As an Aussie, I’m grateful for everyday that the LNP is not back in government. Labor might be inadequate and sometimes infuriating, but they’re not outright evil bastards like the opposition.
Luckily, just like with Obama II, people can’t see further than one term and don’t realise we should have been using the first term and all of this term to get rid of the 2 party system.
Translation: Australia isn’t fucked right now, just delayed in getting fucked.
With outright majorities in the upper house as common as hens teeth, its pretty inarguable that we have something more complex than a two party system.
We do, but the lower house is not elected proportionally (as the Senate is), resulting in the two major parties having a disproportionate share of the vote.
true, but we’re talking about someone here who’s clearly applying US politics to a country that is not the US. Don’t validate them.
I dont know a way around that though without compromising a key function of the member for the house of reps. They’re elected by a simple majority but to represent and be responsive to that whole division. Its arguable if they ever really do represent the whole electorate once elected though.
Say if you were to introduce multi-member divisions to alleviate proportionality, that would undermine and potentially politicise every demand or request of individuals in that division.
For example,
In a two member division, a new liquor store proposal could be ignored by the conservative member who got a simple majority, but be taken up as a cause celebre for the junior member, provoking a political fight instead of where the needs and wants of a community are supposed to be forefront. In a single member electorate this can’t happen, because if the single member ignores some of their electorate they can’t shift the blame to anyone else, their inaction is an example of them not representing their electorate, thereby ‘hopefully’ hurting them come election time.
We don’t HAVE a two party system
Almost reads like a satirical headline lol
I’m laughing even harder because it’s NOT a Betoota article!
The fact that there is an actual “He is not a monster” headline. Quoting his own wife. Makes me wonder what’s in the report that he thinks a defamation proceeding would succeed.
For something to be defamatory it has to:
a) Reduce the public’s perception of him (which is laughable, the public’s perception of him is “monster”)
b) Be untrue (doubt it)I think he meant derogatory.
And even that’s of questionable accuracy, as it’s about being shown an inappropriate amount of respect.I think he meant derogatory.
He definitely meant defamatory, since he apparently tacitly threatened suing the Liberal Party. But whether it’s true or essentially a SLAPP threat is unclear.
It’s certainly possible that he believes the report contained factually incorrect non-opinion claims about him. I can’t see that being likely though. I guess the fact that they didn’t give him the opportunity for a right-of-reply in the report can’t have helped. That would have given him an opportunity to address any potential issues before it got to this point. It really seems like a monumental fuck-up on their part not to have contacted him for right-of-reply.
If he tries to block it, it will leak, and that’ll make them look even worse again
That bad, huh?
A healthy and broadly educated population, which experiences safety and security, is incompatible with, and toxic to, conservative and authoritarian ideologies.
