On 22/05/2022 8:57 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 22/05/2022 4:19 pm, lindsay wrote:
>> On 22/05/2022 12:04 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>> On 22/5/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>> On 22/05/2022 6:50 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>> How good is that?
>>>>
>>>> Not all good, it's the moderate Libs that have gone, the party
>>>> will move to the right probably with "Spud" Dutton as leader.
>>>
>>> Agree not a good result overall but good in my electorate in that
>>> there was a 2.8% swing to the Liberals, Labor still won the seat
>>> but with a reduced margin which has to be a good thing, we won't be
>>> taken for granted anymore.
>>
>> Same here in Issacs.. 4.5% swing away from Mr Photo-op Dreyfus? May
>> actually have to do *something* to earn his keep next time around.
>> Just for something to do, mind you.
>
> Best news of the lot in my opinion is that ugly fat ranting cunt Craig
> Kelly will not only *not* be our next Prime Minister, but he's lost his
> seat as well.
>
> Couldn't happen to a more deserving pig-eyed sack of shit.

:-D

saw this on-line earlier...
"Clive Palmer and the United Australia Party, it hasn't been that great.
About $100 million in outlays. I can see 231,000 votes for them in the
Senate and a swing to them of 1.4 per cent. So that's a lot of money for
1.4 per cent, and at the moment nationally they seem to be behind Legal
Cannabis Australia which I don't think spent $100 million. Australians
know what they want and they don't need $100 million to tell them."

Sounds about right to me. I hope the pair of fat fucks do a 'Mr
Creosote' and explode, or self immolate.

>> My only concerns are
>>
>> 1: Can albo handle the chinese (lower case). Granted scomo didnt
>> light the world on fire, what with demanding some cunt in china
>> remove a pic of an aus solider preparing to slit a childs throat. He
>> got trolled bad there and reacted poorly... But he did stick to his
>> guns when china handed a list of 14 things we would have to to to be
>> friends with a bunch of bat eating cunts... As I cough my guts out
>> again...)
>
> Hopefully you're on the improve.

so 3 weeks in, certainly getting better, but have this persistent dry
tickle cough that even scotch wont fix. But I keep trying, whilst the
wife keeps buying.... :-)

We are now converts to home deliveries from Woolies, Coles, Dan Murphys,
et-al, esp whilst the price of fuel is so high. Wife got a woolies
delivery for $5.00 It would have cost here more in fuel to go and get
it. And it keeps her away from the disease ridden fucks... although we
apparently cant get it again for 12 weeks. Dont care, I wear a N-95 mask
everywhere I go.

> Difficult to say how Albanese will do with foreign issues, as I get the
> feeling he is seen as "weak". I dunno about China, but I read a report
> on my phone this afternoon that people smugglers in Indonesia are
> already selling places on boats to Australia.

I have this impression that he will be 'soft' too. His new foreign
minister will need some balls.. (Oh, hang on! and "cred" because she
said so!)

>> 2: will the purchase of nuclear powered subs go ahead, if the Labor
>> party needs the Green vote to move forward. (shudder: I can still
>> hear Juliar spouting that..."Moving forward..." and doing her Karate
>> chop in the press gallery) I would imagine the Greens would leave us
>> defenceless.
>
> Their own (Greens) defence policy is absolutely fucking useless, and I
> don't think they'd be in favour of continuing the AUKUS agreement any
> time soon. Fortunately for Albanese he will most likely have his pick of
> who he needs to side with to form a minority Government, and hopefully
> the Greens get left holding the baby.

I'm sure I heard this arvo that the cards have fallen his way, and will
be able to form a majority govt. Hopefully that will add some stability.
Wasnt a major fan of scomo, but he did stand up to the bat eaters. Elbow
will need to do the same, and spend the same, if not more, on defence.
Not less.

>> 3: I've yet to see what Labours defence policy looks like. Did they
>> offer bipartisan support for AUKUS, and the purchase of nuclear
>> powered subs?
>
> Labor has supported the agreement, but Penny Wong has been overly
> critical of the deal claiming that it's a threat to Australia's
> "independence". I'm fucked if I know how buying a bunch of submarines
> from countries we've been allied with for decades and who we've bought
> military hardware from *many* times before could actually do that, but
> apparently that's her position and it's one that's not exactly clear.
> Whether she continues to hold that view on becoming foreign minister or
> whether she changes her tune remains to be seen.

A threat to our "independence" ?.. i wonder if she's seen what china
(lower case) have been doing in the South china Sea? Sri-Lanka? Solomon
Islands?

>> Or the Greens defence policy, for that matter. Trev?
>
> I'm not speaking for Trevor, but this is taken directly from their
> "platform" web page, and lists the proposed defence policies that they
> took to the election:
>
> [quote]
>
>> Renegotiate the US alliance to secure a new relationship focused on
>> making us a better global citizen

wtf? Are we a poor one now? Obviously we're not doing enough to help out
Ukraine? All the peacekeeping we've done in the Persian Gulf, in Timor,
New Guinea... currently in the Soly islands? Tonga? We're to simply stop
all that?

>> Pass War Powers legislation to ensure governments can’t send us to war
>> without Parliamentary approval
>
>> Close all military bases that foreign militaries have set up
>> in this country

Which ones? Pine Gap? Insane. So they'd be happy to turf out the US

>> Sign and ratify the Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty

Why? Whats that going to achieve? A pisssant country of 25 million, who
has no nuclear weapons has to sign a treaty that the worlds worst hasnt
signed? The 3 rouge countries (china, nNrth Korea and Russia) will need
to sign that and remove their stockpiles first.

>> Ban the development and use of Lethal Autonomous Weapons in line with the
>> international campaign ‘Stop Killer Robots’

Right. I'm buying shares in 'Slingshots are us' tomorrow, Trebuchets
will be all the rage up north soon.

>> Reduce military spending to 1.5 % of GDP by buying fewer guns and tanks,
>> and ensuring that we have a light, readily deployable and highly
>> mobile force that meets the needs of our place in the world

I'd double it to 4% just like china has increased theirs...

>> Increase oversight of defence procurement by establishing a
>> Parliamentary Defence Office to provide independent advice to Members
>> of Parliament.
>
> [end quote]
>
> They advertise these defence policy measures as a downloadable PDF under
> the heading of "Peace, Disarmament, and Demilitarisation"

Yeah, that'll work. Everyone hold hands.. here we go.. Kumbuya...

>
> I think that pretty much tells you how royally fucked we would all be if
> they have any say in how this country goes about defending itself.
>
>> As you can see Australia's defence means a lot to me, coz without it,
>>  the rest of the crap is moot.
>
> Indeed.
>
>> I'm not interested in female quotas in politics, I'm not interested
>> foreign ministers who says " I'd make a great foreign minister,
>> because I have cred" (in debate with Marise Payne) apparently because
>> she's of asian decent gives her that "cred" , because I'm fucked if i
>> know how you get "cred" as a *shadow* foreign minister doing fuck all
>> ...!)
>
> Lol :)
>
> Agreed 100%
>
>> I'm only interested in things that matter to me and mine.  Fair
>> chance Australia will be at war with china within 10 years, if not
>> earlier. Depending if Albo and Wong turfs our alliance with USA. He
>> does that? Were sitting ducks. If china invade Taiwan, and USA backs
>> them, so will we, as the terms of our alliance. We dont? No alliance,
>> and we're next. It will all end in tears.. :-)
>
> It absolutely will, and we have a choice to make. Hopefully the people
> in power take the "soft cock" option and leave us all standing here with
> our dicks in the wind.

If allowed, why would they continue pay massive prices for iron ore,
when they could just come and take it?
>
> Personally if I was Prime Minister I'd be asking the Yanks if we could
> do a "fleet" deal on all the B-52's currently sitting in the Arizona
> aircraft boneyard, and if it wasn't too much trouble if they could ship
> them all here with a 40 megatonne load in each one. I'd then set them on
> patrols 2 hours from targets inside China, and once they were holding at
> their failsafe points I'd issue them with a Wing Attack Plan R order :)

On 23/5/2022 9:30 am, keithr0 wrote:
> On 22/05/2022 10:48 pm, Daryl wrote:
>> On 22/5/2022 10:07 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>> On 22/05/2022 8:18 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>> On 22/05/2022 7:05 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>> On 22/05/2022 4:34 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> will learn that, when they fail us, they lose their job. Easy.
>>>>>>> It's why Scummo lost his. He failed us.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Us, don't you mean you?
>>>>>
>>>>> **ALL of us.
>>>>
>>>> You don't speak for anyone but yourself here Trevor. He may have
>>>> failed you, but there are no doubt others who had no problem with him.
>>>>
>>>>>> Did you happen to notice which party received the most primary votes?
>>>>>
>>>>> **Doesn't matter. That's not how our electoral system works.
>>>>
>>>> No, it doesn't, and that's a problem. The person/party that gets the
>>>> most votes doesn't necessarily win. Grouse, huh?
>>>>
>>>> There needs to be a major change to electoral regulations so a
>>>> candidate's preferences are *clearly* made known on every bit of
>>>> advertising they release. So people will clearly know where their
>>>> vote may possibly end up going (and which may be precisely where
>>>> they *don't* want it to go).
>>>
>>> You put the preferences not them, you can put them any way you want.
>>
>> True but who wants to spend the time working it all out.
>
> Then you get the politicians that you deserve, not the ones you need.

Very likely:-)
>
>> Even if a reasonable number of people allocate their own preferences
>> its not going to make much difference if the majority vote following a
>> how to vote card.
>
> Do they?
>
>
You think otherwise?

--
Daryl

On 23/5/2022 2:16 pm, keithr0 wrote:
> On 23/05/2022 11:22 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>> On 23/05/2022 9:32 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>> On 22/05/2022 11:11 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>> On 22/05/2022 10:07 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>> On 22/05/2022 8:18 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There needs to be a major change to electoral regulations so a
>>>>>> candidate's preferences are *clearly* made known on every bit of
>>>>>> advertising they release. So people will clearly know where their
>>>>>> vote may possibly end up going (and which may be precisely where
>>>>>> they *don't* want it to go).
>>>>>
>>>>> You put the preferences not them, you can put them any way you want.
>>>>
>>>> Yes you can, and I always do, but most candidates hand out "how to
>>>> vote" pamphlets with people blindly following their preference
>>>> "advice" without knowing too much about it other than who they put
>>>> at "number 1".
>>>>
>>>> The numbers they put on the pamphlets aren't random. That's where
>>>> they want your preferences to go, but you don't get to find that out
>>>> until polling day.
>>>
>>> Only if you're stupid.
>>
>>
>> 99% of the population must be stupid then
>>
>>
>>> Personally, I refuse all the how to vote cards and make up my own mind.
>>>
>>
>> so you're so knowledgeable about politics that you're well aware of
>> who all the candidates are, and their polices, that you have no need
>> to look at how to vote cards? congratulations, you're exceptional.
>>
> You really think that 98% follow how to vote cards? As for knowing the
> policies of the various parties, they have been forced down our throats
> for the last few months through every form of media, if you don't know
> them then you must be deaf blind and dumb.

Yes and no, its not always easy to find out what each candidate is
affiliated with or what they actually stand for.
For example at the last Vic election I didn't follow a party how to vote
card and worked out my own, I found out later than one candidate who I
actually thought I knew quite well and was standing as an independent is
actually a member of the Labor party.

--
Daryl

On 23/05/2022 7:28 am, John_H wrote:
> lindsay wrote:
>> On 22/05/2022 12:04 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>> On 22/5/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>> On 22/05/2022 6:50 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>>> How good is that?
>>>>
>>>> Not all good, it's the moderate Libs that have gone, the party will
>>>> move to the right probably with "Spud" Dutton as leader.
>>>
>>> Agree not a good result overall but good in my electorate in that there
>>> was a 2.8% swing to the Liberals, Labor still won the seat but with a
>>> reduced margin which has to be a good thing, we won't be taken for
>>> granted anymore.
>>
>> Same here in Issacs.. 4.5% swing away from Mr Photo-op Dreyfus? May
>> actually have to do *something* to earn his keep next time around. Just
>> for something to do, mind you.
>>
>> My only concerns are
>>
>> 1: Can albo handle the chinese (lower case). Granted scomo didnt light
>> the world on fire, what with demanding some cunt in china remove a pic
>> of an aus solider preparing to slit a childs throat. He got trolled bad
>> there and reacted poorly... But he did stick to his guns when china
>> handed a list of 14 things we would have to to to be friends with a
>> bunch of bat eating cunts... As I cough my guts out again...)
>
> The Happy Clapper upset China when he sided with the Pussy Grabber in
> demanding an enquiry into Covid's origins, based on the conspiracy
> theory that it was released deliberately, for which there's not a
> shred of credible evidence (then or now).

I thought this went back further, like when we told Huwaei(?) they wont
be participating on the build of the %g Network because of % Eyes fears?

>>
>> 2: will the purchase of nuclear powered subs go ahead, if the Labor
>> party needs the Green vote to move forward. (shudder: I can still hear
>> Juliar spouting that..."Moving forward..." and doing her Karate chop in
>> the press gallery) I would imagine the Greens would leave us defenceless.
>
> We're already way behind on defence (no armed drones, no long range
> missiles, etc) which isn't likely to change anytime soon.

Maybe not now, but
https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/joint/new-missile-strike-capabilities-announced

>> 3: I've yet to see what Labours defence policy looks like. Did they
>> offer bipartisan support for AUKUS, and the purchase of nuclear powered
>> subs?
>
> Labor supports AUKUS however we'd be getting nuclear subs much sooner
> if the Happy Clapper had stuck with the French who could've supplied
> same. The real problem is that all parties (including the Libs) have
> a ban on Australian based nuclear power. The difference being the
> AUKUS subs' reactors are supposed to last the life of the sub.

Not too sure how the french subs would have worked now. They, like the
Collins class, dont have the endurance to operate for weeks/months in
the South china Sea. Nuclear powered french subs? They would need to
integrate the US fire control system to utilise the MK 48 torpedo. As
they would have with a diesel/elec boat.. France dont use the MK48, so I
wonder if there was some issue there with the US giving France the info?

>>
>> Or the Greens defence policy, for that matter. Trev?
>
> Rubber band guns probably! But who gives an FF since they're unlikely
> to be able to form any sort of alliance with Labor after the last
> experience with the Ranga.
>>
>> As you can see Australia's defence means a lot to me, coz without it,
>> the rest of the crap is moot.
>
> Stated Lib policy was to *increase* it to 2% of GST if re-elected.
> USA spends 3.5%, Russia spends 4%.

I thought we were at 2.2% now.
>>
>> I'm not interested in female quotas in politics, I'm not interested
>> foreign ministers who says " I'd make a great foreign minister, because
>> I have cred" (in debate with Marise Payne) apparently because she's of
>> asian decent gives her that "cred" , because I'm fucked if i know how
>> you get "cred" as a *shadow* foreign minister doing fuck all ...!)
>
> Last Liberal Foreign Minister with cred was Julie Bishop whom the
> Happy Clapper shafted. Arguably the best since Doc Evatt .

+1

>> I'm only interested in things that matter to me and mine. Fair chance
>> Australia will be at war with china within 10 years, if not earlier.
>> Depending if Albo and Wong turfs our alliance with USA. He does that?
>> Were sitting ducks. If china invade Taiwan, and USA backs them, so will
>> we, as the terms of our alliance. We dont? No alliance, and we're next.
>> It will all end in tears.. :-)
>
> Your paranoia is showing. China isn't likely to invade anyone now
> they've seen what's happening to Putrid in Ukraine. What China mainly
> wants is economic superiority over the US, which also requires a
> superior military capability. Hopefully neither will use it.

Fingers x'ed. But we MUST be prepared.
>
> The imminent threat is Russia and in terms of history repeating itself
> it's now 1938. Putrid has to stopped, the world can't afford
> otherwise.

Agreed.

Obummer blew the opportunity when the little green men
> invaded Crimea.

You have some lovely nicknames.. :-) Xi told Obama they wouldnt
militarise the South china Sea too...
>

On 23/05/2022 8:20 pm, lindsay wrote:

>> The Happy Clapper upset China when he sided with the Pussy Grabber in
>> demanding an enquiry into Covid's origins, based on the conspiracy
>> theory that it was released deliberately, for which there's not a
>> shred of credible evidence (then or now).
>
> I thought this went back further, like when we told Huwaei(?) they wont
> be participating on the build of the %g Network because of % Eyes fears?

seems i need a new keyboard... lets try 5G network, and 5 Eyes...

On 23/05/2022 7:52 pm, lindsay wrote:
> On 22/05/2022 8:57 pm, Noddy wrote:

>> Best news of the lot in my opinion is that ugly fat ranting cunt Craig
>> Kelly will not only *not* be our next Prime Minister, but he's lost his
>> seat as well.
>>
>> Couldn't happen to a more deserving pig-eyed sack of shit.
>
> :-D
>
> saw this on-line earlier...
> "Clive Palmer and the United Australia Party, it hasn't been that great.
> About $100 million in outlays. I can see 231,000 votes for them in the
> Senate and a swing to them of 1.4 per cent. So that's a lot of money for
> 1.4 per cent, and at the moment nationally they seem to be behind Legal
> Cannabis Australia which I don't think spent $100 million. Australians
> know what they want and they don't need $100 million to tell them."
>
> Sounds about right to me. I hope the pair of fat fucks do a 'Mr
> Creosote' and explode, or self immolate.

Sounds fair to me.

>>> My only concerns are
>>>
>>> 1: Can albo handle the chinese (lower case). Granted scomo didnt
>>> light the world on fire, what with demanding some cunt in china
>>> remove a pic of an aus solider preparing to slit a childs throat. He
>>> got trolled bad there and reacted poorly... But he did stick to his
>>> guns when china handed a list of 14 things we would have to to to be
>>> friends with a bunch of bat eating cunts... As I cough my guts out
>>> again...)
>>
>> Hopefully you're on the improve.
>
> so 3 weeks in, certainly getting better, but have this persistent dry
> tickle cough that even scotch wont fix. But I keep trying, whilst the
> wife keeps buying.... :-)

Essential medication. Can't not....

> We are now converts to home deliveries from Woolies, Coles, Dan Murphys,
> et-al, esp whilst the price of fuel is so high. Wife got a woolies
> delivery for $5.00 It would have cost here more in fuel to go and get
> it. And it keeps her away from the disease ridden fucks... although we
> apparently cant get it again for 12 weeks. Dont care, I wear a N-95 mask
> everywhere I go.

Not so bad here and I occasionally where a mask, but I forget more often
than not. Especially if I swap from one car to another and don't realise
that car B hasn't got any in the glovvy.

The media has gone quiet on it lately, but We're not out of the woods
yet with this fucking pox. There are currently over 72 thousand active
cases in Victoria, and we're averaging around 6 fatalities a day.

>> Difficult to say how Albanese will do with foreign issues, as I get the
>> feeling he is seen as "weak". I dunno about China, but I read a report
>> on my phone this afternoon that people smugglers in Indonesia are
>> already selling places on boats to Australia.
>
> I have this impression that he will be 'soft' too. His new foreign
> minister will need some balls.. (Oh, hang on! and "cred" because she
> said so!)

Heh :)

>> Their own (Greens) defence policy is absolutely fucking useless, and I
>> don't think they'd be in favour of continuing the AUKUS agreement any
>> time soon. Fortunately for Albanese he will most likely have his pick of
>> who he needs to side with to form a minority Government, and hopefully
>> the Greens get left holding the baby.
>
> I'm sure I heard this arvo that the cards have fallen his way, and will
> be able to form a majority govt. Hopefully that will add some stability.

Hopefully they get the 76 seats they need for a majority, as I don't
think anyone wants to see a repeat of that bullshit that went on under
Gillard.

As of right now, the AEC website cites Labor as one seat short of the
necessary 76 seats needed to govern in their own right with 7 seats
still as yet to be decided. I assume that they're banking on picking up
at least one of those remaining 7 seats to give them the 76 that they
need, but I *also* assume that given that he was sworn in as Prime
Minister today he has gone to the Governor General and declared that he
has a Minority Government and has done a deal with either independents
or Greens for their support.

Something he said he would never do in the run up to the election :)

> Wasnt a major fan of scomo, but he did stand up to the bat eaters. Elbow
> will need to do the same, and spend the same, if not more, on defence.
> Not less.

Agreed.

I thought Morrison was a dick, but to be honest as long as the country
was in good shape I couldn't have cared less what bullshit he got up to
in front of the media's cameras. As for Albanese, I think he'll find the
going a little tough as being the leftie that he is he's probably far
less likely to take a hard line where necessary than Morrison would be.
Still, I may be wrong and it may turn out to be his forte.

I'm sure he'll find out soon enough. He's been thrown in at the deep end
a bit as he flies out to Tokyo for the Quad summit.

>>> 3: I've yet to see what Labours defence policy looks like. Did they
>>> offer bipartisan support for AUKUS, and the purchase of nuclear
>>> powered subs?
>>
>> Labor has supported the agreement, but Penny Wong has been overly
>> critical of the deal claiming that it's a threat to Australia's
>> "independence". I'm fucked if I know how buying a bunch of submarines
>> from countries we've been allied with for decades and who we've bought
>> military hardware from *many* times before could actually do that, but
>> apparently that's her position and it's one that's not exactly clear.
>> Whether she continues to hold that view on becoming foreign minister or
>> whether she changes her tune remains to be seen.
>
> A threat to our "independence" ?.. i wonder if she's seen what china
> (lower case) have been doing in the South china Sea? Sri-Lanka? Solomon
> Islands?

She's a bit of a radical fuckwit and I don't have a lot of time for her.
Still, being in opposition can bring that out in people. She'll need to
pull her head in a bit if she wants to serve any time as Foreign Minister.

>>> Or the Greens defence policy, for that matter. Trev?
>>
>> I'm not speaking for Trevor, but this is taken directly from their
>> "platform" web page, and lists the proposed defence policies that they
>> took to the election:
>>
>> [quote]
>>
>>> Renegotiate the US alliance to secure a new relationship focused on
>>> making us a better global citizen
>
> wtf? Are we a poor one now? Obviously we're not doing enough to help out
> Ukraine? All the peacekeeping we've done in the Persian Gulf, in Timor,
> New Guinea... currently in the Soly islands? Tonga? We're to simply stop
> all that?

I think the Greens idea of being a "better global citizen" is to run
around putting flowers in guns and telling people that it would be a
rooly rooly bad vibe to shoot at each other.

>>> Pass War Powers legislation to ensure governments can’t send us to
>>> war without Parliamentary approval
>>
>>> Close all military bases that foreign militaries have set up
>>> in this country
>
> Which ones?  Pine Gap? Insane. So they'd be happy to turf out the US

Apparently.

>>> Sign and ratify the Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty
>
> Why? Whats that going to achieve? A pisssant country of 25 million, who
> has no nuclear weapons has to sign a treaty that the worlds worst hasnt
> signed? The 3 rouge countries (china, nNrth Korea and Russia) will need
> to sign that and remove their stockpiles first.

Yeah, it's not like any other country in the world is going to take the
slightest notice of anything we ever do, which makes the argument of us
needing to lead by example on climate change look even *more* ridiculous :)

>>> Ban the development and use of Lethal Autonomous Weapons in line with
>>> the
>>> international campaign ‘Stop Killer Robots’
>
> Right. I'm buying shares in 'Slingshots are us' tomorrow, Trebuchets
> will be all the rage up north soon.

Lol :)

>>> Reduce military spending to 1.5 % of GDP by buying fewer guns and tanks,
>>> and ensuring that we have a light, readily deployable and highly
>>> mobile force that meets the needs of our place in the world
>
> I'd double it to 4% just like china has increased theirs...

Just for shits and giggles I'd like to actually hear what the Greens
idea of a light, readily deployable and highly mobile force" actually
is, and how effective it would actually be against a full scale invasion.

On 23/05/2022 8:20 pm, lindsay wrote:
> On 23/05/2022 7:28 am, John_H wrote:

>> The Happy Clapper upset China when he sided with the Pussy Grabber in
>> demanding an enquiry into Covid's origins, based on the conspiracy
>> theory that it was released deliberately, for which there's not a
>> shred of credible evidence (then or now).
>
> I thought this went back further, like when we told Huwaei(?) they wont
> be participating on the build of the %g Network because of % Eyes fears?

It certainly started back then, and the Chinese have been looking for an
excuse to fire back ever since.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On Mon, 23 May 2022 18:13:37 +1000, Noddy wrote:

snip dross
> your claim of people not knowing must be "deaf, blind and dumb" to be a
> completely nonsensical.

And another Irony meter explodes...

alvey
Not bothering with "...to be a complete nonsensical."

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Mon, 23 May 2022 18:21:54 +1000, Noddy wrote:

> On 23/05/2022 5:50 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>> On 23/05/2022 5:41 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> On 23/05/2022 2:16 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>> On 23/05/2022 11:22 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>> On 23/05/2022 9:32 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>> On 22/05/2022 11:11 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>> On 22/05/2022 10:07 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 22/05/2022 8:18 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There needs to be a major change to electoral regulations so a
>>>>>>>>> candidate's preferences are *clearly* made known on every bit of
>>>>>>>>> advertising they release. So people will clearly know where
>>>>>>>>> their vote may possibly end up going (and which may be precisely
>>>>>>>>> where they *don't* want it to go).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You put the preferences not them, you can put them any way you want.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes you can, and I always do, but most candidates hand out "how to
>>>>>>> vote" pamphlets with people blindly following their preference
>>>>>>> "advice" without knowing too much about it other than who they put
>>>>>>> at "number 1".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The numbers they put on the pamphlets aren't random. That's where
>>>>>>> they want your preferences to go, but you don't get to find that
>>>>>>> out until polling day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only if you're stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 99% of the population must be stupid then
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally, I refuse all the how to vote cards and make up my own
>>>>>> mind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> so you're so knowledgeable about politics that you're well aware of
>>>>> who all the candidates are, and their polices, that you have no need
>>>>> to look at how to vote cards? congratulations, you're exceptional.
>>>>>
>>>> You really think that 98% follow how to vote cards?
>>>
>>>
>>> most ppl do
>>
>> Alvey posted this:
>> https://www.crikey.com.au/2016/11/07/which-party-has-the-most-sheeple-for-voters/
>
> ROTFL :) Crikey. The last great bastion of truth in journalism started
> by a former failed Liberal candidate who went on a Liberal hatred
> campaign and has been ever since.
>
> Hahahahaha :)
>
> Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that a clueless fuckstick like
> Alvey would be a follower :)

“Your call mate, but when you choose to play the man rather than the ball
your integrity goes out the window.” Fraudster, 19Jul21

>
>> It says:
>>
>>  Following the Senate order a party prefers requires voters to pick up
>> and follow that party’s HTV card, something 27.43% of those who voted
>> for the Coalition as their first preference did.  Labor voters were much
>> more independent minded — 12.68% followed the ALP’s how-to-vote card.
>> And just 9.41% of Greens voters followed the party’s directions. The
>> figures for minor parties were uniformly lower again.
>
> Actually what it says is that they used their own "speshul calculating
> program" to come up with figures that mean nothing to anyone.

I'm assuming that the Bumhole Bogan doesn't know what "open source" means.

alvey

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 23/05/2022 5:13 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>> On 23/05/2022 4:37 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, without picking up party flyer, you know what the policy
>>>>> details for every party and independent standing at the recent
>>>>> election where, do you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Amazing.....
>>>>
>>>> So the party policies are printed on the how to vote card? As you
>>>> say Amazing.
>>>
>>> The party policies are generally handed out *with* the how to vote
>>> cards.
>>>
>>> Have you ever been to a polling booth on election day? :)
>>
>> More than you, it would appear, I haven't done a postal vote for years.
>
> Good for you. As I mentioned, *not* going to the polling booth and
> having to stand in line with a bunch of munts is my preferred method of
> voting.
>
>> At the booth that I went to to do an early vote, they were handing out
>> how to vote card not party manifestos. Anyway, it's a bit late in the
>> day to try and get your ideas across right at the booth, that job has
>> already been done with saturation coverage across all the media, and
>> the tons of dead tree material dropped in letterboxes.
>
> That's all nice and dandy there Keith, but as usual you have completely
> avoided answering the question by asking one of your own and steering
> the conversation off into another irrelevant direction.
>
> You made the claim earlier in reply to Felix where you stated that "As
> for knowing the policies of the various parties, they have been forced
> down our throats for the last few months through every form of media, if
> you don't know them then you must be deaf blind and dumb."
>
> In reply to that I asked if you knew the policy details of every party
> and independent, and of course you wandered off with your irrelevant
> question in reply.
>
> So *again* I ask you. Without picking up a flyer from one of the
> candidates, were you aware of the policies of every party or independent
> standing for the recent election as you seemed to indicate with your
> earlier statement?
>
> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the nightly
> news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads, and the repeated
> bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit about anyone else and think
> your claim of people not knowing must be "deaf, blind and dumb" to be a
> completely nonsensical.

Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has been
stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every everybody
contesting our local seat. There were article in the papers, interviews
on TV, their policies were forced down our throats ad nauseum. There was
ample opportunity to study them to whatever depth you considered
reasonable. OTOH the stuff handed out at the polling place was just
"This is how we want to fill out your voting form".

On 24/05/2022 8:20 am, keithr0 wrote:
> On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:

>>
>> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the nightly
>> news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads, and the
>> repeated bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit about anyone
>> else and think your claim of people not knowing must be "deaf, blind
>> and dumb" to be a completely nonsensical.
>
> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has been
> stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every everybody
> contesting our local seat. There were article in the papers, interviews
> on TV, their policies were forced down our throats ad nauseum.

Maybe in *your* part of the world pal, but not here.

> There was ample opportunity to study them to whatever depth you considered
> reasonable. OTOH the stuff handed out at the polling place was just
> "This is how we want to fill out your voting form".

Keith, is there a point to this insane waffling you're running away
with, or can you just not accept the fact that not everyone's world runs
the same way that yours does?

For fuck's sake....

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 23/05/2022 6:02 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> On 23/05/2022 5:50 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>> On 23/05/2022 5:41 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> On 23/05/2022 2:16 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>> On 23/05/2022 11:22 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>> On 23/05/2022 9:32 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>> On 22/05/2022 11:11 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>> On 22/05/2022 10:07 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 22/05/2022 8:18 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There needs to be a major change to electoral regulations so a
>>>>>>>>> candidate's preferences are *clearly* made known on every bit
>>>>>>>>> of advertising they release. So people will clearly know where
>>>>>>>>> their vote may possibly end up going (and which may be
>>>>>>>>> precisely where they *don't* want it to go).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You put the preferences not them, you can put them any way you
>>>>>>>> want.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes you can, and I always do, but most candidates hand out "how
>>>>>>> to vote" pamphlets with people blindly following their preference
>>>>>>> "advice" without knowing too much about it other than who they
>>>>>>> put at "number 1".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The numbers they put on the pamphlets aren't random. That's where
>>>>>>> they want your preferences to go, but you don't get to find that
>>>>>>> out until polling day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only if you're stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 99% of the population must be stupid then
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally, I refuse all the how to vote cards and make up my own
>>>>>> mind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> so you're so knowledgeable about politics that you're well aware of
>>>>> who all the candidates are, and their polices, that you have no
>>>>> need to look at how to vote cards? congratulations, you're
>>>>> exceptional.
>>>>>
>>>> You really think that 98% follow how to vote cards?
>>>
>>>
>>> most ppl do
>>
>> Alvey posted this:
>> https://www.crikey.com.au/2016/11/07/which-party-has-the-most-sheeple-for-voters/
>>
>>
>> It says:
>>
>>  Following the Senate order a party prefers requires voters to pick up
>> and follow that party’s HTV card, something 27.43% of those who voted
>> for the Coalition as their first preference did. Labor voters were
>> much more independent minded — 12.68% followed the ALP’s how-to-vote
>> card. And just 9.41% of Greens voters followed the party’s directions.
>> The figures for minor parties were uniformly lower again.
>>
>>
>>>> As for knowing the policies of the various parties, they have been
>>>> forced down our throats for the last few months through every form
>>>> of media, if you don't know them then you must be deaf blind and dumb.
>>>
>>>
>>> in my electorate there were 9 candidates for the Reps and God knows
>>> how many for the Senate. of all of those the only ones I'd heard of
>>> via advertising were the Libs, Labor, and UAP, and it would have been
>>> similar in your electorate. so to even suggest that you knew all the
>>> candidates AND their policies, is beyond ridiculous.
>>
>> If that taxed your brain, heaven help you if you had to make a really
>> difficult decision.
>>
>
> so then, tell us who ALL the candidates in your electorate were and what
> ALL their policies were without googling. I'll wait with bated breath..
>
You really thing that anybody is going to write all that out for you?
I'm afraid the your breath will have to remain baited. Of course that is
what you expected you only asked so that you can say "He couldn't do
it". Sorry but your cunning little plan was just too pathetic.

lindsay wrote:
>On 23/05/2022 7:28 am, John_H wrote:
>> lindsay wrote:
>>> On 22/05/2022 12:04 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>>> On 22/5/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>> On 22/05/2022 6:50 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> How good is that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Not all good, it's the moderate Libs that have gone, the party will
>>>>> move to the right probably with "Spud" Dutton as leader.
>>>>
>>>> Agree not a good result overall but good in my electorate in that there
>>>> was a 2.8% swing to the Liberals, Labor still won the seat but with a
>>>> reduced margin which has to be a good thing, we won't be taken for
>>>> granted anymore.
>>>
>>> Same here in Issacs.. 4.5% swing away from Mr Photo-op Dreyfus? May
>>> actually have to do *something* to earn his keep next time around. Just
>>> for something to do, mind you.
>>>
>>> My only concerns are
>>>
>>> 1: Can albo handle the chinese (lower case). Granted scomo didnt light
>>> the world on fire, what with demanding some cunt in china remove a pic
>>> of an aus solider preparing to slit a childs throat. He got trolled bad
>>> there and reacted poorly... But he did stick to his guns when china
>>> handed a list of 14 things we would have to to to be friends with a
>>> bunch of bat eating cunts... As I cough my guts out again...)
>>
>> The Happy Clapper upset China when he sided with the Pussy Grabber in
>> demanding an enquiry into Covid's origins, based on the conspiracy
>> theory that it was released deliberately, for which there's not a
>> shred of credible evidence (then or now).
>
>I thought this went back further, like when we told Huwaei(?) they wont
>be participating on the build of the %g Network because of % Eyes fears?

They weren't happy but they accepted it and didn't retaliate at that
point. Morrison backing Trump's line is what really pissed 'em off,
IIRC they penalised some of our imports shortly after and their govt
officials refused to talk to our lot. Whatever the trigger point
diplomacy was never Morrison's strong point and he never made the
slightest attempt to cool the relationship down.
>
>>> 2: will the purchase of nuclear powered subs go ahead, if the Labor
>>> party needs the Green vote to move forward. (shudder: I can still hear
>>> Juliar spouting that..."Moving forward..." and doing her Karate chop in
>>> the press gallery) I would imagine the Greens would leave us defenceless.
>>
>> We're already way behind on defence (no armed drones, no long range
>> missiles, etc) which isn't likely to change anytime soon.
>
>Maybe not now, but
>https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/joint/new-missile-strike-capabilities-announced

What's it's range and accuracy? Apparently the Russian's can lob
missiles on strategic targets from a long way off as they've
demonstrated in Ukraine.
>
>>> 3: I've yet to see what Labours defence policy looks like. Did they
>>> offer bipartisan support for AUKUS, and the purchase of nuclear powered
>>> subs?
>>
>> Labor supports AUKUS however we'd be getting nuclear subs much sooner
>> if the Happy Clapper had stuck with the French who could've supplied
>> same. The real problem is that all parties (including the Libs) have
>> a ban on Australian based nuclear power. The difference being the
>> AUKUS subs' reactors are supposed to last the life of the sub.
>
>Not too sure how the french subs would have worked now. They, like the
>Collins class, dont have the endurance to operate for weeks/months in
>the South china Sea. Nuclear powered french subs? They would need to
>integrate the US fire control system to utilise the MK 48 torpedo. As
>they would have with a diesel/elec boat.. France dont use the MK48, so I
>wonder if there was some issue there with the US giving France the info?

We were quite happy with their diesel subs until the AUKUS deal came
up (presumably they had the same constraints). IOW they probably
stuffed up with the diesel subs which doesn't say much for our defence
planning capabilities.
>>>
>>> Or the Greens defence policy, for that matter. Trev?
>>
>> Rubber band guns probably! But who gives an FF since they're unlikely
>> to be able to form any sort of alliance with Labor after the last
>> experience with the Ranga.
>>>
>>> As you can see Australia's defence means a lot to me, coz without it,
>>> the rest of the crap is moot.
>>
>> Stated Lib policy was to *increase* it to 2% of GST if re-elected.
>> USA spends 3.5%, Russia spends 4%.

Bugger, I meant GDP.
>
>I thought we were at 2.2% now.

Should've put that in past tense (it's been a while since I read it).
It's been below 2% in fairly recent times and a mere token increase
does bugger all for our capabilities....
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?locations=AU
>>>
>>> I'm not interested in female quotas in politics, I'm not interested
>>> foreign ministers who says " I'd make a great foreign minister, because
>>> I have cred" (in debate with Marise Payne) apparently because she's of
>>> asian decent gives her that "cred" , because I'm fucked if i know how
>>> you get "cred" as a *shadow* foreign minister doing fuck all ...!)
>>
>> Last Liberal Foreign Minister with cred was Julie Bishop whom the
>> Happy Clapper shafted. Arguably the best since Doc Evatt .
>
>+1
>
>>> I'm only interested in things that matter to me and mine. Fair chance
>>> Australia will be at war with china within 10 years, if not earlier.
>>> Depending if Albo and Wong turfs our alliance with USA. He does that?
>>> Were sitting ducks. If china invade Taiwan, and USA backs them, so will
>>> we, as the terms of our alliance. We dont? No alliance, and we're next.
>>> It will all end in tears.. :-)
>>
>> Your paranoia is showing. China isn't likely to invade anyone now
>> they've seen what's happening to Putrid in Ukraine. What China mainly
>> wants is economic superiority over the US, which also requires a
>> superior military capability. Hopefully neither will use it.
>
>Fingers x'ed. But we MUST be prepared.

We aren't and nor are we likely to be any time soon. We're entirely
dependent on the US coming to our aid and if Trump happens to get
re-elected they probably wouldn't.
>>
>> The imminent threat is Russia and in terms of history repeating itself
>> it's now 1938. Putrid has to be stopped, the world can't afford
>> otherwise.
>
>Agreed.
>
> Obummer blew the opportunity when the little green men
>> invaded Crimea.
>
>You have some lovely nicknames.. :-) Xi told Obama they wouldnt
>militarise the South china Sea too...

Like Putin, Xi lies. Hopefully Xi isn't as deranged as Putin.

The nicknames aren't mine, most pollies earn those they get....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiGg8D4hFLc&ab_channel=ChristinaHouston

--
John H

On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 23/05/2022 5:13 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>> On 23/05/2022 4:37 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, without picking up party flyer, you know what the policy
>>>>> details for every party and independent standing at the recent
>>>>> election where, do you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Amazing.....
>>>>
>>>> So the party policies are printed on the how to vote card? As you
>>>> say Amazing.
>>>
>>> The party policies are generally handed out *with* the how to vote
>>> cards.
>>>
>>> Have you ever been to a polling booth on election day? :)
>>
>> More than you, it would appear, I haven't done a postal vote for years.
>
> Good for you. As I mentioned, *not* going to the polling booth and
> having to stand in line with a bunch of munts is my preferred method
> of voting.

preferable for those in line too..

>
>> At the booth that I went to to do an early vote, they were handing
>> out how to vote card not party manifestos. Anyway, it's a bit late in
>> the day to try and get your ideas across right at the booth, that job
>> has already been done with saturation coverage across all the media,
>> and the tons of dead tree material dropped in letterboxes.
>
> That's all nice and dandy there Keith, but as usual you have
> completely avoided answering the question by asking one of your own
> and steering the conversation off into another irrelevant direction.
>
> You made the claim earlier in reply to Felix where you stated that "As
> for knowing the policies of the various parties, they have been forced
> down our throats for the last few months through every form of media,
> if you don't know them then you must be deaf blind and dumb."
>
> In reply to that I asked if you knew the policy details of every party
> and independent, and of course you wandered off with your irrelevant
> question in reply.

he ignored my request also

>
> So *again* I ask you. Without picking up a flyer from one of the
> candidates, were you aware of the policies of every party or
> independent standing for the recent election as you seemed to indicate
> with your earlier statement?
>
> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the nightly
> news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads, and the
> repeated bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit about anyone
> else and think your claim of people not knowing must be "deaf, blind
> and dumb" to be a completely nonsensical.
>

yes it's bullshit. just him trying to make himself seem better than
everyone else and put others down as per usual

--
https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam

FUCK PUTIN!!

On 24/05/2022 8:37 am, Noddy wrote:
> On 24/05/2022 8:20 am, keithr0 wrote:
>> On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>>
>>> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the nightly
>>> news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads, and the
>>> repeated bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit about anyone
>>> else and think your claim of people not knowing must be "deaf, blind
>>> and dumb" to be a completely nonsensical.
>>
>> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has been
>> stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every everybody
>> contesting our local seat. There were article in the papers,
>> interviews on TV, their policies were forced down our throats ad nauseum.
>
> Maybe in *your* part of the world pal, but not here.

You don't live in Australia then.

>> There was ample opportunity to study them to whatever depth you
>> considered reasonable. OTOH the stuff handed out at the polling place
>> was just "This is how we want to fill out your voting form".
>
> Keith, is there a point to this insane waffling you're running away
> with, or can you just not accept the fact that not everyone's world runs
> the same way that yours does?

Perhaps you should take your own advice here nodz your little world
seems not to bear a resemblance to the real one.

> For fuck's sake....

As you say for fucks sake.

On 24/05/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:
> On 24/05/2022 8:37 am, Noddy wrote:
>> On 24/05/2022 8:20 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>> On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the
>>>> nightly news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads, and
>>>> the repeated bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit about
>>>> anyone else and think your claim of people not knowing must be
>>>> "deaf, blind and dumb" to be a completely nonsensical.
>>>
>>> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has
>>> been stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every
>>> everybody contesting our local seat. There were article in the
>>> papers, interviews on TV, their policies were forced down our
>>> throats ad nauseum.
>>
>> Maybe in *your* part of the world pal, but not here.
>
> You don't live in Australia then.

we had no letterbox advertising material here. none! and for those of us
who don't read newspapers or watch political interviews, how are
political parties policies 'being forced down our throats' exactly?

>
>>> There was ample opportunity to study them to whatever depth you
>>> considered reasonable. OTOH the stuff handed out at the polling
>>> place was just "This is how we want to fill out your voting form".
>>
>> Keith, is there a point to this insane waffling you're running away
>> with, or can you just not accept the fact that not everyone's world
>> runs the same way that yours does?
>
> Perhaps you should take your own advice here nodz your little world
> seems not to bear a resemblance to the real one.
>
>> For fuck's sake....
>
> As you say for fucks sake.
>

--
https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam

FUCK PUTIN!!

On 24/05/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:
> On 24/05/2022 8:37 am, Noddy wrote:

>>> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has been
>>> stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every everybody
>>> contesting our local seat. There were article in the papers,
>>> interviews on TV, their policies were forced down our throats ad
>>> nauseum.
>>
>> Maybe in *your* part of the world pal, but not here.
>
> You don't live in Australia then.

You can't can't accept reality. Can you?

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 24/5/2022 8:20 am, keithr0 wrote:
> On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
>> On 23/05/2022 5:13 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>> On 23/05/2022 4:37 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, without picking up party flyer, you know what the policy
>>>>>> details for every party and independent standing at the recent
>>>>>> election where, do you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Amazing.....
>>>>>
>>>>> So the party policies are printed on the how to vote card? As you
>>>>> say Amazing.
>>>>
>>>> The party policies are generally handed out *with* the how to vote
>>>> cards.
>>>>
>>>> Have you ever been to a polling booth on election day? :)
>>>
>>> More than you, it would appear, I haven't done a postal vote for years.
>>
>> Good for you. As I mentioned, *not* going to the polling booth and
>> having to stand in line with a bunch of munts is my preferred method
>> of voting.
>>
>>> At the booth that I went to to do an early vote, they were handing
>>> out how to vote card not party manifestos. Anyway, it's a bit late in
>>> the day to try and get your ideas across right at the booth, that job
>>> has already been done with saturation coverage across all the media,
>>> and the tons of dead tree material dropped in letterboxes.
>>
>> That's all nice and dandy there Keith, but as usual you have
>> completely avoided answering the question by asking one of your own
>> and steering the conversation off into another irrelevant direction.
>>
>> You made the claim earlier in reply to Felix where you stated that "As
>> for knowing the policies of the various parties, they have been forced
>> down our throats for the last few months through every form of media,
>> if you don't know them then you must be deaf blind and dumb."
>>
>> In reply to that I asked if you knew the policy details of every party
>> and independent, and of course you wandered off with your irrelevant
>> question in reply.
>>
>> So *again* I ask you. Without picking up a flyer from one of the
>> candidates, were you aware of the policies of every party or
>> independent standing for the recent election as you seemed to indicate
>> with your earlier statement?
>>
>> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the nightly
>> news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads, and the
>> repeated bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit about anyone
>> else and think your claim of people not knowing must be "deaf, blind
>> and dumb" to be a completely nonsensical.
>
> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has been
> stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every everybody
> contesting our local seat. There were article in the papers, interviews
> on TV, their policies were forced down our throats ad nauseum. There was
> ample opportunity to study them to whatever depth you considered
> reasonable. OTOH the stuff handed out at the polling place was just
> "This is how we want to fill out your voting form".
>
Not the case where I live, fortunately we get very little junk mail,
used to get lots at our old place but here next to none.
I very rarely watch free to air TV so I didn't see all that many
political ads, I watch a lot of YouTube and that was inundated with UAP
ads but not much from anyone else and I skipped those whenever possible.

--
Daryl

On 24/5/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:
> On 24/05/2022 8:37 am, Noddy wrote:
>> On 24/05/2022 8:20 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>> On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the nightly
>>>> news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads, and the
>>>> repeated bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit about anyone
>>>> else and think your claim of people not knowing must be "deaf, blind
>>>> and dumb" to be a completely nonsensical.
>>>
>>> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has been
>>> stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every everybody
>>> contesting our local seat. There were article in the papers,
>>> interviews on TV, their policies were forced down our throats ad
>>> nauseum.
>>
>> Maybe in *your* part of the world pal, but not here.
>
> You don't live in Australia then.

See my reply to a previous post, very little junk mail here, I live in
the same postcode as Noddy, he is on "acreage" so even less likely to
get junk mail.
To see TV ads you need to watch free to air TV which I don't.

--
Daryl

On 24/05/2022 1:19 pm, Daryl wrote:
> On 24/5/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:

>>>> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox
>>>> has been stuffed with literature laying out the policies of
>>>> every everybody contesting our local seat. There were article
>>>> in the papers, interviews on TV, their policies were forced
>>>> down our throats ad nauseum.
>>>
>>> Maybe in *your* part of the world pal, but not here.
>>
>> You don't live in Australia then.
>
> See my reply to a previous post, very little junk mail here, I live
> in the same postcode as Noddy, he is on "acreage" so even less likely
> to get junk mail.

We get absolutely none, and I couldn't be happier about that.

> To see TV ads you need to watch free to air TV which I don't.

Apart from the nightly news, me either.

The only political advertising I saw during the campaign was the stuff
that was in the Herald-Sun, which I read daily, which was mostly Clive
Palmer's bullshit, the stuff on the telly during the nightly news, which
for the most part was Liberal "There's a hole in your bucket" or "It
won't be easy under Albanese" bullshit, or the *one* time I got an
unsolicited text message from the UAP on my phone on the Friday before
polling day.

That's it. Nothing else, and I couldn't even tell you what parties or
individuals were standing in my electorate other than seeing the names
on the ballet when I filled in my postal vote. I couldn't tell you
*what* their policies were, or who they represented.

According to Keefy that apparently means I don't live in Straya.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 24/05/2022 1:19 pm, Daryl wrote:
> On 24/5/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:
>> On 24/05/2022 8:37 am, Noddy wrote:
>>> On 24/05/2022 8:20 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>> On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the
>>>>> nightly news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads, and
>>>>> the repeated bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit about
>>>>> anyone else and think your claim of people not knowing must be
>>>>> "deaf, blind and dumb" to be a completely nonsensical.
>>>>
>>>> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has
>>>> been stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every
>>>> everybody contesting our local seat. There were article in the
>>>> papers, interviews on TV, their policies were forced down our
>>>> throats ad nauseum.
>>>
>>> Maybe in *your* part of the world pal, but not here.
>>
>> You don't live in Australia then.
>
> See my reply to a previous post, very little junk mail here, I live in
> the same postcode as Noddy, he is on "acreage" so even less likely to
> get junk mail.
> To see TV ads you need to watch free to air TV which I don't.

We got more political junk mail than that from real estate agents
wanting to sell our house, and that's saying something. Also got
"Personal letters" (well personally addressed anyway) purporting to be
from John Howard and Anastasia wanting us to vote for their party. Maybe
that's because we are in a marginal electorate.

On Tue, 24 May 2022 12:39:55 +1000, Noddy wrote:

>
> You can't can't accept reality. Can you?

As gold nuggets go, that's about 50 * the Welcome Stranger.

alvey

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 24/05/2022 1:57 pm, keithr0 wrote:
> On 24/05/2022 1:19 pm, Daryl wrote:
>> On 24/5/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>> On 24/05/2022 8:37 am, Noddy wrote:
>>>> On 24/05/2022 8:20 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>> On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the
>>>>>> nightly news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads,
>>>>>> and the repeated bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit
>>>>>> about anyone else and think your claim of people not knowing must
>>>>>> be "deaf, blind and dumb" to be a completely nonsensical.
>>>>>
>>>>> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has
>>>>> been stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every
>>>>> everybody contesting our local seat. There were article in the
>>>>> papers, interviews on TV, their policies were forced down our
>>>>> throats ad nauseum.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe in *your* part of the world pal, but not here.
>>>
>>> You don't live in Australia then.
>>
>> See my reply to a previous post, very little junk mail here, I live
>> in the same postcode as Noddy, he is on "acreage" so even less likely
>> to get junk mail.
>> To see TV ads you need to watch free to air TV which I don't.
>
> We got more political junk mail than that from real estate agents
> wanting to sell our house, and that's saying something. Also got
> "Personal letters" (well personally addressed anyway) purporting to be
> from John Howard and Anastasia wanting us to vote for their party.
> Maybe that's because we are in a marginal electorate.
>

ahh.. that's the reason why and why we never got any

--
https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam

FUCK PUTIN!!

On 24/5/2022 1:57 pm, keithr0 wrote:
> On 24/05/2022 1:19 pm, Daryl wrote:
>> On 24/5/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>> On 24/05/2022 8:37 am, Noddy wrote:
>>>> On 24/05/2022 8:20 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>> On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the
>>>>>> nightly news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads, and
>>>>>> the repeated bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit about
>>>>>> anyone else and think your claim of people not knowing must be
>>>>>> "deaf, blind and dumb" to be a completely nonsensical.
>>>>>
>>>>> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has
>>>>> been stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every
>>>>> everybody contesting our local seat. There were article in the
>>>>> papers, interviews on TV, their policies were forced down our
>>>>> throats ad nauseum.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe in *your* part of the world pal, but not here.
>>>
>>> You don't live in Australia then.
>>
>> See my reply to a previous post, very little junk mail here, I live in
>> the same postcode as Noddy, he is on "acreage" so even less likely to
>> get junk mail.
>> To see TV ads you need to watch free to air TV which I don't.
>
> We got more political junk mail than that from real estate agents
> wanting to sell our house, and that's saying something. Also got
> "Personal letters" (well personally addressed anyway) purporting to be
> from John Howard and Anastasia wanting us to vote for their party. Maybe
> that's because we are in a marginal electorate.
>
That's most likely why you got so much, around here too many sheeple
just vote Labor simply because that's what they have always done, at
least we had a swing to Liberal reducing Labor's margin, still not a
marginal electorate but going in the right direction.

--
Daryl

On Tue, 24 May 2022 13:57:22 +1000, keithr0 wrote:

> On 24/05/2022 1:19 pm, Daryl wrote:
>> On 24/5/2022 11:53 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>> On 24/05/2022 8:37 am, Noddy wrote:
>>>> On 24/05/2022 8:20 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>> On 23/05/2022 6:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For the record, I'm a regular newspaper reader and watch the
>>>>>> nightly news, and apart from the Labour and Liberal party ads, and
>>>>>> the repeated bullshit from the UAP, I never saw jack shit about
>>>>>> anyone else and think your claim of people not knowing must be
>>>>>> "deaf, blind and dumb" to be a completely nonsensical.
>>>>>
>>>>> Every day since before the election was called, my letterbox has
>>>>> been stuffed with literature laying out the policies of every
>>>>> everybody contesting our local seat. There were article in the
>>>>> papers, interviews on TV, their policies were forced down our
>>>>> throats ad nauseum.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe in *your* part of the world pal, but not here.
>>>
>>> You don't live in Australia then.
>>
>> See my reply to a previous post, very little junk mail here, I live in
>> the same postcode as Noddy, he is on "acreage" so even less likely to
>> get junk mail.
>> To see TV ads you need to watch free to air TV which I don't.
>
> We got more political junk mail than that from real estate agents
> wanting to sell our house, and that's saying something. Also got
> "Personal letters" (well personally addressed anyway) purporting to be
> from John Howard and Anastasia wanting us to vote for their party. Maybe
> that's because we are in a marginal electorate.

What electorate is that keith?

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus