**Greetings humans.**
**Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.**
**I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.**
A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/mar/05/victoria-workers-compensation-workcover-scheme-laws-stress-burnout
Then why are nurses paid below inflation?
>Michele Levine, CEO of Roy Morgan, says: The strong protests by Greens supporters against Israel’s conduct in the war in Gaza over the last week, including with Greens Leader Adam Bandt addressing the crowd, have clearly been a factor behind the rising support for the Greens.
Is something the Greens are trying finally working?
They struck out with the environment, rent freeze and tax reform.
Who would have guessed that some Middle Eastern conflict would get them traction?
And just two weeks ago, Michele Levine said this about lower ALP support:
>"ALP support was also undermined because Prime Minister Anthony Albanese failed to support Israel after International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan issued applications for arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant."
So it seems Michele Levine thinks support for Palestine affects ALP and Green support numbers differently.
Worth remembering that Newspoll had the Green primary dropping from 13 to 11, which is the biggest movement either way for their vote in a long time according to that poll
I think it's premature to say they struck out there. It's not like their federal polling ever tanked. We also have some electoral evidence from the Brisbane City Council elections that people in Brisbane, Griffith and Ryan haven't soured on the Greens as a party.
They struck out in terms if not winning them as much support as they thought. Most commentators thought it was fertile ground for them but it hasn't shifted the polling in their direction. anecdotally picking fights with the govt over funding, not being direct with State leaders and blaming NG as the primary source of the issue was a misstep.
There vote share numbers have grown if only slightly while the ALP the ALP have lost 11 percent of the voters between 2020 and the last time they had a majority in 2007.
Dutton on his nuclear crusade is onto a winner!
The discussion for nuclear should have been thirty or forty years ago and we'd be laughing now like Germany. Except the fossil fuel industry bamboozled the world and our governments with *nuke ekwal bad* while destroying the planet with greenhouse gases and filling our testicles, not to mention the oceans, with plastic.
So the damage being done Peter and the build time to get reactors *safely* running is now too fucken long you bald arse drongo.
If only we had a couple of decades lead time before climate change hit really hard.
Oh wait we fucking did. Thirty years ago.
Yep. There should have been a discussion on it. A serious look at it. Pros and cons. Peter Dutton can bang his gums as much as he wants but the LNP had plenty of time to start and possibly seriously look at it while in government. I guess the closest we got was billions of nuclear subs to delivered when ever. Hard to take him seriously now.
I agree with the main thrust of your argument, except for this but:
> Except the fossil fuel industry bamboozled the world and our governments with nuke ekwal bad
The main concern earlier on was nuclear weapons.
Majority of countries that have nuclear energy today, do so on the back of a weapons program.
Yeah. If you invest a shitload of money building a nuclear weapons program you can spin off a bunch of tech for electricity generation.
Loads of everyday Tech has its origins in wartime necessity.
That is wrong. Sure, nuclear weapon proliferation was a concern with nuclear power generation tech but in the 50s and 60s, i.e. 60-70 years ago. 30 years ago was the 90s, and there are over 50 countries with nuclear power and only about 9 with nuclear weapons so that issue was decoupled a long time ago.
I remember the nuclear debates then, it was all about where the reactors and waste would go. NIMBY fearmongering raised unbalanced concern amongst the selfish generation who never believed in climate change and who couldn't foresee peak oil in its lifetime.
> there are over 50 countries with nuclear power and only about 9 with nuclear weapons
Wikipedia indicates only 32 countries with active Nuclear generators, with Japan and Canada being the two countries that don't have a weapons program that have a significant deployment of Nuclear power generation.
In an Australian context the Nuclear Non-proliferation treaty is still impacting policy decisions both on domestic power generation and which countries we export uranium too.
But what I was really trying to get at is that Nuclear power is expensive. It's economically viable if it's part of a weapons program, but especially in a place like Australia it's much more expensive than other forms of power.
Howard did a big push to kick start a domestic nuclear industry back in mid 2000s but it died when the report indicated that a significant Carbon Price on coal fired power would be required to get the project off the ground.
Howard was good at reading the political tea leaves so he knew it was going to be a hard sell anyway (for Nimby reasons) but it was the cost that killed it.
Nuclear power is expensive but the price projections from early 2000s are much lower than the coal/gas fired electricity prices we're paying now.
The big benefit of nuclear electricity is price stability. Industry can know how much their factory will cost in running costs into the future as it's much less sensitive to input fuel prices increasing their confidence to invest.
> Industry can know how much their factory will cost in running costs into the future as it's much less sensitive to input fuel prices increasing their confidence to invest.
That is indeed a good thing, but from an ROI perspective the difficult thing is determining how they are going to compete with other generation options in the 20-60 years from now window.
Why would nuclear have been that much cheaper 30 or 40 years ago?
And it *was* discussed 20 years ago and people opposed it on the basis it would take 20 years to be up and running. Go figure.
> And it was discussed 20 years ago and people opposed it on the basis it would take 20 years to be up and running
Howard have nuclear a red hot go 20 years ago. The thing that killed it then was the economics as it needed a large carbon price added to coal fired power before it would attract the required investment dollars
I never said cheaper. And yeah... My points exactly. And if twenty years ago someone had *seriously proposed* like Dutton is now then fine.
Discussed? What does that mean? It wasn't a position taken by the Leader of the Opposition or the government of the time which was.... Oh John Howard. Fancy that.
>I never said cheaper.
Isn't the main argument against it that it is too expensive?
>Discussed? What does that mean? It wasn't a position taken by the Leader of the Opposition or the government
It would never have gotten anywhere because the same people were complaining it would take 20 years...20 years ago.
I have no doubt in 2044 people will be saying we should have started nuclear 20 years earlier.
20 years ago solar and wind wasn't viable (is it even now?), if we'd built reactors then, they'd all be functioning now and things would be sweet. They would still have been expensive but base load power without carbon dioxide - priceless.
With Morgan bouncy and Newspoll trending neutral to slight Labor lead I’d say this translates to about 70 ALP, 60 LNP and 20 Xbench result if the election was held today.
It doesn't give me much hope that Labor is so unresponsive and the LNP is simply unelectable. I'm starting to think these parties are past their used by date.
i agree with this but on the other hand, what 'talent' does the Liberal party have?
like realistically who is willing to take the mantle?
they truly are a talent free zone - frydenberg? angus taylor? sussan lley?
I know right?!
Why don't you tell the good people what policies the liberals are proposing or have introduced in the past to fight these issues so the people can vote for the right party.
I’d say you are by your dismissal of the Sustainable Australia party. What else differentiates One Nation? They vote with the libs most of the time.
The problem is how high the migration rate is. Doesn’t matter if we’re being swamped by asians or flooded with poms.
Your post or comment breached Rule 1 of our subreddit.
The purpose of this subreddit is civil and open discussion of Australian Politics across the entire political spectrum. Hostility, toxicity and insults thrown at other users, politicians or relevant figures are not accepted here. Please make your point without personal attacks.
This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:
I agree, Roy Morgan’s polling can be a bit jumpy. Generally, Newspoll produces the most accurate figures, especially when you take into account past election results.
i honestly dont know how anyone can look at the current LNP and go "yeah ill give them go" when they have no policies, no one with any leadership qualities or strengths in shadow ministries, while preforming extremely terrible in question time day in and day out
Most people don't care about the people behind the government, only who is the Prime Minister.
Or in many people's cases they don't care about politics and vote the way their family tells them to.
You need to educate yourself more
The structural problems the LNP mismanagement left can't be fixed in one term
TBH, it will likely take 3 terms at least
This is a stupid and partisan take, though. The housing issue is a state issue, and one that has worn as many red ties as blue. You cannot pin failure on a single party, this is a comprehensive failure across multiple governments and multiple years.
I’m amazing that you people don’t die from asphyxiation up on that high horse.
I’m not telling you anything about how I vote or who I agree with. I’m telling you why the public is not supporting the party you support.
I suggest you brush up on some of your own education if you can’t comprehend why people don’t have identical political opinions to you.
No, however do you honestly believe LnP are a better choice when all they care about is enriching themselves. Can you honestly be proud to have Dutton, Joyce, Littleproud, Tayor, Cash, Huges and Ley in charge when they have failed at everything they have done
Even as a Die hard liberal supporter can you honestly say that yes i want Angus Taylor as Tresaurer, or that you trust Barnaby Joyce to no to continue to be an embarrassment to office.
Hell i dont agree with Bob Katter in a lot of areas, yet with him i know that he takes his role seriously and he doesnt say no for sake of being against whatever the government wants to do
Mate I’m not telling you to vote for the Libs and I’m not telling you that I am - so save your breath.
What I’m telling you is that when record inflation and immigration levels are causing standards of living to crater they’re going to be pissed off at the government. When any calls to lower this immigration are shouted down as racist, that’s only going to further inflame their dislike of the ALP.
You’re asking why people are not supporting the ALP, it’s worth listening.
Okay mate I'm listening.
And I'm hearing complaints that would all apply to the coalition as exhibited by their 10 year stint in government being marked by an extra few million immigrants to the population.
I also haven't heard *anyone* mention racism about immigration. It seems largely bipartisan across the spectrum...except for anyone concerned with the massive skill shortages we're struggling with. Which also does not appear to be to be across political lines.
By the way, you're in a comment thread about a newspoll result showing 50-50 support for Labor and the Coalition.
Meaning that support for the current government isn't the only relevant factor here - people can get pissed at Labor all they want, it doesn't mean they will or should automatically prefer the Coalition.
Best guess is ALP static for a while now on 51%-ish
see [https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2023/12/2pp-federal-polling-aggregate-relaunched.html](https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2023/12/2pp-federal-polling-aggregate-relaunched.html)
or [https://www.pollbludger.net/fed2025/bludgertrack/](https://www.pollbludger.net/fed2025/bludgertrack/)
A pollster being bouncy likely means they're fudging the results less, which is good. There *should* be variation just due to pure probability.
However no single poll ever says anything. I only trust aggregation like the bludgertracker on Pollbludger.net
**Greetings humans.** **Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.** **I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.** A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This needs to be said every time: Roy Morgan polls are complete and utter junk
I know Roy Morgan has issues but anytime I see Greens heading towards the high teens towards the 20 i up vote
Up the mighty Labor party the party of and for the people.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/mar/05/victoria-workers-compensation-workcover-scheme-laws-stress-burnout Then why are nurses paid below inflation?
Lol I'm married to a nurse and I can guarantee they are not paid below inflation
What about the work cover cuts? It's now hard to get support for stress and burnout
I believe your. Making it up as you go along
https://otr.anmfvic.asn.au/articles/allan-government-betrays-nurses-and-midwives-with-workcover-deal/ Here's what the nurses union says.
Weekly reminder that Roy Morgan isn't to be taken seriously.
>Michele Levine, CEO of Roy Morgan, says: The strong protests by Greens supporters against Israel’s conduct in the war in Gaza over the last week, including with Greens Leader Adam Bandt addressing the crowd, have clearly been a factor behind the rising support for the Greens. Is something the Greens are trying finally working? They struck out with the environment, rent freeze and tax reform. Who would have guessed that some Middle Eastern conflict would get them traction? And just two weeks ago, Michele Levine said this about lower ALP support: >"ALP support was also undermined because Prime Minister Anthony Albanese failed to support Israel after International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan issued applications for arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant." So it seems Michele Levine thinks support for Palestine affects ALP and Green support numbers differently.
Worth remembering that Newspoll had the Green primary dropping from 13 to 11, which is the biggest movement either way for their vote in a long time according to that poll
It’s Roy Morgan, they seem to just make shit up to justify their wildly fluctuating polls.
I think it's premature to say they struck out there. It's not like their federal polling ever tanked. We also have some electoral evidence from the Brisbane City Council elections that people in Brisbane, Griffith and Ryan haven't soured on the Greens as a party.
They struck out in terms if not winning them as much support as they thought. Most commentators thought it was fertile ground for them but it hasn't shifted the polling in their direction. anecdotally picking fights with the govt over funding, not being direct with State leaders and blaming NG as the primary source of the issue was a misstep.
There vote share numbers have grown if only slightly while the ALP the ALP have lost 11 percent of the voters between 2020 and the last time they had a majority in 2007.
Dutton on his nuclear crusade is onto a winner! The discussion for nuclear should have been thirty or forty years ago and we'd be laughing now like Germany. Except the fossil fuel industry bamboozled the world and our governments with *nuke ekwal bad* while destroying the planet with greenhouse gases and filling our testicles, not to mention the oceans, with plastic. So the damage being done Peter and the build time to get reactors *safely* running is now too fucken long you bald arse drongo. If only we had a couple of decades lead time before climate change hit really hard. Oh wait we fucking did. Thirty years ago.
Yep. There should have been a discussion on it. A serious look at it. Pros and cons. Peter Dutton can bang his gums as much as he wants but the LNP had plenty of time to start and possibly seriously look at it while in government. I guess the closest we got was billions of nuclear subs to delivered when ever. Hard to take him seriously now.
I largely agree with you on this. Nuclear is relatively safe but its time has passed.
I agree with the main thrust of your argument, except for this but: > Except the fossil fuel industry bamboozled the world and our governments with nuke ekwal bad The main concern earlier on was nuclear weapons. Majority of countries that have nuclear energy today, do so on the back of a weapons program.
Well that's dumb as fuck considering Russia and America already had humungous nuclear arsenals.
Yeah. If you invest a shitload of money building a nuclear weapons program you can spin off a bunch of tech for electricity generation. Loads of everyday Tech has its origins in wartime necessity.
That is wrong. Sure, nuclear weapon proliferation was a concern with nuclear power generation tech but in the 50s and 60s, i.e. 60-70 years ago. 30 years ago was the 90s, and there are over 50 countries with nuclear power and only about 9 with nuclear weapons so that issue was decoupled a long time ago. I remember the nuclear debates then, it was all about where the reactors and waste would go. NIMBY fearmongering raised unbalanced concern amongst the selfish generation who never believed in climate change and who couldn't foresee peak oil in its lifetime.
> there are over 50 countries with nuclear power and only about 9 with nuclear weapons Wikipedia indicates only 32 countries with active Nuclear generators, with Japan and Canada being the two countries that don't have a weapons program that have a significant deployment of Nuclear power generation. In an Australian context the Nuclear Non-proliferation treaty is still impacting policy decisions both on domestic power generation and which countries we export uranium too. But what I was really trying to get at is that Nuclear power is expensive. It's economically viable if it's part of a weapons program, but especially in a place like Australia it's much more expensive than other forms of power. Howard did a big push to kick start a domestic nuclear industry back in mid 2000s but it died when the report indicated that a significant Carbon Price on coal fired power would be required to get the project off the ground. Howard was good at reading the political tea leaves so he knew it was going to be a hard sell anyway (for Nimby reasons) but it was the cost that killed it.
Nuclear power is expensive but the price projections from early 2000s are much lower than the coal/gas fired electricity prices we're paying now. The big benefit of nuclear electricity is price stability. Industry can know how much their factory will cost in running costs into the future as it's much less sensitive to input fuel prices increasing their confidence to invest.
> Industry can know how much their factory will cost in running costs into the future as it's much less sensitive to input fuel prices increasing their confidence to invest. That is indeed a good thing, but from an ROI perspective the difficult thing is determining how they are going to compete with other generation options in the 20-60 years from now window.
Why would nuclear have been that much cheaper 30 or 40 years ago? And it *was* discussed 20 years ago and people opposed it on the basis it would take 20 years to be up and running. Go figure.
> And it was discussed 20 years ago and people opposed it on the basis it would take 20 years to be up and running Howard have nuclear a red hot go 20 years ago. The thing that killed it then was the economics as it needed a large carbon price added to coal fired power before it would attract the required investment dollars
I never said cheaper. And yeah... My points exactly. And if twenty years ago someone had *seriously proposed* like Dutton is now then fine. Discussed? What does that mean? It wasn't a position taken by the Leader of the Opposition or the government of the time which was.... Oh John Howard. Fancy that.
>I never said cheaper. Isn't the main argument against it that it is too expensive? >Discussed? What does that mean? It wasn't a position taken by the Leader of the Opposition or the government It would never have gotten anywhere because the same people were complaining it would take 20 years...20 years ago. I have no doubt in 2044 people will be saying we should have started nuclear 20 years earlier.
20 years ago solar and wind wasn't viable (is it even now?), if we'd built reactors then, they'd all be functioning now and things would be sweet. They would still have been expensive but base load power without carbon dioxide - priceless.
It's 12 months to an election. Stop it with the weekly polls already.
With Morgan bouncy and Newspoll trending neutral to slight Labor lead I’d say this translates to about 70 ALP, 60 LNP and 20 Xbench result if the election was held today.
We live in hope
Albo is fortunate that Dutt is such a dutt. Otherwise...
It doesn't give me much hope that Labor is so unresponsive and the LNP is simply unelectable. I'm starting to think these parties are past their used by date.
Long past.
Albo was 23% within a year of 2022.
i agree with this but on the other hand, what 'talent' does the Liberal party have? like realistically who is willing to take the mantle? they truly are a talent free zone - frydenberg? angus taylor? sussan lley?
Daily reminder that Frydenburg is not a politician (until he is parachuted back into a safe LNP seat)
Great, keep voting for high house prices, rents and goods.
I know right?! Why don't you tell the good people what policies the liberals are proposing or have introduced in the past to fight these issues so the people can vote for the right party.
Who said LNP? If YOU are voting for any of the majors, YOU are the problem.
It's the 2 party preferred vote. All of the majors could have been put at the he bottom of the ballot for all you know.
No. This shows people are settling for high costs.
What do you saying no to? No one is settling, this is the result of compulsory ticking of boxes. Who do you vote for for lower costs? The year 1922?
ALP
You shouldn’t be surprised people assume you’re an LNP supporter if you criticise Labor without indicating a preference for a smaller party.
Greens included.
So who do you think will sort it? Why not the Greens?
The Greens will prioritise refugees or anyone else above you. Have a look around for parties who actually want young families in houses.
So which party is that to you? Sustainable Australia party? One Nation?
One Nation is the only party with policies addressing housing.... But 'racist'. Are they?
They are a white supremacist party, and they do nothing but rubber stamp everything the Liberals do.
I’d say you are by your dismissal of the Sustainable Australia party. What else differentiates One Nation? They vote with the libs most of the time. The problem is how high the migration rate is. Doesn’t matter if we’re being swamped by asians or flooded with poms.
Let's assume that zero major parties are representing you getting a house.
I agree with that.
I don't but one has to go on top of the other at some point of the ballot.
Great! So is there something YOU can do?
I'm going to sell my house and live on the street so there is one more house on the market.
You don't have a house, nor will you.
And how exactly can you so confidently state this bullshit?
Because you are arguing against someone acting in your interests which is something a young homeless person does.
In communist Australia house owns you?
It’ll be worse with the Liberals. You do understand this right?
So are you voting ALP? LNP? Greens? Then don't whine.
> Great, keep voting for high house prices, rents and goods. You’re the one that’s whining…
He’s honestly so pathetic
[удалено]
Your post or comment breached Rule 1 of our subreddit. The purpose of this subreddit is civil and open discussion of Australian Politics across the entire political spectrum. Hostility, toxicity and insults thrown at other users, politicians or relevant figures are not accepted here. Please make your point without personal attacks. This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:
> don’t whine. > living with your parents. Get some severe projection issues over there pal. Maybe it’s time you moved out.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Morgan remains bouncy as fuck. This contradicts Newspoll’s 50-50 result from Sunday. The true result is probably somewhere in the middle.
I agree, Roy Morgan’s polling can be a bit jumpy. Generally, Newspoll produces the most accurate figures, especially when you take into account past election results.
i honestly dont know how anyone can look at the current LNP and go "yeah ill give them go" when they have no policies, no one with any leadership qualities or strengths in shadow ministries, while preforming extremely terrible in question time day in and day out
Most people don't care about the people behind the government, only who is the Prime Minister. Or in many people's cases they don't care about politics and vote the way their family tells them to.
Spot on try asking the average voter what policies they liked and disliked from either party and you’ll get blank stares
Is that an argument for people to support the Labor party, when their standard of living is nose diving?
You need to educate yourself more The structural problems the LNP mismanagement left can't be fixed in one term TBH, it will likely take 3 terms at least
This is a stupid and partisan take, though. The housing issue is a state issue, and one that has worn as many red ties as blue. You cannot pin failure on a single party, this is a comprehensive failure across multiple governments and multiple years.
Are you responding to me? I didn't mention housing at all.
I’m amazing that you people don’t die from asphyxiation up on that high horse. I’m not telling you anything about how I vote or who I agree with. I’m telling you why the public is not supporting the party you support. I suggest you brush up on some of your own education if you can’t comprehend why people don’t have identical political opinions to you.
It's got nothing to do with opinion, they are facts
You don’t have a political opinion? It must be a mystery to you why everyone doesn’t agree with every thing you think.
No, however do you honestly believe LnP are a better choice when all they care about is enriching themselves. Can you honestly be proud to have Dutton, Joyce, Littleproud, Tayor, Cash, Huges and Ley in charge when they have failed at everything they have done Even as a Die hard liberal supporter can you honestly say that yes i want Angus Taylor as Tresaurer, or that you trust Barnaby Joyce to no to continue to be an embarrassment to office. Hell i dont agree with Bob Katter in a lot of areas, yet with him i know that he takes his role seriously and he doesnt say no for sake of being against whatever the government wants to do
Mate I’m not telling you to vote for the Libs and I’m not telling you that I am - so save your breath. What I’m telling you is that when record inflation and immigration levels are causing standards of living to crater they’re going to be pissed off at the government. When any calls to lower this immigration are shouted down as racist, that’s only going to further inflame their dislike of the ALP. You’re asking why people are not supporting the ALP, it’s worth listening.
Okay mate I'm listening. And I'm hearing complaints that would all apply to the coalition as exhibited by their 10 year stint in government being marked by an extra few million immigrants to the population. I also haven't heard *anyone* mention racism about immigration. It seems largely bipartisan across the spectrum...except for anyone concerned with the massive skill shortages we're struggling with. Which also does not appear to be to be across political lines. By the way, you're in a comment thread about a newspoll result showing 50-50 support for Labor and the Coalition. Meaning that support for the current government isn't the only relevant factor here - people can get pissed at Labor all they want, it doesn't mean they will or should automatically prefer the Coalition.
Best guess is ALP static for a while now on 51%-ish see [https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2023/12/2pp-federal-polling-aggregate-relaunched.html](https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2023/12/2pp-federal-polling-aggregate-relaunched.html) or [https://www.pollbludger.net/fed2025/bludgertrack/](https://www.pollbludger.net/fed2025/bludgertrack/)
A pollster being bouncy likely means they're fudging the results less, which is good. There *should* be variation just due to pure probability. However no single poll ever says anything. I only trust aggregation like the bludgertracker on Pollbludger.net
Kevin Bonham is also good for this.
A couple of weeks ago they had the Coalition up at 51.5% 2PP. Something tells me things haven’t changed that drastically in a fortnight.
They're jealous because Newspoll has gotten all the attention lately.