"With enough votes like mine, we will at least have another hung Parliament and hold the men in suits to account."

So, "Hopefully the women of Australia won’t forget how much these men despise, deride and damn us when we dare to cross the portals of power." and "...will lead the groundswell away from these monoliths of the male dominated hierarchy we have been subjected to for so long."

But you look forward to a parliament that is, well... hung?

A none of the above party would win in a landslide

"Hopefully the women of Australia won’t forget how much these men despise, deride and damn us when we dare to cross the portals of power. Hopefully we, who birth and raise the next generations, who count the cost in the shops and when the bills come in, who make the conscious decisions about the food to feed our families and what to clothe them in, will lead the groundswell away from these monoliths of the male dominated hierarchy we have been subjected to for so long"

However, it was Julia's government who damned supporting parents, the overwhelming majority of who are women, to be thrown onto Newstart.

With a cut in financial support of up to $150.00 a week for some mothers and their children, many are now facing diabolical circumstances.

That act alone, makes a mockery of holding up a woman Prime Minister as someone who looked out for those who "....who birth and raise the next generations, who count the cost in the shops and when the bills come in, who make the conscious decisions about the food to feed our families and what to clothe them in...."

Many of these women are now camping with friends, living in cars or just plain homeless. If they can afford their rent, they can't afford much else.

And it's not as if this was done for any other measure than saving the government money. The measures to seek work, etc, were already in place...the only difference is the cut in benefit.

Correction - should be "up to $150.00 a fortnight".

i note juliar..wont be at-tending..sundays policy launch
i also noted tony..on two channels saying he will release..his costings..BEFORE labor

i feel these two errors will get gezzumpt
by kevin talking extensively/EXCLUSIVELY..of aLL the good lab has ACHIEVED..since the its time..time..

[unlike the libs policy afternoon..lunch launch..
that seemed more like a hollywood roast

a photo op..wont do..kev..we know they are staged
give julia..and the party..and ALL the greats..a this is your life exposure..that highlights the works of others

lets face it..
iyts a speech..you will..*have to make for tony
if you dont give respect..where its due..[thank the cast and crew too

just*..dont mention the war..nor the warrior
thats where the lib lunch/launch went wrong..

give respect..to get respect..and respect IS due!
overdue too

dont attack back..turn the other..cheek

Karma..give us grace..
as we gave grace..to other..
re*cognition..it soothes the wounded beast

I was considering voting Greens too, crazy or not, but then the distinct possibility that LABOR might become a spent force which would end our democracy entered my mind.

Could you imagine what Phoney Tony would do if he obtained a huge majority in this election? Every millionaire in OZ would be hugely advantaged while the poor would be thrown on the scrapheap! Every employer would cut wages and force employees to enter into agreements that strip away hard-fought-for benefits! The mining oligarchs would tell the Coalition what to do! The Disability Movement would be killed in its tracks! Rupert might elect himself King of OZ...

Think carefully about the possibilities... Some of them are dire!

I am surprised that Sophie Love, going by her previous posts has ever ventured far enough into the real world to vote for a serious party.

It is a pity that when she did she chose such a corrupt and incompetent one.

I agree with your sentiments Sophie and have voted Greens for a long time for the reasons you state. Don't agree with all their policies but no party will ever do exactly what I want them to.

Yes David we all worry about Labor crashing but my answer is vote Green in the Senate to 'keep the bastards honest' and then give Labor your preferences or else give them your vote in the Lower House.

Typical troll response from Shadow the denier, who denies that Greens are a real party - third political force in fact - and a growing one at that.

The (mainly young) educated and computer literate are turning more to some of the excellent web news sites such as Crikey and not reading the tripe put out by the ultra right Murdoch press and right leaning Fairfax. We now also have the Guardian on line. The disgusting excuse for news that Murdoch / Fairfax have promulgated in the last 4 years is ensuring their continuing demise.

'They are a moral compass who embrace and encourage women '

The Greens a 'moral compass' Its not april one is it?

So you are going to vote green Sophie? Why am I not surprised! But then, you also believe in home births and no vaccinations?
The greens can run around about and scream and shout, but remember, they sided with Tony and blocked the ETS and the Malaysia solution.
The Malaysia solution, promised to all but shut down the people smuggling trade; so, responsibility for the many drowning since, may be shot home to the greens and their par for the course, mindless intransigence?
Now they have the unmitigated Gaul, to critique a much harsher outcome for Asylum seekers.
With an ETS in place and bedded in, we wouldn't have seen all the internal division inside Labour.
My bet with their history, most THINKING VOTERS, will give the tail wagging the dog, obstructionist, job destroying greens, a miss this time.
And indeed, put them last on the ballot every time! There are other saner conservationist options!
We confront quite dire economic circumstances, and the very last thing we need is the, I'm all right Jack, greens, and their usual economy harmful job destroying meddling.
They can continue to propose entirely unaffordable policies, given they will never ever be asked to actually fund them!
If either major party wins a clear mandate for their enunciated policies, the other major party can help to minimize the harm the greens do, by allowing the winner's proposed bills through.
That way, the greens will lose any real influence and electoral support. Balance of power is only ever effective if it can be actually wielded!
Rhrosty.

CHELSEA SPEAKS

I stoutly defend Courtney's opinions in this post-trannie-gender world - on this occasion.

We men all should always vote conscious that it is oppression of the swinging male political dangling that makes our shrivling little lives whot they are today.

Speaking for the inner woman in me I wish to be called Chelsea from now on. As I place my vote of engendered male patheticness towards Pauline "Sarah" Hanson Milner.

Ta

Roses1,

The Official Monster Raving Loony Party, is also a real party. I said that the greens were not a serious party. The greens policies are a collection of populist aspirational statements of which I have yet to see any costed.

Sophie's anti vaccination, home birth, etc reflect a common theme that I see in green's voters for whom facts are an inconvenience, and find the greens a haven from reality.

Go Greens! Good on you Sophie. You aren't alone.

I am revolted by the idea of either Abbott or Rudd being Prime Minister, so will have to vote on policies. Today I am bothered by the Abbott maternity leave scheme and the trade off with superannuation improvements for low paid workers. In the long term, anything which reduces superannuation will be a huge cost to the government through increased old age pensions. I am also bothered by Rudd's stream-of-consciousness policy announcements. And I am also bothered by not actually believing that anything either of them says will ever be implemented. Tomorrow I expect to be bothered anew. Bother.

So you are going to vote Green ... and of course you will preference Labor won't you. Your anti labor stance, like kevvy and julia, is just one big deceiptful fraud. Is it just tony you hate or do you hate all men?

Julia started this vicious race to the bottom of the cruel, inhuman and degrading finding released by the UNHRC last week, she was the one who forced more single parents into dire poverty, her two main policies don't start for years and her vision didn't go past the end of her nose.

The equation is simple - Australia is a cruel, inhuman and degrading nation that has become lawless and is now trafficking humans to other nations and dumping them like garbage.

This exercise started by Gillard will cost taxpayers billions while every day 20,000 kids starve to death.

If you don't want to vote for cruel, inhuman and degrading you must vote for neither major party.

Candide - yes this election campaign grind is more irritating than most.

Which is the worst Party? Worst Leader? Worst replacement if Tony or Kevy get in?

Hi Marilyn

I've noticed on this forum that the genuine misogynists on this forum regularly have a go at you.

So I thought I'd say something supportive before they get started on you again. Good luck :)

Cheers

Pete
(or is that Chelsea Manning?)

I dunno.

Sexism isn't a valid complaint it's just an endless complaint.
Julia Gillard was disliked by both male and female voters because she gained office through a spill and led a deeply flawed and unpopular minority government. So Ms Gillard wasn't the victim of "misogyny" she was judged solely upon the content of her character and her actions in government.

"It seemed that the fear and loathing of strong women, which is inherent in the Aussie culture of ‘mateship’, had finally bubbled up into the public arena in all its ugliness. "

Whilst I can accept that there are a small number of people for whom that may be the case I think as a general claim I don't think it's substantiated by any more than feminist dogma.

My impression is that many of those most critical of Gillard and her performance as PM had a high level of respect for Margaret Thatcher.

The attacks like a lot of attacks go for whatever is deemed in the attackers view to maximise the hurt. Comments about Gillards backside are not necessarily any more sexist than the lefts pre-occupation with Abbott's swimming attire or ears.

I also get the impression that as there are some who disliked Gillard as PM because of her gender there are others who liked her more for her gender than what she actually did. Not sure how we accurately measure the size of either group.

R0bert

Poirot,

I'm sure that any day now, Abbott will announce that he is reinstating all that money cruelly ripped away from those women.

Then when the carbon tax is removed, Ford will suddenly cancel its plans to close its factory and when the FBT recording for part-private car use is gone, that company will rehire all those staff they had to immediately sack months before anything ever really happened.

Homelessness skyrocketed during Howard's Golden Age too, as did youth suicide and personal bankruptcies.

We get to have a vote every 1000 days or so but some power brokers get to vote anytime they like.

All we have are two groups of self-serving opportunists arguing over who gets to sit on the leather com-car seats.

The only difference is that one believes that things can always get better and the other believes that this is as good as it gets, so don't change anything unless we really have to.

They both have "faceless men" behind the scenes and both have dubious internal practices.

"With enough votes like mine, we will at least have another hung Parliament and hold the men in suits to account."

Unfortunately it seems to be only the 'men in suits' who understand money and who realise that in order to spend money it is first necessary to make it -- or to motivate someone else to make it on your behalf. I'm sure the Liberals will be drab, uninspiring and in some ways retrogressive, but they will hopefully put enough money in our pockets so that we can afford to choose our own ways of alleviating the situation. Under the Greens all we can look forward to is a big group hug to keep us warm when the last power station closes down.

Don't vote for either of the major parties.

The trouble, Arjay, is that our voting system means that in most cases our vote will flow through to the major parties. They have stitched up our democracy for their own advantage. Add to that above the line Senate voting, which can result in the election of a Senator with a miniscule primary vote (ie virtually no public support) but a lot of carefully negotiated preferences, and I think we can fairly call our democracy non-representative.