Australian Atheists Forum

Not directly linked to voldemort exactly, but a thread for coalition news as we enter our modest electoral cycle.

I have very grave fears that Albo and his mob of 'less worses' are basically fucked. They've done nothing shockingly bad, a bit like Biden, but who could possibly get excited about another 3 years of the ALP? Except as a far more palatable option to Dutton. Personally, i find them to be nothing more than a bunch of wealthy neoliberals, hell bent on fossil fuel extraction and system maintenance but without the dog whistling to bigots and...well, fucking Nazis! So good on them for that? Cool.

In a weird kind of way, they are the conservatives now, all left adjacent parties are starting to assume that position. The former conservatives are the ones pushing system change, and in a system that is really only benefiting the already wealthy, change is a good sell - even if that change is fascism, apparently. What a pickle we're all in.

My money would be on a Dutton win in 5 months time.

I think if Albo doesn't get the interest rates down, he's cooked. Cost of living is what got Trump in. It will get Dutton in also.

Greens and Teals.

DanDare2050 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 10, 2024 10:02 pm Greens and Teals.

Based on the idea that progressive labor voters, party members and traditional supporters are completely pissed off and deeply disappointed with ALP 2024 and a significant minority will preference greens and teals before labor as a protest? I hope that happens, and greens and teals do well in four months time. However, the two party swingers will go for change and combined with the drop off for ALP first preferences it will be a majority for Dutton (if he wins his seat).

A good result, which is not out of the question, is a minority coalition government, which might quickly precipitate another election because it proves unworkable due to the green/teal block. Albo fucks off and someone actually progressive takes control of the ALP!

LOL. I'm literally in just fantasizing now. Sorry. But really, we desperately need a Whitlam!

pipbarber wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 9:20 pmAlbo fucks off and someone actually progressive takes control of the ALP!

I have a lot of friends in the ALP. None of them want progressive anything. It makes me sad. They are just a different kind of conservative to the LNP mob.

DanDare2050 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 11:30 pm

pipbarber wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 9:20 pmAlbo fucks off and someone actually progressive takes control of the ALP!

I have a lot of friends in the ALP. None of them want progressive anything. It makes me sad. They are just a different kind of conservative to the LNP mob.

My experience is completely different. All the (Springwood) branchies that I am involved with are exactly like me.

wolty wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 7:43 amMy experience is completely different. All the (Springwood) branchies that I am involved with are exactly like me.

Can you talk some into moving out Kenmore way?

Hmm, things not going well for Dutton's nuclear proposals, seems they fudged the numbers to make them look good, and of course the country, not being full of idiots, spotted it immediately.

Top energy analysts have reacted with scorn to Peter Dutton's nuclear plan, warning it will cost more, burn more carbon and result in a smaller economy than the Coalition claims.

One economist said the Coalition had effectively modelled the difference in cost between renewables and doing nothing for the next 15 years.

They have compared that number to Labor's plan, which includes far greater adoption of renewables, batteries and storage, which it calculates will cost $594 billion.

Labor and the Coalition are trading claims about the cost of their energy plans.

But analysts say the Coalition has cherrypicked the Frontier Economics analysis by comparing two different versions of the future: one in which Australia meets its climate targets and another, under Mr Dutton, in which emissions remain elevated until well into the 2040s.

So no surprises there, politicians lie, but I mean really, they aren't even trying to cover the lies up these days, it's all Trumps fault, Dutton thinks all Australians are also stupid and will fall for his lies without even questioning them. Let's hope he's wrong, but I won't bet on it, not after the US debacle!

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-13/ ... /104723256

stevebrooks wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2024 2:06 am Hmm, things not going well for Dutton's nuclear proposals, seems they fudged the numbers to make them look good, and of course the country, not being full of idiots, spotted it immediately.

Top energy analysts have reacted with scorn to Peter Dutton's nuclear plan, warning it will cost more, burn more carbon and result in a smaller economy than the Coalition claims.

One economist said the Coalition had effectively modelled the difference in cost between renewables and doing nothing for the next 15 years.

They have compared that number to Labor's plan, which includes far greater adoption of renewables, batteries and storage, which it calculates will cost $594 billion.

Labor and the Coalition are trading claims about the cost of their energy plans.

But analysts say the Coalition has cherrypicked the Frontier Economics analysis by comparing two different versions of the future: one in which Australia meets its climate targets and another, under Mr Dutton, in which emissions remain elevated until well into the 2040s.

So no surprises there, politicians lie, but I mean really, they aren't even trying to cover the lies up these days, it's all Trumps fault, Dutton thinks all Australians are also stupid and will fall for his lies without even questioning them. Let's hope he's wrong, but I won't bet on it, not after the US debacle!

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-13/ ... /104723256

Australians have voted in Scummo and the Mad Monk, so anything's possible. Going nuclear seems like a dismally failing political strategy to me, but I am a terrible judge of electoral trends and the public mood. Maybe, because Dutton's reactors are so far in the future, they are like a dream, and people will see it differently because it's so remote, and what they're really voting for is anti-wokeness or whatever you want to call the abstract tribal vibe Dutton is trying to exploit. It's not really about the nuts and bolts of energy and cost.

Even if Dutton wins and starts spending billions of dollars on his mad plan, none of his reactors will ever be switched on, they'll be obviously redundant long before they're finished. I say that based on the electric car trajectory. There'll be no need to ban ICE cars by 2035 (the EU policy), because no-one in their right mind would want to buy an ICE car by then anyway. Even the niche companies will have given up on them and it will just be a hobby for vintage enthusiasts, like those lovely model steam trains you see occasionally.

stylofone wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2024 7:15 am Australians have voted in Scummo and the Mad Monk, so anything's possible. Going nuclear seems like a dismally failing political strategy to me, but I am a terrible judge of electoral trends and the public mood. Maybe, because Dutton's reactors are so far in the future, they are like a dream, and people will see it differently because it's so remote, and what they're really voting for is anti-wokeness or whatever you want to call the abstract tribal vibe Dutton is trying to exploit. It's not really about the nuts and bolts of energy and cost.

Even if Dutton wins and starts spending billions of dollars on his mad plan, none of his reactors will ever be switched on, they'll be obviously redundant long before they're finished. I say that based on the electric car trajectory. There'll be no need to ban ICE cars by 2035 (the EU policy), because no-one in their right mind would want to buy an ICE car by then anyway. Even the niche companies will have given up on them and it will just be a hobby for vintage enthusiasts, like those lovely model steam trains you see occasionally.

I don't think Dutton cares if the nuclear reactors ever come on line.
Its all about slowing down the uptake of renewables and pushing the life of coal.
Even the push for more gas is all about saying "oh renewables aren't good enough".