Dear Bazz,

The Greens are doing remarkably well.
And undoubtedly will do even better according
to all indications, predictions., and forecasts:

http://www.newmatilda.com/2016-07-03/too-much-party-testosterone-explains-the-opposition

Foxy,

You support the Greens' firearms policy, Principle 7 is part of that policy.

If you don't support Pr.7 then say so, but until you do then one must assume that you agree with it being a crime to protect oneself or any other person from an attack by a wild dog if the Greens got their way.

Foxy,
Yes they are doing well because almost no one looks at the implications
of their policies.
Implement their "demands" and everyone who lives in a block of flats
will vote against them. Being stuck for a few hours in a lift will not
be found to be amusing or dragging the shopping up 22 floors will be
very good exercise but not fun.

Oh rubbish I hear everyone saying but it is reality.
I agree it won't happen as they will be history once people realise
it is not just the raving of people like me.

The Greens' policies give support to terrorists, murderers and other violent criminals.

I'm sure that the misguided majority of their supporters have no idea of the real meaning of many of the Greens' public statements.

The fact that they have lied to the NSW Parliament ought to be enough for most thinking people.

Just to sort of get back to topic:

* The Coalition doesn't look like gaining enough seats in the Reps to form government on its own (boy, did I get that wrong);

* The Labor Party doesn't look like gaining enough seats in the Reps to form government on its own;

* the Greens have not won any extra seats, in fact they may lose a Senate spot in SA.

While this would give every one of us great glee for one reason or another, the reality is that the new situation is no good for ANY serious party, or for the Greens.

It's likely that we will be back at the polling stations within six months. I don't know what the legal procedure is, and I'm probably wrong but if the PM, whoever it may be, calls an election early, it may affect only the lower house, not the Senate: Senators elected on Saturday are in for three- and six-year terms, regardless. Someone please correct me :)

Since this thread is supposed to be about the Greens, it's worth pointing out that they have actually lost some share of votes, from around 11 % to below 10 %. This is surprising, given that in Marxist-class terms, the number of relatively affluent, educated, inner-city people in the Goat-Cheese-and-Kale-Circle is steadily growing. By the way, for those who haven't ever tried kale, don't unless you like eating dry grass. It's for sale in my local supermarket at $ 4.49 a kilo, and one suspects, $ 2.00 for 2 kilos.

So where are those ex-Greens going ? Back to Labor, perhaps ? NXT ? The Sex Party ? Informal ? Is it possible that, like the Democrats before them, the Greens have actually peaked ? That they will be a distant memory by the early 2020s ? Who will speak then, for people-smugglers ?

Gosh, what a tragedy.

Joe

Greens politicians are the way the Australian cricket team used to be: once you get that nomination you have it for life. Lee Rhiannon is an example.

Protest is easy peasy. No need for any real, comprehensive policies that must take into account the full range of government responsibilities and services.

The Greens knobs will always be self-limiting because it suits them to be so. Nothing like a Senator's pay and conditions and then there is that golden handshake that lasts for life.

Protest is safe because there will always be the serially disaffected and easily led youth who have a need to protest - to stall coming to terms with reality and taking responsibility for their decisions as an adult.

Take a look at SHY, the stereotypical egocentric, warring, adolescent girl with authority issues. Rude, overbearing and ignorant and of course totally unaware and uncaring about her impact on others.