Peter Dutton to leave Coalition leaderless, conceding he has lost his seat of Dickson
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/29061644
We’ve done it, we got rid of another soulless right wing politician!
Peter Dutton first made his party lose this election and now also lost his own seat much like Pierre Pullover
We’ve still got a government that green-lit new coal power plants in it’s last term, screwed over the Aboriginal community with a poorly run referendum, and still doesn’t give a shit about climate change, but baby steps hey.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-03/peter-dutton-losing-dickson-coalition-leadership/105247916Open linkView original on lemmy.world1026
Comments182
We have a basic rule that the headline must match the article. Current headline reads:
"Peter Dutton to leave Coalition leaderless, conceding he has lost his seat of Dickson"
I'll give you a fair shot to correct it before just removing it.
Done. Only because I respect you.
It doesn’t make sense that rule. But you’ll disagree anyway and there’s never a chance of winning a mod argument anyway.
The article headline you want is pointless and meaningless to the 99% of the world who visits this.
Peter Dutton to leave Coalition leaderless, conceding he has lost his seat of Dickson
I added context and a little bit of juice to it so it would make for a better headline for non-Australians. Did I add some anti Trump sentiment? Sure. Did that misconstrue the content of the article? No.
I understand the current rule makes it easy to mod the place, but it also means you don’t let the OP add context for Lemmy. The rule should be: you can’t misconstrue the content of the article.
Anyway, I appreciate all you mods do and I respect the rules that are in place.
I disagree.
Not modifying headings is a fairly universal rule.
Making it "easier to mod" is an understatement. If you let people "adapt titles to be more suitable for lemmy" or whatever you did, then you'll spend all day having arguments about what adoptions are appropriate. It's unworkable with volunteer mods.
It's so pathetic that the top comment chain is discussing this pedantic issue instead of the actual article. Thank god for this moderation or my experience may have been slightly degraded.
It's a pretty fundamental aspect of content aggregators. If posters editorialise the articles they post it becomes an echochamber for a very confined range of opinions.
Counterpoint. I posted an article from the Australian national broadcaster. They have their flaws but they aint breitbart.
While I sensationalised the title and added my 2 cents in the original OP I cross posted to this community, I linked to a nice source and created a more world context friendly title, yet far from disingenuous click bait.
The upvotes and the comments are largely based on that.
What this rule is currently accomplishing:
What’s the point of a community if these are the rules? You’re asking for bad sources and at best or you’re just a comment section provider for legacy media.
Why has everyone started saying "counterpoint" all of a sudden. Every comment is a counterpoint.
Counterpoint. Hopefully people aren't idiots that upvote sensational headlines.
Counterpoint. Everything I already said.
Counterpoint. You could make your own community where people sensationalise headlines.
Counterpoint: I haven't noticed that being a trend until this thread.
Didn't say moderation isn't necessary, it is. What I said is it's sad the top comment chain is about moderation.
I opened this post to read comments out of curiosity, I still don't even know the context of this article because the top comment is about the title which I find sad.
If only there was some way to determine which content was shown on your device.
Like when there's too much content to show at once, maybe it could be organised in a tall "page" and you could jump around to read different comments.
Although it would be tall enough it's more like a scroll I guess. You could "zoom" up or down the scroll and read those comments you found interesting or engaging.
Actually, maybe you could get users to promote those comments they found most interesting and demote others.
It's a shame nothing like this exists.
Not really sure how to filter posts whose top comment is regarding moderation, pretty damn specific filter. Then again your comment is a large giant nothing burger that continues to ignore the point I'm attempting to emphasize so I don't think you really thought it through in the first place.
Thanks @[email protected] ! I know the rules are a pain, but really it helps prevent shitposting. Imagine coming into a community and just seeing variations on "xxx is a dumbass/shithead/etc. etc." all the way down. :)
All good. Thanks for all you do around here!
I'm curious what your headline orginally was
You can see it in the crosspost
Ty! Makes a bit more sense as it does give context. The 'booting to the curb' was a bit editorialized. But if like me, you have no idea who Dutton and Dickson are it's a lot clearer.
It's also factually incorrect. While Poilievre lost his seat, he's staying on as leader and attempting to win another in a by-election.
So he isn't really booted to the curb because his party kept him. Or least for today, they're supposed to hold a secret vote tomorrow.
Your original headline was better. New one makes no sense to me M
Just remove it.
People who do this shit are actively making this place worse.
Lol "the people actually making content are the problem" y'all are fucking clowns.
Can we just be loose with the moderation while the "top" posts don't even get 2k upvotes.
It gave lemmy content, it led to engaging discussions, who tf cares if the title is bad.
Jesus Christ I don't understand this mentality
You've made 3 posts in 2 years, op contributed to more fediverse in a day than you did in two years.
You really want to make this place better, then quit your bitchin or contribute more and your bitchin will be more understandable
Editorialized titles distract from the content. There’s enough crazy ass shit happening globally that the added sensationalism isn’t necessary.
Either way, maybe calm down a bit lmao.
If you take an article title directly from a local newspaper and post it verbatim on World News, nobody will know what the fuck it's about and regardless of its content, it won't see the light of day. It's important that the article title is relevant to the audience.
Okay, provided and example of this.
Jfc, it’s like I’m talking to kids lol.
Having civilized discourse on a topic is not childish. I'm sorry you feel that way.
While my tone wasn't cordial it also wasn't ALL CAPS SAYING KYS
You may be projecting a bit?
Regardless I've seen this garbage take on lemmy enough that I'm not going to politely point out the fault. I'll check their Lemmy contributions and call them fucking clowns if they are saying silly shit like "remove content me no likey for pendantic reasons" while contributing nothing to posts.
It's alotta reddit entitlement and I will attempt to call it out when i see it and I'm not going to be pleasant about it
K
At your service.
That’s what I thought about you when I read your message.
Man fuck em, thank you for adding to the fediverse OP! You should look at non .world communities. .world is the more shitty instance filled with "um actually......" Style users and mods
This forward progress to the human race is brought to you by the color ORANGE.
We proudly demonstrated to the world the proper direction to go.
Our loss is your gain.
It must be stated that the Labor party here are anything but progressive. They are centre-right by the most recent assessment of their values and support a variety of cunts in toxic industries who fund their campaigns.
The libs (our very right wing major party) ran an exceptionally incompetent campaign, with Dutton as a key soulless idiot who can’t admit to mistakes when it hits him in the face. They had a bit of headwind from the global anti Trump sentiment, but it wasn’t like we were in the same situation like Canada.
Regionally we already ARE the 51st state of the USA, because we provide them with much needed Southern Hemisphere intelligence bases which Australians have no right to visit, and they are our protector against any major military threat in the region.
It’s a minor victory for any progressive minded person, as any mention of action on the climate emergency was stupifyingly absent from the entire campaign.
I'm not sure how any of these things scream right wing:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-28/election-2025-key-promises-labor-coalition/104717394
I'm not sure how support for universal healthcare, renewables and the party having a gender quota is 'anything but progressive' but sure, they're centre right if your definition of right wing is anything right of the greens
Happy to have a bit of a debate over that. You can put them dead centre if that makes you feel better.
They certainly have some positives for the general public, and more so than the $.25 rebate promised by LNP. However, the majority of stuff they offer are stopgaps, instead of fixing the real underlying issues. High power bills aren’t going to go down with one off rebates. First home buyers 5% isn’t fixing the housing supply, or over demand, nor is it a solution to anyone over 40 who still hasn’t been able to buy, because a 5% deposit means you’ll pay for forever and then some. Same with tax cuts. Also Tax Cuts are right wing, though they are usually for the wealthy.
They are still all for really terrible corporate developments, they are still cosy with the coal lobby, they’re just smart enough to not bring a big beautiful lump of coal into parliament anymore. They won’t tax mega corporations fairly, they won’t do anything for the climate emergency, just boost green energy, without any serious international commitments or plans to reduce or go net zero in this term of this new government. None of that anywhere.
They tried one terribly worded referendum which probably blew the Aboriginal community a chance at some form of reconciliation for the next half a century, and there’s no more follow up. They have no solid plan for the housing crisis, just a few hand outs.
It’s not screaming right wing, and I didn’t say it was, and it certainly isn’t Trumpism, and our democracy is bar none one of the best and most secure in the world, but it isn’t progressive or left at all. It is fairly competent centrism, maintaining the status quo for corporate Australia, while minimally appeasing the plebeians, because thank fuck, it could have been so much worse. it is a shameful far cry from what we needed in order to really respond to the situation we’re in on the global timeline.
I'm a kiwi, so I only hear about Australia's most significant developments, but even then, some of the claims you're making are wrong.
They're probably putting in stopgaps to make it less painful while the fixes to the underlying issues gain steam.
This will probably be solved (or stop getting worse) as a side effect of Future Made in Australia investing in the Australian manufacture of renewable energy technologies, as Australian made versions are likely to be cheaper than global competitors (at least in Australia). It's also important to note that rising energy prices is not just an Australian problem, considering NZ's wholesale electricity price has risen >30% despite 80% of our electricity coming from renewables (and doesn't have variable running costs).
This will probably be mitigated by the Housing Australia Future Fund as it is set up to be able to spend $500 million per year on housing in perpetuity without any additional funding. This means they could technically "sell" something like 2000 houses a year for free forever. On a more realistic note they could take a $50k loss on 10000 houses per year to help mitigate the housing supply problem.
It is technically possible to have tax cuts that benefit only those who are not already rolling in it, but those kinds of tax cuts are so uncommon you're likely to see a unicorn before they happen. The tax cuts are probably going to be something like the tax cuts we saw over here where the only ones that benefit are the already very wealthy.
I was under the impression that they were majorly funded by the unions. Considering this winge piece complains about the mining industry paying 5x more in tax than they used to and makes the misleading insinuation that it is paying the majority of Australia's tax share, I'd say that they're probably not funded by the mining lobby. (Values from the Australian Treasury suggest that they're paying <10% of the total tax income)
They appear to have this net zero plan I found on a .gov.au website? I notice it doesn't target net zero within the next 3 years because that's simply impossible. The climate action tracker suggests that Australia is doing better than NZ in terms of climate policy, especially considering our action is considered "highly insufficient."
You make the claim that it isn't progressive, but over here it certainly would be. Either way, we can still celebrate that it isn't Trumpism.
ty mate, amazing response
We’re in the land of Democrats sucking on billionaires’ toes and Republican Nazis. There are very few things that aren’t left of our politics.
Albo himself is fairly progressive, but has been pushed further to the right by Labor.
Labor's policies over time have become increasingly more conservative. Yes, they still have some progressive policies, but all of the things you've listed are a direct response to one issue that a lot of voters are struggling with - cost of living.
Telling people that they'll be more financially secure is a no-brainer for any political party, regardless of ideology.
For more on Labor's shift to the right: https://socialjusticeaustralia.com.au/labor-partys-shift-to-right/
Also is on the right, he's part of the Right faction within labor and was one of the 'faceless men' that removed our best PM in living memory, Kevin Rudd.
I’m a huge Rudd fan but you have to admit he wasn’t progressive. The man ran on a technocrat platform and was just as in favour of the status quo’s policies as Gillard. He wasn’t exactly a Burnie firebrand
Damn. This one is pretty good. I wish Canada did this.
Australian housing market is possibly even more fucked up than ours is FYI
I had to look it up because we're already able to get a mortgage with 5% down, this plan is to not require mortgage insurance on a 5% down payment loan.
Working in a GP practice. The deal they are offering to GP’s are pretty bad and the only ones taking the offer is the 5minute doctors
Lets hope it is not just to the wealthy
The ALP are hardly Whitlam-style socialists, but they’re somewhat more progressive than UK Labour, in that they at least purport to be progressive, rather than banking their capital, rewarding donors and distracting the public with culture wars inherited from the Tories.
Mind you, they do most of that when the Greens hold their feet to the fire. With Labor having a lower house majority, it will depend on the Senate to force them to do the right thing.
Ah yes that old chestnut. The ALP isn’t perfect so we shouldn’t vote at all. You do realise that we have to vote here in Australia so vibe based voter suppression techniques don’t really work here. The perfect shouldn’t be the enemy of the good.
Easy tiger. I voted yesterday. Pipe it down a notch.
it’s okay to criticise… i saw noting anywhere about anyone saying we shouldn’t vote, or even vote for ALP
Coming from a Lemming this means less than nothing.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot mate?!?
A very nice change of recent trends across the world
I'm glad our fuck up in the US is inspiring others to step back from the edge. It's at least a silver lining I can console myself with while everything crumbles around me.
The front fell off.
That's not very typical.
Man the fact that we're at the stage of posting an image with a caption within a frame on a wall within a picture within a comment within a forum is kind of fucking with me just a little bit.
Somebody screencap this whole situation and post it on Mastodon and Bluesky, then take a screenshot of that and post it back here on Lemmy.
and hopefully all these conservative losses means more governments pushing back against trump harder, which can only mean good things for yall too!
I think it wasn't so much your fuck-up, as much as an opportunist fuckwit thinking he could emulate that style and that it would work here without the decades of groundwork that made enough people stupid enough to fall for it.
While I’m extremely happy about the election results, let’s not forget that the Conservatives were on track to sweep before Trump shit the bed so badly that the entire world had to hold its nose.
perhaps, but they also had an absolutely miserable campaign and labor was phenomenal… it wasn’t a single issue that they won on
Omg I posted this in the wrong thread! This was in reference to Canada’s election.
I guess most of that I said can still be salvaged 😂
There was a definite trump effect, just not as bigly as it was in Canada.
The conservative leader did nominate a a grossly unqualified “efficiency” minister who claimed she would “make Australia great again”.
Congratulations Australians!
WWIII teams are forming up
It's going to be so weird helping the Germans defeat Nazi America
Same here (said the American)
You know it's going to make more sense on some level, though. We love talking shit about America, we've just never been able to channel it anywhere.
(Although if you're closer to the border it's probably different)
Lol
Don't worry, they are turning nazi too
Hopefully more like Cold War II. And honestly, Australia's in a pickle there - most other democracies are pretty damn far away from it. They might try to do the Finland thing instead.
Hoping must work better outside the US, all it got me was a government composed of nazi terrorists.
The way you phrased that makes it sound like there's something I should personally do to make sure an inevitable conflict stays cold. If you have an idea, I'm all ears.
Anyway, hopefully Canada will open up asylum to Americans soon, in case things get really bad.
I really hope they do, but I feel like nobody is going to take American refugees until mass atrocities are well underway
Hey, we took in your draft dodgers. The main thing would be to not mess up our housing supply further. In any case, I doubt the safe third country agreement would withstand a court challenge at this point.
It's going to be trans people who would be eligible first, probably.
Remember that the ultimate enemy are the Sociopathic Oligarchs, and their Corporations. They have nearly unlimited finances, so they have to be resisted in other ways.
Nobody wants to let Dutton be another Trump
Trump is dismantling the US government so his billionaire friends can buy it. He's not building a global populist movement, he's siezed power and he's using it for petty, selfish ends. The whole world can see it plainly
The rise of fascism in the US may have heralded worldwide rises in conservativism for a time, but now that Trump has absolute power, he's not bothering to hide his intentions. It's swung back the other way, now the US is making the world less fascist
Fascism's win condition is always its own destruction. It's a death cult. It can't win worldwide because it promotes selfish leaders who sabotage the movement for personal enrichment
It's gonna be okay, everyone
They're not going to stop trying just because they lost an election. Don't become complacent. Victory has not yet been accomplished, defeat has been postponed.
Fascism is an existential threat to all democratic countries.
The Australian Liberal party (note, they’re the Conservative Party) has taken an anti-climate change to the Australian electorate for a decade. Over time they lost power, they lost seats to independents who are aligned to Liberal party except on climate change, and now they’ve been reduced to a puddle due in part to their anti-climate agenda. There’s practically zero chance that the Liberal Party will ever campaign on an anti-Climate Change platform (despite what their corporate overlords want). Which means we may finally have clean air for a debate on policy and politics that’s not being hijacked by bullshit fossil fuel arguments.
This is progress, for sure.
Not sure. I can see them go full Trump and get aligned with our extreme right wing parties and billionaires and make their own truth social and just double down hard calling it a hoax. All the flooding is just weather engineering with chemtrails, didn’t you know?
That seems unlikely based on last night's outcome.
Trumpism has a stink on it.
Dutton was trotting out some Trump rhetoric in the last 2 weeks and Australian voters have issued an emphatic, resounding rejection.
I expect a reformed liberal party will go back to their roots of fiscal and social conservatism, but do anything to avoid the culture war.
I hope Labour learns from this and starts leaning hard into the culture war. More trans rights please!
I'm not sure that's the right message to take away from what's happened.
Rejecting Dutton because he was stoking the culture war from the conservative end, does not mean that the electorate will embrace a leader who stokes the culture war from the progressive end.
For example, the voice to parliament was part of the culture war, and it failed spectacularly for Labor. They were lucky to recover really.
That's not to say the electorate doesn't want trans rights, but voters do want someone who's going to address the bread and butter problems they're facing.
Nah mate, common myth. The Greens had a way better plan for the bread and butter problems - create a government department for building housing, end negative gearing, cap rent increases, put dental in medicare, build free GP clinics, 50c transport fares, wipe all student debt, 800$ back to school payment, free school lunches, make supermarket price gouging illegal, increase wages.
What voters want, is something comfortable and familiar that makes them feel like they're opposing Trump, without having to actually think or learn anything. They want the status quo.
It's important to point out that they didn't just "lose" an election, and it wasn't only because of Trump.
They've been gutted. So many senior party members lost their seats they can't figure out who's the next party leader.
Yup, this will be what triggers them to go all in on nazism, same thing happened to America's Republicans.
I was just listening to something that said the liberal seat losses were predominantly the moderates. The hard-line conservatives fared better, so you might be right.
I'm not steeped in Australian politics like I am in US politics, please correct me if I am wrong, but there are some things I've heard (though they may be out of date) that work in the left/center's favor more than the right, particularly that young Australian men do not seem to be pulling hard right like their US counterparts. Also, it is my understanding that "minor" political parties are more popular and feasible than in the US. Probably the biggest thing working against radicalization is ranked choice voting, it probably splits right more than the left. However, your right wing parties risk losing their identity if they move left and will have to be very competitive as moderates, where they could probably secure a much more ideologically "pure," resilient, and loyal base by going further right.
I think this is true. Of course there are some who are, but there are fewer than in the US. There is much less "machismo" in Australian culture, there's still masculinity but it's focused on sport, cars, outdoor stuff like fishing and camping. It's much less concerned with power, control, or force.
Yes, and yes it's because of ranked choice voting. In the recent election there were a lot of seats where Labor (center left) and Liberal (center right) received similar numbers of votes, but then a third candidate from the greens (further left) had an almost equal number of the primary vote. When those voters second preferences are counted enough of them voted center left to push them over the line.
This happens with independent candidates also, who have put on a very impressive show in the most recent election. I'm a bit vague on this part but candidates who won a significant number of votes this time round will receive financial support from the Australian Electoral Commission for their campaign next time.
Yeah so our Liberal (center right) party has been whingeing a lot about this. They're saying they have the further right parties stealing votes from them, and Labor on the center right.
This is exactly the same for Labor (center left) because they have Liberal on their right and the Greens on their left.
That's politics.
A phrase that's been coming up a lot in the last 24 hours is that the Liberal party should return to their roots of being "fiscally dry". That is their identity. Lower taxes, fewer services, small government. They got lost in the weeds trying to get elected on a Trump platform which thankfully the Australian people have rejected.
Thank you so much for your time! Being an American there is a real dearth of information about the politics of other countries, at least in terms of what is "fed" to me via social media and legacy news.
I really wish my country could have learned some lessons from your guys' election system, it seems much better tuned in terms of producing democratic results and avoiding polarization.
The Trump effect is wild lmao
It's only partially responsible for this.
Significantly partially. In January Dutton started to style himself after Trump, even going so far as getting tips from the GOP, after Trump's win. However by mid-March Dutton was trying to backpedal rapidly but it was too late. Clearly not all his staff got the memo (esp Jacinta Price... oh dear) and everything he did or said could be met with a variation of "hold on, last week you were saying x".
Also I'd like to once again say thanks to the founders that gave us compulsory, preferential voting.
Not sure if sarcastic or not, but it made me look up when these things were introduced. Preferential voting was 1918 by Billy Hughes Nationalist Party. Compulsory voting was a state thing, starting with QLD in 1925 and ending with SA in 1942.
Not sarcastic, but rereading it now I can see why you'd say that. I'm grateful for preferential voting because there were a lot of seats that had Liberal first preference majorities that swung on preference counts. I wasn't actually aware that preferential voting came along 17 years after federation and that it was the states that gradually brought in compulsory voting... and now in wondering why, and what happened to cause us to shift away from the British model we were no doubt following beforehand. Thanks for the new rabbit hole!
King Midas
I hate the fact that it had to be the US that fell to these fascists... but at least it put the rest of the world on notice.
Yeah we kinda hate it too.
🇨🇦🤝🇦🇺
The Canadian cons didn't actually boot Polievre, instead they're giving him an easy to win riding and a brand new seat in parliament so he can stay on. Which probably means he'll stick around and win the next election. I hate it.
Edit: autocorrect
Wait what? Source please
It's about 3 seconds of googling to find out that there will be byelection in Battle River-Crowfoot, which went 81.8% in favour of the Conservative candidate. Polievre will run there, get swept in, and pretend that he represents Canadians.
Telling people to google stuff is so fcking reddit mate.
Thanks for providing context.
Learn to search shit your self, or get off the internet.
No one owes you anything.
The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. Whether or not something is easily confirmable
then it should have been very easy for you to post a source instead of arguing about it
Yes, but if we all did that there'd be no conversation here.
I don't think a comment asking for a source is very interesting conversation.
I don't think a comment stating that you don't think a comment asking for a source is very interesting conversation is very interesting conversation, yet here we are.
Only if you respond with a link and no explanation.
What would you prefer? No sources? Talking only about insubstantial things that don't need them? Obviously you're here to talk about something.
Not op but https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-to-run-in-alberta-byelection-1.7525104
Basically he asked a con in the highest % of con votes to step down to trigger a by-election. It's an area where the other parties don't even campaign, they just hand it to the cons.
There are already talks of "liberals rigged the election" so that he can deflect and not make it a personal failing that he lost a riding that's historically always been conservative and lost a 25 point lead in the polls in a few months.
Welcome to Canadian Parliamentary politics, where every good step forward has an equal and opposite step backwards.
While I still prefer it to the alternative system to the south; where it's all bad steps. I'd be lying if I said our own system was perfect by any means.
Carney could deny the by-election or at least delay it, but that'd cause conservative tears so he's avoiding the drama.
Oh god… We had Jacinta Pryce (extreme right winger in Oz) try the same here tonight. How do they expect this to work? I suppose because it worked for Diaper Don..
Imagine running a campaign so terrible that you lose your own riding, then running off to a province on the other side of the country to weasel your way back in.
Sorry, didn't check back until now, but looks like it got sourced in the meantime.
Ya, and also the conservatives lost by 1% of the popular vote, and had excellent numbers overall. I really wish we kicked them to the curb, but that's hardly the case. Sounds like Australia did a much better job.
That's exactly what makes me believe they will win next time with little effort. Unless the LPC delivers big, people are not going to vote "anything but conservative" again.
If Carney is smart, he actually pushes for proportional representation. It would save the liberals next election, all the smaller parties would be on board, and even if he gets ousted after, he would have secured his place in the history books (not sure how susceptible he is to appeals to his vanity...)
I dunno, I'd like to try to be hopeful. The NDP has a real shot to completely rebrand and come back swinging. Convince Charlie Angus to come out of retirement and lead the party, and spend the next however-long-this-term-lasts rebuilding support. I can't think of a better outcome than having to Sophie's Choice between Carney and Angus. Imagine having to choose between 2 legitimately good party leaders.
The deep mind 3D chess move to make here would be to found a better conservative party and split the conservative vote.
I said it a couple days ago that this election reminded me of our 2020 election and what followed. Center-right liberals are only good at driving people away since all they do is tell you what you want to hear and then go behind your back and do the exact opposite. It's just diet Republicanism here in the US and sounds like it's very similar abroad. Nobody likes diet Republicanism.
The good news is that the riding he has to run in is incredibly rural. He's going to hate it.
Poilievre is a city boy. He grew up in the Calgary suburbs. Then he moved to Ottawa to become an MP. The only job he's ever had involving physical exertion is when he was a paperboy as a kid. Now he's going to have to spend some time in his new riding surrounded by farmers. The biggest "city" there has a population under 20k. Everything else is towns, villages and hamlets. Assuming he buys a house in Camrose, if he wants Thai food, he'll have to drive over an hour to get to Edmonton.
Maybe because the conservatives have such an overwhelming majority in Battle River - Crowfoot, they won't care that he's a carpetbagger and he won't have to put much effort in there. But, I think eventually he'll have to spend some time in his riding, and it will be a major culture clash.
A lot of farmers are just rich guys, basically, but smug on top of it because of the tough image they have. The ones that own land aren't the ones that do the work, and the work that people who aren't immigrants do tends to be the sitting in a cab kind. There's not a lot of people between 20 and 45 here in rural Alberta anyway. The Hutterites are an obvious exception, but they don't vote anyway.
From what I've seen they really liked Kurek, are mad Poilievre is an outsider, and doubly mad because he's an Ontario city type, but it's nothing a firm handshake and some rabble-rousing won't smooth over. He might get only 70%
Yeah. I was really looking forward to not worrying about the CBC being shuttered. No such luck.
As an American working on moving to Australia this was great news to wake up to!
Make sure you open a Seattle style teriyaki joint there!
Don't think I haven't thought about it! I joke with my wife I'm going to open Cascadia Teriyaki in Australia and introduce them to Seattle style Teriyaki and Marionberry pie.
Majority Labor and Potato lost his seat, blessed be the aussies.
Almost the exact playbook as in Canada. Except it's a close minority here. But the Maple Maggot, after losing his own seat, has decided to take over another MP's seat in a by-election.
I know the chances are very, very slim, but I'd love to see the people of Battle-River-Crowfoot vote ABC and make that little weiner lose again.
There are so many hilarious opportunities with this by-election.
-91 candidates run and he comes in 91st
-Trudeau also runs there and wins
-He runs, loses, and repeats the process until the Liberals have a majority
Trudeau might be the first candidate to ever achieve a negative number of votes if he ran in Crowfoot.
Ok that'd be hilarious too 🤣
The riding he's chosen to run in is one of the most conservative in the country. The guy who's stepping down won something like 80% of the vote.
But, the Liberals should run someone who actually lives in that riding and keeps reminding the voters there that Poilievre doesn't live there and doesn't know anything about his new riding. It won't be enough to keep him from winning this time, but there's a chance that over time it will start to matter to voters that their MP doesn't live there and knows nothing about their riding.
Dude I'm clearly not serious with that comment and am just writing a sitcom in my head
No repetition necessary. The Liberals are one seat away from a majority.
Mot really, Labor did nothing over the last 3 years and get rewarded for that as well as Greens losing a few seats.
Best case scenario was minority Labor gov shared with the Greens.
The massive infrastructure project 5 minutes from my house is not nothing. I'm very happy Labour are putting my taxes towards constructing the nation.
Yes, the Labor Party have demonstrated they're inadequate to solve our ongoing crises. The Greens appear to have kept their strong crossbench position in the senate so I can't be too disappointed.
gee i guess the fact that we scored 2nd in the world on the IMF balanced budgets globally is nothing! if you don’t win you’re a loser
Agreed but let's be honest, that would've relied on people voting for their best interests and, as always, Australians generally vote governments out. The safest way to vote out Liberal is to vote Labor and, so, we have a majority.
Labour in the UK is looking so fucking stupid right now
Foreign elections being won based on real opposition to Trump and those that style themselves after him. Democrats can do this, but it means they would have to stop trying to make deals with nazis.
L + rato
🥳🥳
This is so good to hear. At least some good is coming out of my country being completely fucking destroyed.
Hell yeah who's next? I need some more good news. Getting a literal ulcer over here...
Some good news, ulcers can usually be treated with a simple round of antibiotics.
I will refrain from finishing this thought in order to keep it good news
Good for the Australians.
Well done. The the rest of the world has learned from the Trump catastrophe in the US.
Bravo to the Australian voters. However, you should have purchased the submarines from the French.
That was done by the conservatives
Shouldn’t have bought any subs at all, but sure.
LOLLLLLLL
REST IN PISS YA WON'T BE MISSED LIB-TURD
I'm not Australian and I don't know much about Australian politics.
However, I know that Australian people drive some of the biggest cars in the world. Car companies just manufacture huge SUVs and sell them to the Australian, thinking "these dumb fucks will buy them".
That's not good for the climate. That's bad for the roads. That's not even good for Australians themselves, because it's very unsafe for pedestrians. I heard that Albanese encouraged mandatory rules for better fuel efficiency. Which is a good idea. I just don't understand why the other bald guy says they are bad.
In the 1990s and 2000s, the US Auto Industry successfully fought against every attempt to impose fuel efficiency rules. After US Auto manufacturers went bankrupt in 2008, President Obama bailed them out and forced them to save some fuel. Because outside North American, no one wanted to buy american cars anymore.
During his first mandate, Trump rolled back all those Obama fuel-efficiency rules:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/15/us/politics/trump-obama-fuel-economy-standards.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/13/climate/cafe-emissions-rollback-oil-industry.html
Lack of strong fuel efficiency rules is the main reason why American cars are so heavy and consume so much oil compared to European cars. The bald candidate is wrong to say fuel efficiency rules are bad.
I dont know the actual justification behind it but i would say:
As to the big cars thing, we have typically had quite regular sized cars and our typical tradesperson vehicles (called "Ute's" here, "trucks" in the USA) were significatly smaller than their american equivilants, but local manufacturing shut down and now we buy from whats available on the market. Also the laws around taxing work vehicles is worded in such a way that bigger cars get taxed differently and incentivises people buying these cars and slowly our car sizes are increasing and more and more giant 'Yank Tanks' are appearing on our roads. And couple this with car manufacturers slowly changing the publics idea of what a 'family car' is from a large sedan to a small suv to a full blown suv or 4x4 7 person tank.
Pickup trucks in the USA. "Truck" is a more generic term that covers just about everything from semi trailers (a.k.a. articulated lorry, heavy goods vehicle) to vans.
Fair enough, but it also spins me out when americans call prime-mover trucks 'tractor trailers'
Are those the trucks that are only able to move 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11 or 13 things at once? (I've never heard that term before)
Yes, it makes logistics a nightmare doing the maths.
Its basically a class of truck that is for moving the biggest loads, like road trains (truck&+ trailers) or moving giant mining dump trucks,dozers,etc.
In one version of the transformers series optimus prime is actually a prime mover too
English is pretty bad at naming these things. In North-American English they're often called "Semi"s, which is short for either "Semi-Trailer" or "Semi-Truck". Why? Who knows, I'm guessing it's because the trailer part is only half of the whole. The front part with the engine and trailer hitch is sometimes called the Tractor Unit. But, that's confusing because "Tractor" mostly means the thing you drive around on a farm. The purpose is basically the same, and the name comes from the fact it's focused on something that pulls, but farming has such a hold of the "tractor" name that that's what people think of when they hear that.
18 wheeler makes sense for the whole unit together. It's also good because it identifies the thing that is instantly visually unique about these kinds of vehicles, all the various wheels. But, I'm sure there are many cases where it's not 18 total wheels. And, when they're used as road trains with more than one trailer, I'm sure it's much more than 18 wheels.
The Brits like "lorry", or "articulated lorry" but where does that come from? And sometimes shortened to "Artic" which makes it sound like it's really cold.
Other names include "HGV" for "Heavy Goods Vehicle", but that's confusing because it's not clear whether it's the goods that are heavy or the truck. Presumably they're also used for light but bulky goods.
Oh well, dumb language, we should start over with Spanish, I'm sure their name is better.
Well done, Aussies!
Be sure to cauterize the wound or else two more heads will grow in its place
YISSSSS congratulations !! Pierre pull-over. I am gonna steal this.
Love it.
For anyone needing how to actually pronounce this douche canoe’s name is Peepeepoopoo as we say in liberal Canada
I prefer Little PP
I felt anxious during this election, but since the votes got counted on the 3rd, it's such an amazing feeling, since we had Labor in last term and this term will just extend their efforts, especially with healthcare, energy and other policies, while the Liberals wanted to make an Aussie DoGE, which is an objectively shit idea.
Love to see it.
And what was the government that green-lit new eucalyptus clear-cutting, screwed over the Koala community with a possibly poorly run woodland referendum, and probably still doesn't give a damn about koala welfare?
Check their username ;)
Damn, two conservative PM candidates in two former British colonies both losing their seats within days of each other. Things are picking up.
Dutton looks like a literal flaccid penis.
He's a dildo with ears. Or a potato with ears, depending on the angle you view him from.
Where I live we've been calling him duttplug and Voldemort, god I love Aussie politician naming conventions.
If your cock looks like Dutton, I recommend seeing a doctor immediately.
That would not be good.