2022 Election
So Andy how do you vote (in most electorates) so your vote does not end up with one of the major parties? To come on here and tell us that you prefer some minor party without a hope of gaining a seat in the reps contributes very little unless you tell us where your preferences are going.
sypkan demonstrates, yet again, his primary school comprehension level. Mate the only decision on your reps vote that actually matters in the vast majority of electorates is what order you put the two major parties.
"Without hope of gaining a seat"
I'll refer you back to that cartoon up the page for some very important reasons to vote for minors, not least of which is receiving electoral funding for getting a pretty modest amount of votes.
I'm with Syppo.
I'll work through the candidates until Labor is second last and Libs and Nationals are last.
And as much as is practicable, all parties whose preferences go the two majors are as low as possible.
Again, anyone who bangs on about "inclusion" and "diversity" and refuses to (thoughtfully and carefully) vote for parties other than the two majors is kidding themselves.
Fair enough. My point is that you have to make that decision.
I think a large part of making that decision is understanding that voting for a minor party is not "wasting your vote".
In fact I'd say it's an extremely important thing to consider.
Andy my comments were aimed initially at Blowin who has been ranting against both major parties. My point is valid. In the end most of us have a binary decision to make. If there is a minor party that appeals to you vote for them but don't pretend, as some here do, that it absolves you from determining where your vote will actually end up.
AndyM wrote:I think a large part of making that decision is understanding that voting for a minor party is not "wasting your vote".
In fact I'd say it's an extremely important thing to consider.
Great work Andy
Thank god Australia has a duopoly, because if it didn't the Greens would be the third party with a real chance of forming government.
And if you don't fear the Greens running the country cause you're some woke lefty, we'll then imagine if One nation somehow were in the mix to run the country, if the system changed you really dont know how votes could fall.
Be careful for what you wish for.
The best way to dismantle the two party duopoly is for voters to start handing out black eyes in the major's heartlands.
There's not much point voting Greens in Waringah, but the Zali Steggal win has the LNP seriously worried about the "Voices of..." movement. There is a big point voting Green in inner city Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane. It scares the fuck out of Labor and makes them a lot more concerned about important issues like equality and climate change.
Attack the heartlands from both sides and make it a hung parliament in the lower house and senate with a change of govt. Wouldn't that be sweet. We'd get serious action on climate change, a strong federal ICAC, and protection for our institutions that enhance our democracy. You know, all the stuff Hanson has shown absolutely zero interest in bringing in.
indo-dreaming wrote:Thank god Australia has a duopoly, because if it didn't the Greens would be the third party with a real chance of forming government.
And if you don't fear the Greens running the country cause you're some woke lefty, we'll then imagine if One nation somehow were in the mix to run the country, if the system changed you really dont know how votes could fall.
Be careful for what you wish for.
But a duopoly is one party too many, right?
"Attack the heartlands from both sides and make it a hung parliament
in the lower house ... with a change of govt. Wouldn't that be sweet. "
That'd be the best real world outcome.
AndyM wrote:I'm with Syppo.
I'll work through the candidates until Labor is second last and Libs and Nationals are last.
And as much as is practicable, all parties whose preferences go the two majors are as low as possible..
Fuck yes. Me too. Get 500 of us together and we can form a party. There hasn't been this much angst since "Smells Like Teen Spirit". And what absolute pandemonium and fun that time was.
Imagery related to zeitgeist:
indo-dreaming wrote:Thank god Australia has a duopoly, because if it didn't the Greens would be the third party with a real chance of forming government.
And if you don't fear the Greens running the country cause you're some woke lefty, we'll then imagine if One nation somehow were in the mix to run the country, if the system changed you really dont know how votes could fall.
Be careful for what you wish for.
I don't fear that at all
not least because the greens have seriously run out of steam
I reckon they are more on the nose with people that once voted for them than labor
...they're cooked as any serious political force... peaked about 10 years ago, and has been a whimsical and weak woke withering away ever since then...
hanson on the other hand...
AndyM wrote:indo-dreaming wrote:Thank god Australia has a duopoly, because if it didn't the Greens would be the third party with a real chance of forming government.
And if you don't fear the Greens running the country cause you're some woke lefty, we'll then imagine if One nation somehow were in the mix to run the country, if the system changed you really dont know how votes could fall.
Be careful for what you wish for.
But a duopoly is one party too many, right?
Definitely not one party states are almost always communist/socialist especially these days.
Two is fine im happy with the system we have, even when Labor get voted back in, it's really not the end of the world, but there is no other party even remotely capable of running the country not left or right.
What policy is so on the nose with the Greens????
Always hear people bagging them, but can never give reason re policy. Too much propaganda from Murdoch maybe...
My major gripe is they seem to target Labor electorates, instead of working with Labor to get rid of LNP. Crikey being worried about the Greens when the fucken loons of the National Party form govt... Corrupt gerrymandering Hicks.... And only approx 5,% of vote...
Yep system needs reform.... It's not presently democracy, it's a sham...
greens have just become a joke basically
and it really has nothing at all to do with murdoch... sigh... you guys have really gotta get over that... it may make those within the tent feel better about the woeful position of the left... but for anyone who's not party faithful... it just reeks of excuses and patheticness...
the greens first sold out their environmentalism for some sort of open borders utopia
then they fucked up the best chance oz ever had for real climate action whilst drunk on power
then they fully embraced wokism and gave up on any reality at all re. refugees
then sadly - and I really hate to drag the term out again - they went all neoliberal stooge with richard de natalie... who i actually had high hopes for... but sadly, they just seemed to turn to shit...
then they had their little commies versus neoliberal stooges stoush... and ousted the old chook commie... (lee rhihanon maybe?) ...which I didn't really have strong feelings for either way... the stoush... but it just all appeared a bit unbecoming for the greens, and the nail in the coffin for any integrity they were desperately holding onto...
(I think you'll find that's not a very murdoch list... so please spare me the wild accusations and pathetic excuses...please!!! ...just stop it!!! ....all of you!!!!!!)
.
sypkan wrote:greens have just become a joke basically
and it really has nothing at all to do with murdoch... sigh... you guys have really gotta get over that... it may make those within the tent feel better about the woeful position of the left... but for anyone who's not party faithful... it just reeks of excuses and patheticness...
the greens first sold out their environmentalism for some sort of open borders utopia
then they fucked up the best chance oz ever had for real climate action whilst drunk on power
then they fully embraced wokism and gave up on any reality at all re. refugees
then sadly - and I really hate to drag the term out again - they went all neoliberal stooge with richard de natalie... who i actually had high hopes for... but sadly, they just seemed to turn to shit...
then they had their little commies versus neoliberal stooges stoush... and ousted the old chook commie... (lee rhihanon maybe?) ...which I didn't really have strong feelings for either way... the stoush... but it just all appeared a bit unbecoming for the greens, and the nail in the coffin for any integrity they were desperately holding onto...
(I think you'll find that's not a very murdoch list... so please spare me the wild accusations and pathetic excuses...please!!! ...just stop it!!! ....all of you!!!!!!)
Ok fair points .. thanks for reasons.
Not a super Greens supporter but they seem to cop it from all sides. I know they had a lot of internal struggles with environmental greens versus 'socialist' greens. Tree hugging Tories branded about.
Still they have some good policy ideas in my opinion, especially a ICAC with teeth.
Disagree re Murdoch however, his papers along with Costello's 9 set the narrative....
andy-mac wrote:Disagree re Murdoch however, his papers along with Costello's 9 set the narrative....
And that's why scumo and co keep suing social media users, and trying to silence anonymous commentators. They can't have the general public setting the narrative, complaining about corruption, vigorously critiquing shit policies, and blowing the whistle on dodgy deals.
But hey, the free speech warriors on the right don't really care about that stuff, just as long as they can post covid misinformation and deeply racist comments.
Independents have carried more integrity of late, throw a spanner in the works, take a risk. Reform in parliament is needed, the pressure must be applied to create change within the current system. From the last four years lessons should have be learn't. And the four years before that well it speaks for it's self. Come on Australia I dare you. Shake it up,
andy-mac wrote:Disagree re Murdoch however, his papers along with Costello's 9 set the narrative....
for who?
I barely know anyone that reads or listens to this shit anymore... and those I know that do, consune it with 'oh bloody murdoch' eye...
yes there are the old boys and the conservative faithful, but these people will more than likely vote conservative anyway, hence murdoch's mythical 'influence' has no influence...
I'm not saying there is no influence at all, but it is the same conservative versus progressive influence game any country's politicians must work within...
the mythical murdoch influence is a self affirming prophecy pushed by those on the left because they are basically losing at everything, and have been for a decade or two... it's 9/10ths therapeutic - 1/10th influence...
and besides, as I said, every semi functioning democracy has media filling this role, the challenge is having good policy and politicians to win this fight, ...same as it ever was...
when the left reflexively resort to murdoch for every argument that isn't going their way, it just gives the impression of weakness and incompetence
good therapy for the party faithful... but it ain't winning any arguments...
or winning over any potential swinging voters...
it has the opposite effect...
This just dropped an hour ago on the Aspen Daily news…..
https://www.aspendailynews.com/news/aussie-pm-scott-morrison-rumored-in-...
sypkan wrote:andy-mac wrote:Disagree re Murdoch however, his papers along with Costello's 9 set the narrative....
for who?
I barely know anyone that reads or listens to this shit anymore... and those I know that do, consune it with 'oh bloody murdoch' eye...
yes there are the old boys and the conservative faithful, but these people will more than likely vote conservative anyway, hence murdoch's mythical 'influence' has no influence...
I'm not saying there is no influence at all, but it is the same conservative versus progressive influence game any country's politicians must work within...
the mythical murdoch influence is a self affirming prophecy pushed by those on the left because they are basically losing at everything, and have been for a decade or two... it's 9/10ths therapeutic - 1/10th influence...
and besides, as I said, every semi functioning democracy has media filling this role, the challenge is having good policy and politicians to win this fight, ...same as it ever was...
when the left reflexively resort to murdoch for every argument that isn't going their way, it just gives the impression of weakness and incompetence
good therapy for the party faithful... but it ain't winning any arguments...
or winning over any potential swinging voters...
it has the opposite effect...
It's not about who reads the actual papers, but the agenda setting that occurs. This is indisputable, outlined below.
https://m.
Understand the sentiment re independents / minor party's, when you get the likes of Senator Rex Patrick hard to argue against
However since Federation Australia has always been more or less a two party political system and reality on the ground is that wont change in our life time.
Politics is about power and exercising it do you think Australia would have progressed from the dark ages under Whitlam if he was bound by minor parties.... Buckley's.
2016 election over 20% voted for minor parties what did we get... a Coalition government.
I hear all the criticism about Labor and unions by people generally using terms / labels raised then poisoned by the extreme well funded right wing, the labels being trotted out by those who know better, useful idiots anyone?
The result of all this is we get the Coalition you know the mob who run illegal Robo debt when they knew it was illegal.
Same mob who backed financial institutions to shake you down through fees robbing superfunds and the like.
Remember the removal of penalty rates from the lowest paid feel like cheering that one on anyone oh but Labor would be worst eh.
Carry on cheering for the Coalition if that's what you want.
Good comment Focus.
Would argue that the Coalition gets away with the examples you mentioned such as Robo Debt as well as many more due to compliant media.
Would Angus Taylor, Stewart Robert, Matt Canavan, Barnaby Joyce and the list goes on still have a job if the media went after them to same extent as Sam Dastyari???
Dastyari got what he deserved, but good example of the double standards that are accepted...
sypkan wrote:andy-mac wrote:Disagree re Murdoch however, his papers along with Costello's 9 set the narrative....
for who?
I barely know anyone that reads or listens to this shit anymore... and those I know that do, consune it with 'oh bloody murdoch' eye...
yes there are the old boys and the conservative faithful, but these people will more than likely vote conservative anyway, hence murdoch's mythical 'influence' has no influence...
I'm not saying there is no influence at all, but it is the same conservative versus progressive influence game any country's politicians must work within...
the mythical murdoch influence is a self affirming prophecy pushed by those on the left because they are basically losing at everything, and have been for a decade or two... it's 9/10ths therapeutic - 1/10th influence...
and besides, as I said, every semi functioning democracy has media filling this role, the challenge is having good policy and politicians to win this fight, ...same as it ever was...
when the left reflexively resort to murdoch for every argument that isn't going their way, it just gives the impression of weakness and incompetence
good therapy for the party faithful... but it ain't winning any arguments...
or winning over any potential swinging voters...
it has the opposite effect...
Yep completely nailed it, reality is it's not 1981 its not 1991 or even 2001, its 2021.
Most people now don't rely on getting their news from news papers or TV, they get their news through all kinds of sources and these sources have never been more diverse than right now.
As we know a large number of people get their news online these days and if you want to get your news online via Murdoch press most sites you need to pay, and like Sypkan pointed out its the older people more likely to vote conservative that are going to subscribe to paywalled murdoch press or watch TV news anyway..
Im quite happy to consume Murdoch news, id much rather read the Australians take on something than the ABC's, but the reality is i consume ABC news because its free and also free of adverts etc
Anyway here is where Australians get their news online, again more diverse than ever and pretty evenly split between narratives.
indo-dreaming wrote:sypkan wrote:andy-mac wrote:Disagree re Murdoch however, his papers along with Costello's 9 set the narrative....
for who?
I barely know anyone that reads or listens to this shit anymore... and those I know that do, consune it with 'oh bloody murdoch' eye...
yes there are the old boys and the conservative faithful, but these people will more than likely vote conservative anyway, hence murdoch's mythical 'influence' has no influence...
I'm not saying there is no influence at all, but it is the same conservative versus progressive influence game any country's politicians must work within...
the mythical murdoch influence is a self affirming prophecy pushed by those on the left because they are basically losing at everything, and have been for a decade or two... it's 9/10ths therapeutic - 1/10th influence...
and besides, as I said, every semi functioning democracy has media filling this role, the challenge is having good policy and politicians to win this fight, ...same as it ever was...
when the left reflexively resort to murdoch for every argument that isn't going their way, it just gives the impression of weakness and incompetence
good therapy for the party faithful... but it ain't winning any arguments...
or winning over any potential swinging voters...
it has the opposite effect...
Yep completely nailed it, reality is it's not 1981 its not 1991 or even 2001, its 2021.
Most people now don't rely on getting their news from news papers or TV, they get their news through all kinds of sources and these sources have never been more diverse than right now.
As we know a large number of people get their news online these days and if you want to get your news online via Murdoch press most sites you need to pay, and like Sypkan pointed out its the older people more likely to vote conservative that are going to subscribe to paywalled murdoch press or watch TV news anyway..
Im quite happy to consume Murdoch news, id much rather read the Australians take on something than the ABC's, but the reality is i consume ABC news because its free and also free of adverts etc
Anyway here is where Australians get their news online, again more diverse than ever and pretty evenly split between narratives.
The list you provided just strengthens my argument I believe.
The majority of sites are either Newscorp or 9 Entertainment. The pod cast I added makes clear how they set narrative that other news sites pick up.
Anyway agree to disagree.... ☮️
When govts are formed on swings of +/- 5% or less every Murdoch rag lie counts.
indo-dreaming wrote:sypkan wrote:andy-mac wrote:Disagree re Murdoch however, his papers along with Costello's 9 set the narrative....
for who?
I barely know anyone that reads or listens to this shit anymore... and those I know that do, consune it with 'oh bloody murdoch' eye...
yes there are the old boys and the conservative faithful, but these people will more than likely vote conservative anyway, hence murdoch's mythical 'influence' has no influence...
I'm not saying there is no influence at all, but it is the same conservative versus progressive influence game any country's politicians must work within...
the mythical murdoch influence is a self affirming prophecy pushed by those on the left because they are basically losing at everything, and have been for a decade or two... it's 9/10ths therapeutic - 1/10th influence...
and besides, as I said, every semi functioning democracy has media filling this role, the challenge is having good policy and politicians to win this fight, ...same as it ever was...
when the left reflexively resort to murdoch for every argument that isn't going their way, it just gives the impression of weakness and incompetence
good therapy for the party faithful... but it ain't winning any arguments...
or winning over any potential swinging voters...
it has the opposite effect...
Yep completely nailed it, reality is it's not 1981 its not 1991 or even 2001, its 2021.
Most people now don't rely on getting their news from news papers or TV, they get their news through all kinds of sources and these sources have never been more diverse than right now.
As we know a large number of people get their news online these days and if you want to get your news online via Murdoch press most sites you need to pay, and like Sypkan pointed out its the older people more likely to vote conservative that are going to subscribe to paywalled murdoch press or watch TV news anyway..
Im quite happy to consume Murdoch news, id much rather read the Australians take on something than the ABC's, but the reality is i consume ABC news because its free and also free of adverts etc
Anyway here is where Australians get their news online, again more diverse than ever and pretty evenly split between narratives.
well, Im pretty surprised abc.com tops that list... really surprised... by a significant 20% margin...
does that not give them significant power to shape the narrative?
andy-mac wrote:indo-dreaming wrote:sypkan wrote:andy-mac wrote:Disagree re Murdoch however, his papers along with Costello's 9 set the narrative....
for who?
I barely know anyone that reads or listens to this shit anymore... and those I know that do, consune it with 'oh bloody murdoch' eye...
yes there are the old boys and the conservative faithful, but these people will more than likely vote conservative anyway, hence murdoch's mythical 'influence' has no influence...
I'm not saying there is no influence at all, but it is the same conservative versus progressive influence game any country's politicians must work within...
the mythical murdoch influence is a self affirming prophecy pushed by those on the left because they are basically losing at everything, and have been for a decade or two... it's 9/10ths therapeutic - 1/10th influence...
and besides, as I said, every semi functioning democracy has media filling this role, the challenge is having good policy and politicians to win this fight, ...same as it ever was...
when the left reflexively resort to murdoch for every argument that isn't going their way, it just gives the impression of weakness and incompetence
good therapy for the party faithful... but it ain't winning any arguments...
or winning over any potential swinging voters...
it has the opposite effect...
Yep completely nailed it, reality is it's not 1981 its not 1991 or even 2001, its 2021.
Most people now don't rely on getting their news from news papers or TV, they get their news through all kinds of sources and these sources have never been more diverse than right now.
As we know a large number of people get their news online these days and if you want to get your news online via Murdoch press most sites you need to pay, and like Sypkan pointed out its the older people more likely to vote conservative that are going to subscribe to paywalled murdoch press or watch TV news anyway..
Im quite happy to consume Murdoch news, id much rather read the Australians take on something than the ABC's, but the reality is i consume ABC news because its free and also free of adverts etc
Anyway here is where Australians get their news online, again more diverse than ever and pretty evenly split between narratives.
The list you provided just strengthens my argument I believe.
The majority of sites are either Newscorp or 9 Entertainment. The pod cast I added makes clear how they set narrative that other news sites pick up.
Anyway agree to disagree.... ☮️
If thats what you're seeing then yep i think we definitely need to just agree to disagree.
sypkan wrote:well, Im pretty surprised abc.com tops that list... really surprised... by a significant 20% margin...
does that not give them significant power to shape the narrative?
Exactly what i was thinking, especially when you consider three different factors
-Online space
-Radio
-TV
Much of it all covers a large demographic too like Triple J for instance is very political and targets a younger audience.
..and didn't this work out well!
...and this turned out even worse.
Then there are all attack stories. If your family tragedy ever ends up on the front page of the Daily Scumraker, as mine did, you will find out how low Murdoch's pack of mongrels really are. There is political bullshit and influence and then there is parasitically feeding on those in deep grief, distorting the facts to suit their views and the publication of irrelevant personal details.
if you attribute tony abbott winning that election to a front page preaching to the converted, rather than the internal shitfuckery of the labor party at the time and a pretty pissed bunch of k rudd lovers...
well, there's no hope for you...
indo-dreaming wrote:andy-mac wrote:indo-dreaming wrote:sypkan wrote:andy-mac wrote:Disagree re Murdoch however, his papers along with Costello's 9 set the narrative....
for who?
I barely know anyone that reads or listens to this shit anymore... and those I know that do, consune it with 'oh bloody murdoch' eye...
yes there are the old boys and the conservative faithful, but these people will more than likely vote conservative anyway, hence murdoch's mythical 'influence' has no influence...
I'm not saying there is no influence at all, but it is the same conservative versus progressive influence game any country's politicians must work within...
the mythical murdoch influence is a self affirming prophecy pushed by those on the left because they are basically losing at everything, and have been for a decade or two... it's 9/10ths therapeutic - 1/10th influence...
and besides, as I said, every semi functioning democracy has media filling this role, the challenge is having good policy and politicians to win this fight, ...same as it ever was...
when the left reflexively resort to murdoch for every argument that isn't going their way, it just gives the impression of weakness and incompetence
good therapy for the party faithful... but it ain't winning any arguments...
or winning over any potential swinging voters...
it has the opposite effect...
Yep completely nailed it, reality is it's not 1981 its not 1991 or even 2001, its 2021.
Most people now don't rely on getting their news from news papers or TV, they get their news through all kinds of sources and these sources have never been more diverse than right now.
As we know a large number of people get their news online these days and if you want to get your news online via Murdoch press most sites you need to pay, and like Sypkan pointed out its the older people more likely to vote conservative that are going to subscribe to paywalled murdoch press or watch TV news anyway..
Im quite happy to consume Murdoch news, id much rather read the Australians take on something than the ABC's, but the reality is i consume ABC news because its free and also free of adverts etc
Anyway here is where Australians get their news online, again more diverse than ever and pretty evenly split between narratives.
The list you provided just strengthens my argument I believe.
The majority of sites are either Newscorp or 9 Entertainment. The pod cast I added makes clear how they set narrative that other news sites pick up.
Anyway agree to disagree.... ☮️If thats what you're seeing then yep i think we definitely need to just agree to disagree.
Leave out international sites and ABC vast majority Newscorp and 9. And if you take the into account that ABC tends to report what is in print media, then case is strengthened.
Did you watch podcast which breaks down how this happens... ???
Just as thick as ever then Syppy? The point is the complete bias. The link is below, see if you can find anything comparable supporting a Labor politician.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Australian+Daily+Telegraph+front+pages+of+poli...
interesting episode at the drum the other week, pretty much dedicated to the labor's new talking point... 'the liar from the shire'
complete with bernard keane and his new book about scott morrison, with lies, lies, lies, lies lies, etc. written all over the cover...
I forget thd rest of the guests, but it was the usual stacked drum panel, with one old chook ex liberal there - one assumes to give some balance...
anyway, from my perspective painting morrison as a liar should have been a walk in the park... a job that does itself... but that just didn't happen...
I mean morrison was portrayed as a liar, with a heap of examples... but one of their biggest gotcha moments - where morrison was supposedly blatantly lying about wanting to knock off turnball as leader - was just totally dismantled and disproven by the old chook liberal who was actually in the party room at the time
now, Im not meaning to play some tit for tat game here, but my point is, as was the crucial point made by old chook liberal... that media make all sorts of assumptions to fill in the gaps of what they cannot possibly know. and that gap flling is loaded with bias and agenda... that's political reporting... but both sides do it - as hard and and as feasable as they believe it can be possibly pushed...
as I said, for me proving morrison is 'the liar from the shire' should be easy... but that episode failed miserably... and I gotta say journalists have failed miserably generally to do so... they especially did that week (a few weeks ago) when labor and certain journalists were going hard to morrison's face with this theme. but when they confronted him, they seemed ill equipped with backup and good examples and just fell to pieces
now I know norrison is a shyster and a trickster with language, but I must say the journalists came off looking rather pathetic and inadequate that week, when they seemed to have nowhere to go after shamelessly confronting morrison with this term 'the liar from the shire'...
Im not saying that is not true, Im not really saying anything, other than both sides of politics play this perception shaping game hard...
and from what I can see, one side is either woefully inadequate at it... too chicken to play it hard... or too influenced by their own perception shaping to actually see what's going on...
blindboy wrote:Just as thick as ever then Syppy? The point is the complete bias. The link is below, see if you can find anything comparable supporting a Labor politician.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Australian+Daily+Telegraph+front+pages+of+poli...
first post of the morning... and straight into the insults...
you, are fucking unbelievable!!!
fuckwit
an unbelievable unbelievably biased fuckwit...
your opinion on anything is essentially worthless
You know nothing of the real dynamic. Murdoch couldn't give a rats about who is in power as long as they follow the most extreme version of neoliberalism. His agenda is to maximise profit and power for his organisation by minimising government regulation in any relevant area (just about everything). He has used that power over many decades to undermine efforts to address climate change and most other environmental issues, to reduce welfare benefits, to drive down wages, to destroy unions and remove the basic rights of workers.
Aaah poor syppy! Why not try getting your facts right making sense and writing coherently?
sypkan wrote:blindboy wrote:Just as thick as ever then Syppy? The point is the complete bias. The link is below, see if you can find anything comparable supporting a Labor politician.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Australian+Daily+Telegraph+front+pages+of+poli...first post of the morning... and straight into the insults...
you, are fucking unbelievable!!!
fuckwit
an unbelievable unbelievably biased fuckwit...
your opinion on anything is essentially worthless
I wouldn’t take it to heart mate. He’s literally wrong about everything so it’s actually a big vote of confidence in someone if Blindboy thinks he’s smarter than them.
blindboy wrote:You know nothing of the real dynamic. Murdoch couldn't give a rats about who is in power as long as they follow the most extreme version of neoliberalism. His agenda is to maximise profit and power for his organisation by minimising government regulation in any relevant area (just about everything). He has used that power over many decades to undermine efforts to address climate change and most other environmental issues, to reduce welfare benefits, to drive down wages, to destroy unions and remove the basic rights of workers.
Aaah poor syppy! Why not try getting your facts right making sense and writing coherently?
that's all pretty obvious actually champ
as I have been saying, murdoch is just fufilling his role for his brand of politics...
you on the other hand... are just a twisted little man that deludes himself as some grand arbitrar of all truth...
Blowin wrote:sypkan wrote:blindboy wrote:Just as thick as ever then Syppy? The point is the complete bias. The link is below, see if you can find anything comparable supporting a Labor politician.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Australian+Daily+Telegraph+front+pages+of+poli...first post of the morning... and straight into the insults...
you, are fucking unbelievable!!!
fuckwit
an unbelievable unbelievably biased fuckwit...
your opinion on anything is essentially worthless
I wouldn’t take it to heart mate. He’s literally wrong about everything so it’s actually a big vote of confidence in someone if Blindboy thinks he’s smarter than them.
yep, the grand arbitrar that is inherently wrong...
the grand weathervane of all things wrong
can't we use him for gambling or stock market or something?
such a wasted talent
Blowin wrote:sypkan wrote:blindboy wrote:Just as thick as ever then Syppy? The point is the complete bias. The link is below, see if you can find anything comparable supporting a Labor politician.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Australian+Daily+Telegraph+front+pages+of+poli...first post of the morning... and straight into the insults...
you, are fucking unbelievable!!!
fuckwit
an unbelievable unbelievably biased fuckwit...
your opinion on anything is essentially worthless
I wouldn’t take it to heart mate. He’s literally wrong about everything so it’s actually a big vote of confidence in someone if Blindboy thinks he’s smarter than them.
yep, the grand arbitrar that is inherently wrong...
the grand weathervane of all things wrong
can't we use him for gambling or stock market or something?
such a wasted talent
Blowin wrote:sypkan wrote:blindboy wrote:Just as thick as ever then Syppy? The point is the complete bias. The link is below, see if you can find anything comparable supporting a Labor politician.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Australian+Daily+Telegraph+front+pages+of+poli...first post of the morning... and straight into the insults...
you, are fucking unbelievable!!!
fuckwit
an unbelievable unbelievably biased fuckwit...
your opinion on anything is essentially worthless
I wouldn’t take it to heart mate. He’s literally wrong about everything so it’s actually a big vote of confidence in someone if Blindboy thinks he’s smarter than them.
yep, the grand arbitrar that is inherently wrong...
the grand weathervane of all things wrong
can't we use him for gambling or stock market or something?
such a wasted talent
Blowin wrote:sypkan wrote:blindboy wrote:Just as thick as ever then Syppy? The point is the complete bias. The link is below, see if you can find anything comparable supporting a Labor politician.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Australian+Daily+Telegraph+front+pages+of+poli...first post of the morning... and straight into the insults...
you, are fucking unbelievable!!!
fuckwit
an unbelievable unbelievably biased fuckwit...
your opinion on anything is essentially worthless
I wouldn’t take it to heart mate. He’s literally wrong about everything so it’s actually a big vote of confidence in someone if Blindboy thinks he’s smarter than them.
yep, the grand arbitrar that is inherently wrong...
the grand weathervane of all things wrong
can't we use him for gambling or stock market or something?
such a wasted talent
Five in a row syppy! Is that a record? I know you don't have much to say but posting the same thing four times is a bit sad.
nah, what is sad... is that is all you have got...
computer malfunction
go hard deluded one
'winning'
Sypkan reporting from his room full of mirrors
.