The Election 2025

Status
Not open for further replies.
The "Voice" thing was diabolically run & only enforced division. This shouldn't be forgotten at any point in the election.

The LNP should be made to offer viable change as an option, or treated with as much disdain for it's policies as the ALP.

The smaller parties will grow stronger, the more radical the world becomes. I see another horrible result that puts the Greens/Teals in with more power. Any party pushing a 'moral agenda' should be sidelined while genuine attempts to improve the infrastructure of our government are made. These parties are no less agenda driven that the Palmer Utd party (who are running those gaudy Trumpet of Patriots signs on roadsides...)

There is no strong direction on either side of our major political chances, and we seem bereft of any kind of quality leadership that former leaders such as Hawke & Howard provided.

It's another bleak campaign trail filled with the opportunity to vote for the least bad result.
 
We never voted for mass immigation during a cost of living and housing shortage crisis:

The impact of mass immigration needs to be highlighted right up to Election Day.

Both the good & the bad. I assume a majority of voters are either dumb or worse- not interested.

I think that the mass population needs to understand the impact having more people than housing can accommodate is actually having.

It's not seen on the streets with homeless people. We aren't THERE yet.

It's in rent prices going from $350 a week in Qld to $800 a week in the space of 5 years.

It's housing prices going from $450k to $850k in that time frame.

It's forcing parents that want to have single income lifestyles & reliance on child care reduced, forced into 2 income households, or over reliance on government handouts, to simply stay as they were 5 years ago.

Nobody progresses through that unless our incomes inflate dangerously.

We have now entered a pattern of no turning back on cost of living that can only be rectified through radical change. Housing & rent prices will NEVER go back to $350 etc per week. $800+ is the new normal- and unless you earn $140-$160k a year individually, your house is now forever a 2 income household.

What used to be considered a livable amount on Super may NEVER be the amount required as a result.

We will remain reliant on government handouts.

Which will forever require increased taxes to cover.

Which will continue to stop people saving & getting ahead.

Only a reduction in demand can cure the cycle- and it needs to be rather radical.
 
Dutton's intention to cut Education and Health as well as 41,000 Federal Public Servants has been lifted from the DOGE playbook. As of June 30 last year, only 36.9 per cent of the workforce — or 68,435 — was based in Canberra. Here a just a few among many examples of Dutton at his finest -

The caravan explosives con - amplifying the threat posed by what police are calling a "fabricated terrorism plot" involving an explosives-laden caravan found in January.

Dutton was the only Opposition frontbencher to abstain from the apology for the stolen generations, boycotting the 2008 apology.

Nuclear Energy - Grattan Institute energy guru Tony Wood — described the Coalition's assumptions as "heroic" and in defiance of international experience and reality.

Last time Peter Dutton had anything to do with the health portfolio it was 2014, he was health minister in the Tony Abbott government and his big idea was to introduce a $7 “co-payment” to see a GP. When that failed to pass the Senate, he proposed a reduction in Medicare rebates to GPs. He was slapped down and moved to the immigration role.

Dutton's captain's call to commit to another squadron of F35As was made at a time when Defence agreed to a five-year, $600 million deal with Boeing Defence Australia to upgrade and sustain the Super Hornet fleet, which also includes sister aircraft the Growler, to keep them active for longer. Also, the announcement was light on detail as where the pilots, ground crew and funding would come from for an additional squadron.
 
Dutton's intention to cut Education and Health as well as 41,000 Federal Public Servants has been lifted from the DOGE playbook. As of June 30 last year, only 36.9 per cent of the workforce — or 68,435 — was based in Canberra. Here a just a few among many examples of Dutton at his finest -

The caravan explosives con - amplifying the threat posed by what police are calling a "fabricated terrorism plot" involving an explosives-laden caravan found in January.

Dutton was the only Opposition frontbencher to abstain from the apology for the stolen generations, boycotting the 2008 apology.

Nuclear Energy - Grattan Institute energy guru Tony Wood — described the Coalition's assumptions as "heroic" and in defiance of international experience and reality.

Last time Peter Dutton had anything to do with the health portfolio it was 2014, he was health minister in the Tony Abbott government and his big idea was to introduce a $7 “co-payment” to see a GP. When that failed to pass the Senate, he proposed a reduction in Medicare rebates to GPs. He was slapped down and moved to the immigration role.

Dutton's captain's call to commit to another squadron of F35As was made at a time when Defence agreed to a five-year, $600 million deal with Boeing Defence Australia to upgrade and sustain the Super Hornet fleet, which also includes sister aircraft the Growler, to keep them active for longer. Also, the announcement was light on detail as where the pilots, ground crew and funding would come from for an additional squadron.
And here we have the ALP trying to tie in the LNP with a MAGA-Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon-DOGE link, knowing it will make those with strong feelings against how America voted fearful.

It would be the wise idea to see what is proposed.

Remember- Greece went broke on it's over reliance on public sector employment. And anyone would know that public sector employment can be used to mask real unemployment stats.

The ALP should be taken more seriously, if instead of fear-mongering, they enforced their own policy strengths instead.

It should never be an election about "look what they are doing!" and ALWAYS about "this is what we intend to do".
 
The impact of mass immigration needs to be highlighted right up to Election Day.

Both the good & the bad. I assume a majority of voters are either dumb or worse- not interested.

I think that the mass population needs to understand the impact having more people than housing can accommodate is actually having.

It's not seen on the streets with homeless people. We aren't THERE yet.

It's in rent prices going from $350 a week in Qld to $800 a week in the space of 5 years.

It's housing prices going from $450k to $850k in that time frame.

It's forcing parents that want to have single income lifestyles & reliance on child care reduced, forced into 2 income households, or over reliance on government handouts, to simply stay as they were 5 years ago.

Nobody progresses through that unless our incomes inflate dangerously.

We have now entered a pattern of no turning back on cost of living that can only be rectified through radical change. Housing & rent prices will NEVER go back to $350 etc per week. $800+ is the new normal- and unless you earn $140-$160k a year individually, your house is now forever a 2 income household.

What used to be considered a livable amount on Super may NEVER be the amount required as a result.

We will remain reliant on government handouts.

Which will forever require increased taxes to cover.

Which will continue to stop people saving & getting ahead.

Only a reduction in demand can cure the cycle- and it needs to be rather radical.
I too lament the rapid rate of migration, but what about arguments that suggest they play a vital role in skill shortages and reducing the migration number therefore has deeper economic impacts rather than just the simple suggestion that fewer people equals more available housing stock?

Perhaps a better approach is just going much harder on breaking through local government restrictions to push for higher density living while also reducing incentives for property investors?

Its hard to know what is the right course. Economists talk about the American economy having been the envy of the world until the tariffs came in, but then so many Americans aren't feeling the benefit of it. It seems the same with migration. Economists say how beneficial it is to all of us, but it doesn't really feel like that as we see prices skyrocketing and cities feeling clogged while regional areas suffer with the urban exodus and governments across the country seem to have an incapacity to respond to it all.

Perhaps a temporary stop on migration might allow reforms to start taking effect, but I don't think cutting migration on its own will be a solution.
 
I too lament the rapid rate of migration, but what about arguments that suggest they play a vital role in skill shortages and reducing the migration number therefore has deeper economic impacts rather than just the simple suggestion that fewer people equals more available housing stock?

Perhaps a better approach is just going much harder on breaking through local government restrictions to push for higher density living while also reducing incentives for property investors?

Its hard to know what is the right course. Economists talk about the American economy having been the envy of the world until the tariffs came in, but then so many Americans aren't feeling the benefit of it. It seems the same with migration. Economists say how beneficial it is to all of us, but it doesn't really feel like that as we see prices skyrocketing and cities feeling clogged while regional areas suffer with the urban exodus and governments across the country seem to have an incapacity to respond to it all.

Perhaps a temporary stop on migration might allow reforms to start taking effect, but I don't think cutting migration on its own will be a solution.
Don't disagree.

Migration needs to be discussed, in understandable terms, for both it's negative & positive implications.

Foreign investment, the ability for people to purchase land & housing without living in the country, should equally be discussed.

These are election issues. One's that actually are able to be understood in real-life situations.
 
Jim Chalmers did say this in relation to Dutton as reported by the SBS - "that the best predictor of future performance is past performance," Chalmers said.

Pick the difference here:

  • The Coalition pledged to
    reduce the serviceability buffer
    . This would give homebuyers a boost in borrowing power, but some believe it could raise house prices too.
  • Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the Coalition has a "policy bin fire" as he accused it of using its new housing policy to distract from potential cuts that could be made to service
    nuclear reactors
  • Dutton said a Coalition government would prioritise Victoria's long-awaited Airport Rail Link, but would scrap the $2.2 billion in federal funding for the state's
    controversial Suburban Rail Loop
  • In his press conference earlier, Treasurer Jim Chalmers criticised Peter Dutton and the Coalition over policy details, public service cuts and nuclear reactor plans.

    He compared Dutton's plans to the US Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which was introduced by Donald Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon and has been tasked with cutting government spending.
  • "Today, he threatened cuts to school funding which was right from the DOGE playbook. And we also know that he wants to Americanise Medicare as well, because when he was the health minister, he tried to gut and cut Medicare. He said that the best predictor of future performance is past performance," Chalmers said.

    "When Peter Dutton was voted the worst ever health minister in our history, he tried to Americanise Medicare, and now we hear that he has in mind cuts to education as well. This is DOGE-y Dutton, taking his cues and policies straight from the US in a way that will make Australians worse off."
  • Opposition housing spokesperson Michael Sukkar said the Coalition would reform the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority if elected and reduce the amount you have to borrow for your home.
  • Chalmers said inflation was "much higher and rising" at the last election.

    "Now, it is much lower and falling. Inflation was higher than 6 per cent when we came to office, and it was rising fast. It peaked in 2022, the year that we were elected," he said.

    "And now, it is a fraction of what we inherited from Peter Dutton's Coalition. It's gone from 6.1 per cent and rising before the election, and it's now 2.4 per cent and underlying inflation is coming down as well."
  • Education Minister Jason Clare has condemned Peter Dutton's comments that Australian schools have been infiltrated by a "woke agenda", saying children should be protected from the Coalition's own agenda. "When Peter Dutton started saying today that he's going to cut funding to health and education, I thought it was an April fool's, but he said it last night as well. And that should put the fear of God into any Australian that cares about our kids."
  • Peter Dutton was asked in his press conference to match former Liberal prime minister Tony Abbott's 2013 election commitment to maintain funding for health, education, ABC, and SBS.

    Abbott subsequently made budget cuts in a number of those areas.

    Dutton said he would commit to funding health and education at similar levels but did not directly address the question of matching Labor's funding for public broadcasters.

One party is offering up their ideas & policy.

The other is telling us how bad the other one is.


What are we voting for?
 
I’m not into politics it’s all BS as far as I’m concerned. Both parties seem to make promises that they can’t keep or not get it to where they said was promised. But this election it is a weak one as both candidates are not great. It’s probably the weakest election I’ve had in my life since I’ve been old enough to vote. Albo and Dutton are both not well liked and neither can really be trusted although I think Dutton is definitely the worse one out of the two of them in terms of who is well liked. Regardless who wins the upcoming election Australia is unfortunately not gonna get better under either party or leadership.
 
I’m not into politics it’s all BS as far as I’m concerned. Both parties seem to make promises that they can’t keep or not get it to where they said was promised. But this election it is a weak one as both candidates are not great. It’s probably the weakest election I’ve had in my life since I’ve been old enough to vote. Albo and Dutton are both not well liked and neither can really be trusted although I think Dutton is definitely the worse one out of the two of them in terms of who is well liked. Regardless who wins the upcoming election Australia is unfortunately not gonna get better under either party or leadership.
I assume you are a younger voter? (Forgive me if I'm wrong)

Why do you think Dutton is worse? Not being critical- curious only.
 
nothin better than the poors votin against their own interest coz they read something online.
'we need someone strong like don to make australia great again'
 
I assume you are a younger voter? (Forgive me if I'm wrong)

Why do you think Dutton is worse? Not being critical- curious only.
Yes you are correct my first time being able to vote was back in 2013 for Abbot and Rudd turned 18 that year. But I think Dutton is a very unlikeable candidate probably the worst candidate Liberal could have put forward after Morrison lost back in 22. I think it’s why Labor lost when Bill Shorten was their leader for the 2016 and 19 federal elections he was very unlikeable as well. To be clear I don’t support Labor or Liberal both have their strengths and weaknesses we can all debate about which party is better or worse but I always stay out of it as I said it’s all BS. But I do think if Liberal lose the upcoming election, it’s because they put Dutton as their leader.
 
Yes you are correct my first time being able to vote was back in 2013 for Abbot and Rudd turned 18 that year. But I think Dutton is a very unlikeable candidate probably the worst candidate Liberal could have put forward after Morrison lost back in 22. I think it’s why Labor lost when Bill Shorten was their leader for the 2016 and 19 federal elections he was very unlikeable as well. To be clear I don’t support Labor or Liberal both have their strengths and weaknesses we can all debate about which party is better or worse but I always stay out of it as I said it’s all BS. But I do think if Liberal lose the upcoming election, it’s because they put Dutton as their leader.
I suspect a majority of younger voting demographic feel/vote in similar ways.
 
I suspect a majority of younger voting demographic feel/vote in similar ways.
I think a lot of younger people today don’t care about politics and the few that do go about it for the wrong reasons. Honestly the best outcome for Australia might be a whole different party winning the election. But I don’t think that’ll happen anytime soon.
 
Last edited:
As state previously both candidates Albo and Dutton are both poor examples of a leader who offer nothing of substances. In lamo terminology they are a pack of liars that should have been thrown out along time ago. We have weak and inconsistent state and federal laws, no heavy or medium industry, a imbalance migration pattern that needs to be overhaul and changed, We allow foreign investors(countries) to buy our land, our farms, chunks of housing, airports, to which labor and liberals cannot fix because they do not have strong leaders or deputy leaders who stand up and drive the change.

What is scary if the Greens and Teals get more seats and we go to war within 2 years we are going to be in big trouble.
 
And here we have the ALP trying to tie in the LNP with a MAGA-, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon-DOGE link, knowing it will make those with strong feelings against how America voted fearful.

It would be the wise idea to see what is proposed.

Remember- Greece went broke on it's over reliance on public sector employment. And anyone would know that public sector employment can be used to mask real unemployment stats.

The ALP should be taken more seriously, if instead of fear-mongering, they enforced their own policy strengths instead.

It should never be an election about "look what they are doing!" and ALWAYS about "this is what we intend to do".
I don’t know what the fuss is about? There are 2.5m public service employees, many of whom are on maternity leave right now and of those around 40% don’t return to work at the end of their leave.
Since forever, Labor have increased the PS sector, while their opponents have reduced the numbers to a more affordable level, usually by natural attrition.
People who suggest us Aussies are copying off USA on this matter haven’t been paying attention.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top