting this term, Greens voted with the coalition.

Labor on the other hand, what was their percentage of voting with the coalition ... 85%?

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:14pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:08pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Ethical values??  Your party supports human shields and children being taught to kill!!  Your party supports women being flogged for being raped. Your party supports apostates being killed.  Your party has no understanding of liberal values, ethical values, or just pure sensible democratic values. Ethical values, the greens are bereft of them.  http://greens.org.au/policy Like to point out your claims within the Greens Policies?

No surprises it resolves to a HTTP 404 error. Greens Policies - wishful thinking.

The Greens support extremism and in their inability to offer proper rational thinking over political correctness on issues of terrorism, radical religion, radical nationalism, the Greens end up causing nothing but harm and murder. The regressive left is the worst thing to have happened to the world in the last 20 years. 

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:18pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:10pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Really?  As has been shown the greens do not have problems aligning themselves with coalition policies.  No conviction! Sometimes Greens and the coalition positions are similar. As we know, under 10% of the voting this term, Greens voted with the coalition. Labor on the other hand, what was their percentage of voting with the coalition ... 85%?

Demonstrate the 10%.

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:11pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: The Greens were not going to support the coalition. thats not what they were saying at the time  :D :D... don't try to change history. You should own it instead of being ashamed of the greens actions

Really.
Perhaps you should quote your source.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:11pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: The Greens were not going to support the coalition. thats not what they were saying at the time  :D :D... don't try to change history. You should own it instead of being ashamed of the greens actions Really. Perhaps you should quote your source.

Bob Brown.

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:12pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: a party devoid of ethical values. you mean like a party that claims to be all about the environment voting against an ETS? they're the sorts of ethical values you hold dear?

The Labor ETS that locked in massive payouts to the big polluters and no reduction in coal pollution until after 2033?


Why Greens Rejected The CPRS


http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1449746328

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:21pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:20pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:11pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: The Greens were not going to support the coalition. thats not what they were saying at the time  :D :D... don't try to change history. You should own it instead of being ashamed of the greens actions Really. Perhaps you should quote your source. Bob Brown.

Adam had already committed to not supporting the coalition ... and this was prior to the hung parliament result.

Labor were so desperate for power, their election promises were pulped.


So what will be different this time since a hung parliament is highly likely.

Will both lib and lab sell out election promises for government?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:20pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:18pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:10pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Really?  As has been shown the greens do not have problems aligning themselves with coalition policies.  No conviction! Sometimes Greens and the coalition positions are similar. As we know, under 10% of the voting this term, Greens voted with the coalition. Labor on the other hand, what was their percentage of voting with the coalition ... 85%? Demonstrate the 10%.

Greens voting with the coalition in the Senate this term ~ 6%

http://theaimn.com/why-the-greens-did-what-they-did/


Party/Independent      Voted with the Government
ALP      38%
GREENS      6%
DAY      75%
LEYONHJELM      65%
WANG* (PUP)      55%
MUIR      52%
MADIGAN      42%
LAZARUS (IND)      13%
LAZARUS (PUP)      32%
XENOPHON      29%
LAMBIE (IND)      18%
LAMBIE (PUP)      53%

6% doesn't equate to the claim of Greens being aligned to the government.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:36pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:20pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:18pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:10pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Really?  As has been shown the greens do not have problems aligning themselves with coalition policies.  No conviction! Sometimes Greens and the coalition positions are similar. As we know, under 10% of the voting this term, Greens voted with the coalition. Labor on the other hand, what was their percentage of voting with the coalition ... 85%? Demonstrate the 10%. Greens voting with the coalition in the Senate this term ~ 6% http://theaimn.com/why-the-greens-did-what-they-did/ Party/Independent      Voted with the Government ALP      38% GREENS      6% DAY      75% LEYONHJELM      65% WANG* (PUP)      55% MUIR      52% MADIGAN      42% LAZARUS (IND)      13% LAZARUS (PUP)      32% XENOPHON      29% LAMBIE (IND)      18% LAMBIE (PUP)      53% 6% doesn't equate to the claim of Greens being aligned to the government.

I don't want an email from DiNatalie - I want hard evidence. Show all the legislation that was voted on in the Senate, the Liberal vote, and the Greens vote.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:18pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:10pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Really?  As has been shown the greens do not have problems aligning themselves with coalition policies.  No conviction! Sometimes Greens and the coalition positions are similar. As we know, under 10% of the voting this term, Greens voted with the coalition. Labor on the other hand, what was their percentage of voting with the coalition ... 85%?

that's only because once the greens know the libs legislation will pass and they can then play the ideology card. If labor didn't support the libs on many of those issues the greens would have jumped on it.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:19pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:14pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:08pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Ethical values??  Your party supports human shields and children being taught to kill!!  Your party supports women being flogged for being raped. Your party supports apostates being killed.  Your party has no understanding of liberal values, ethical values, or just pure sensible democratic values. Ethical values, the greens are bereft of them.  http://greens.org.au/policy Like to point out your claims within the Greens Policies? No surprises it resolves to a HTTP 404 error. Greens Policies - wishful thinking. The Greens support extremism and in their inability to offer proper rational thinking over political correctness on issues of terrorism, radical religion, radical nationalism, the Greens end up causing nothing but harm and murder. The regressive left is the worst thing to have happened to the world in the last 20 years.

The link works.
If you can't find policies to work in with your spin, don't blame the link.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:11pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: The Greens were not going to support the coalition. thats not what they were saying at the time  :D :D... don't try to change history. You should own it instead of being ashamed of the greens actions Really. Perhaps you should quote your source.

the election was on the 21st ... the greens declared their support on the 1st ... what do you think they were doing for 10 days if they had already made up their mind :D :D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:42pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:36pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:20pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:18pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:10pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Really?  As has been shown the greens do not have problems aligning themselves with coalition policies.  No conviction! Sometimes Greens and the coalition positions are similar. As we know, under 10% of the voting this term, Greens voted with the coalition. Labor on the other hand, what was their percentage of voting with the coalition ... 85%? Demonstrate the 10%. Greens voting with the coalition in the Senate this term ~ 6% http://theaimn.com/why-the-greens-did-what-they-did/ Party/Independent      Voted with the Government ALP      38% GREENS      6% DAY      75% LEYONHJELM      65% WANG* (PUP)      55% MUIR      52% MADIGAN      42% LAZARUS (IND)      13% LAZARUS (PUP)      32% XENOPHON      29% LAMBIE (IND)      18% LAMBIE (PUP)      53% 6% doesn't equate to the claim of Greens being aligned to the government. I don't want an email from DiNatalie - I want hard evidence. Show all the legislation that was voted on in the Senate, the Liberal vote, and the Greens vote.

Do your own research.
I am not here to spoon feed you.

Labor voted over 600% more times with the coalition than the Greens did this term.
Perhaps part of the reason undecided are undecided. Labor and Liberals are practically identical.

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:52pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:20pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:11pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: The Greens were not going to support the coalition. thats not what they were saying at the time  :D :D... don't try to change history. You should own it instead of being ashamed of the greens actions Really. Perhaps you should quote your source. the election was on the 21st ... the greens declared their support on the 1st ... what do you think they were doing for 10 days if they had already made up their mind :D :D

Greens didn't declare support for the ALP. They guaranteed supply and not to support a vote of no confidence in labor, unless it was brought on by the Greens.

This was done for the economy and for the voters. Not because Labor were a great option.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:59pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:52pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:20pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:11pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: The Greens were not going to support the coalition. thats not what they were saying at the time  :D :D... don't try to change history. You should own it instead of being ashamed of the greens actions Really. Perhaps you should quote your source. the election was on the 21st ... the greens declared their support on the 1st ... what do you think they were doing for 10 days if they had already made up their mind :D :D Greens didn't declare support for the ALP. They guaranteed supply and not to support a vote of no confidence in labor, unless it was brought on by the Greens. This was done for the economy and for the voters. Not because Labor were a great option.

blah blah ... they wouldn't need to wait 10 days to agree to that unless they were trying to win certain conditons :D :D :D

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:49pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:18pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:10pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Really?  As has been shown the greens do not have problems aligning themselves with coalition policies.  No conviction! Sometimes Greens and the coalition positions are similar. As we know, under 10% of the voting this term, Greens voted with the coalition. Labor on the other hand, what was their percentage of voting with the coalition ... 85%? that's only because once the greens know the libs legislation will pass and they can then play the ideology card. If labor didn't support the libs on many of those issues the greens would have jumped on it.

Trying to out cods cods?

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 10:53pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:42pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:36pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:20pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:18pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:10pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Really?  As has been shown the greens do not have problems aligning themselves with coalition policies.  No conviction! Sometimes Greens and the coalition positions are similar. As we know, under 10% of the voting this term, Greens voted with the coalition. Labor on the other hand, what was their percentage of voting with the coalition ... 85%? Demonstrate the 10%. Greens voting with the coalition in the Senate this term ~ 6% http://theaimn.com/why-the-greens-did-what-they-did/ Party/Independent      Voted with the Government ALP      38% GREENS      6% DAY      75% LEYONHJELM      65% WANG* (PUP)      55% MUIR      52% MADIGAN      42% LAZARUS (IND)      13% LAZARUS (PUP)      32% XENOPHON      29% LAMBIE (IND)      18% LAMBIE (PUP)      53% 6% doesn't equate to the claim of Greens being aligned to the government. I don't want an email from DiNatalie - I want hard evidence. Show all the legislation that was voted on in the Senate, the Liberal vote, and the Greens vote. Do your own research. I am not here to spoon feed you. Labor voted over 600% more times with the coalition than the Greens did this term. Perhaps part of the reason undecided are undecided. Labor and Liberals are practically identical.

why am I going to do research on your secondary evidence nonsense? You made the claim based off an email from DiNatalie - not exactly a trustworthy source from an untrustworthy character.

And the reason voters may be undecided is because people like me exist who won't vote Labor or Liberal, but are also NOT regressive leftists who would support a party that promotes its support for radical religion, radical nationalism, terrorism, human shields, rape victims being flogged, etc. etc. etc. etc. Disgusting Greens.

John Smith wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 11:00pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:59pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:52pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:20pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:11pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: The Greens were not going to support the coalition. thats not what they were saying at the time  :D :D... don't try to change history. You should own it instead of being ashamed of the greens actions Really. Perhaps you should quote your source. the election was on the 21st ... the greens declared their support on the 1st ... what do you think they were doing for 10 days if they had already made up their mind :D :D Greens didn't declare support for the ALP. They guaranteed supply and not to support a vote of no confidence in labor, unless it was brought on by the Greens. This was done for the economy and for the voters. Not because Labor were a great option. blah blah ... they wouldn't need to wait 10 days to agree to that unless they were trying to win certain conditons :D :D :D

Whatever you want to claim matey ... if it helps you justify your alp support.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 11:09pm:

____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:53pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:42pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:36pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:20pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:18pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:10pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:05pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 10:00pm: ____ wrote on Apr 18th, 2016 at 9:55pm: Greens didn't push Gillard. it was one of the conditions the greens imposed upon labor in exchange for the greens support. you're an idiot if you are now going to pretend it wasn't greens policy The Greens were not going to support the coalition. It was Labor's desperation that made Labor break another of their election promises. Labor backflipped because they are a party devoid of ethical values. Really?  As has been shown the greens do not have problems aligning themselves with coalition policies.  No conviction! Sometimes Greens and the coalition positions are similar. As we know, under 10% of the voting this term, Greens voted with the coalition. Labor on the other hand, what was their percentage of voting with the coalition ... 85%? Demonstrate the 10%. Greens voting with the coalition in the Senate this term ~ 6% http://theaimn.com/why-the-greens-did-what-they-did/ Party/Independent      Voted with the Government ALP      38% GREENS      6% DAY      75% LEYONHJELM      65% WANG* (PUP)      55% MUIR      52% MADIGAN      42% LAZARUS (IND)      13% LAZARUS (PUP)      32% XENOPHON      29% LAMBIE (IND)      18% LAMBIE (PUP)      53% 6% doesn't equate to the claim of Greens being aligned to the government. I don't want an email from DiNatalie - I want hard evidence. Show all the legislation that was voted on in the Senate, the Liberal vote, and the Greens vote. Do your own research. I am not here to spoon feed you. Labor voted over 600% more times with the coalition than the Greens did this term. Perhaps part of the reason undecided are undecided. Labor and Liberals are practically identical. why am I going to do research on your secondary evidence nonsense? You made the claim based off an email from DiNatalie - not exactly a trustworthy source from an untrustworthy character. And the reason voters may be undecided is because people like me exist who won't vote Labor or Liberal, but are also NOT regressive leftists who would support a party that promotes its support for radical religion, radical nationalism, terrorism, human shields, rape victims being flogged, etc. etc. etc. etc. Disgusting Greens.

An independent site posted it. Take it up with them.

Also, if you are going to repeat the same mumbo jumbo ... is it because you have nothing and so have to make things up. Is Labor that hard to defend. Rhetorical ... we both know defending labor is a waste of energy.

____ wrote on Apr 18^th, 2016 at 11:15pm:

An independent site posted it. Take it up with them. Also, if you are going to repeat the same mumbo jumbo ... is it because you have nothing and so have to make things up. Is Labor that hard to defend. Rhetorical ... we both know defending labor is a waste of energy.

Do you have ANY understanding of how to decipher the information you get? The site posted an email from DiNatalie. DiNatalie could very easily have made up the number by pulling his finger out of his ass.

If you are going to spread information around use primary sources. Otherwise don't try and pass around very questionable data.

And I agree, Labor are a waste of time - that's why I don't vote for them.  They are almost as big a waste of time as the regressive left Greens who wish to destroy our democracy.