The Forum > General Discussion > A Conversation About this Election
A Conversation About this Election
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Page 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- ...
- 56
- 57
- 58
-
- All
Posted by Luciferase, Monday, 13 May 2019 11:45:04 AM
| |
Paul,
You really are thick. How many times do you need to be told what I think about Cory Bernardi before you get the message that he means nothing at all to me? You are the one who is always talking about him. Here, again, is my latest response to your stupid ravings about him. “What's your problem with Cory Bernardi, Pauline? Why do you think your constant criticism is a way of getting at me? I think Bernardi is an arrogant person who likes the sound of his own voice. Sorry to disappoint you. Yes. I am a member of the Australian Conservatives. Yes I donate to them. Yes I will be voting for them in the senate - a proper vote, 12 below the line. There are 12 conservative candidates in SA - I don't have to preference any of your commo friends, including Senator Thunder Thighs-Hanson, who admits that she is packing the poo at this election”. That was yesterday; apparently too long ago for your goldfish brain apparently. You want to talk about horses? Well, you are whipping a dead one, you crashing bore. But you have probably already forgotten what you said about betting the wrong horse in your last rant. Given your lack of just about everything, that comment, before the election, is really stupid. As this is the last time that I will ever recognise you, I would like to thank you so much for referring to me as a “poor excuse for a human being”. You are certainly in tune with your very unpleasant Green leader. Posted by ttbn, Monday, 13 May 2019 2:25:31 PM
| |
Strictly for sane posters - i.e. none Greens - there is a good article in The Spectator online today, about the Greens, titled “ Naive, nasty, noxious and negative”. It paints the party as one interested only in protest and division.
Labor voters, particularly, should read it and ponder whether or not they would want a Labor government replying on these nasties. Bill Shorten has said that he will not do any deals with the Greens, and he chucked off at a Liberal politician who came at him with some idiocy of di Natale's by saying that the Liberal apparently spent 'more time thinking about di Natale than I do’. A good sign, but will he stick with it? We might be able to survive a Labor government; but we will not survive a Labor government beholden to the Greens. They turned even Gillard's stomach eventually. Posted by ttbn, Monday, 13 May 2019 2:45:37 PM
| |
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election-2019/why-scott-morrison-had-to-make-a-last-minute-policy-push-20190511-p51mc6.html
The election is not over, nt won, yet Scott Morrison has *run a good race* He had little choice other than to focus on himself v Bill Shorten He dare not run on his party,s record But in all honesty he has been good A few silly steps, letting his view on climate change be heard,the anti union stuff But any defeat should not be seen as his He did the best with what he had, very little Posted by Belly, Monday, 13 May 2019 3:48:05 PM
| |
Luciferase,
>Non-grid-scale storage ...including what everyone but you regards as grid-scale storage >is profitable in a market disrupted by the RET, It would be profitable even without the RET. >and might even slow blackouts. LOL! You can't even bring yourself to admit that it will eliminate most (possibly all) of those blackouts caused by supply shortages, so you phrase your response in a way that could be construed as meaning you think it could prolong blackouts! You pretend to be the arbiter of what qualities as a solution, but leave the problem very loosely defined and compare future nuclear technology to present (or possibly past) renewables and storage. On another matter, I find it disturbing that you think fairness, or Labor's policy, equates to class warfare! Under the Hawke-Keating government, Australia almost became a classless society. I don't know whether or not it was a direct result of the Accord, but there was a great sense that we were all on the same side. However class divisions reemerged in the Howard era, and have stayed ever since. And when Gillard announced she wanted class warfare, it was the worst thing she ever did (including the carbon tax) as it allowed Abbott to wage class warfare on the nation in the name of defending us from it. And whenever class warfare is waged, the poor always lose most. I'm not a fan of the economic policies of any party, but closing tax loopholes is a sensible move (though I agree whether someone's on the pension shouldn't be the determining factor for imputed credit eligibility and I'm hoping that's something the crossbench senators will be able to fix). And why don't you think people deserve the option of living near their parents? I'm pro immigration and pro globalization, but I think governments should address the negative aspects of the results rather than ignoring them. Posted by Aidan, Monday, 13 May 2019 4:32:19 PM
| |
I just saw a Labor Ad showing Turnbull with morrison when Morrison says "He's my leader & I'm ambitious for him".
The Voiceover then hints that Turnbull shouldn't have trusted him & neither should we. That's a straight-out lie because Morrison stuck with Turnbull ! Then again I should know better & expect no better when it come to Labor making statements ! Posted by individual, Monday, 13 May 2019 6:41:10 PM
|
"Your fixation on getting enough storage for several days' grid consumption at a time (which probably won't be needed until we're at 90% renewables) blinds you to the reality of what storage can do already."
Non-grid-scale storage is profitable in a market disrupted by the RET, and might even slow blackouts. But you accept the ultimate need for massive grid-scale storage capacity, which is great because the rest of your argument is a pea'n'thimble trick on the gullible.
Your codswallop about nuclear in Oz is predicated on renewables + storage actually being a solution. You equate a solution with a non-solution then compare them.
It might interest you to know more about imminent nuclear options besides those existing, that are intended to provide much cheaper electricity than intermittent renewables+storage will ever provide. Those speaking in the link are not dreamers about future breakthroughs as you are about storage, but are already taking us to the near future. Not mentioned are Terrestrial in Canada, and developments in China Russia and India. I'm agnostic on where our future nuclear technology comes from, as long as it comes. http://tinyurl.com/y47jztfd
On another matter, and to keep faith with the thread, it disturbs me that my taxes are going towards Triple J Hack touring the country to whip up millenials for Labor.