|
bowmore posted:I watched the 4Corners documentary on the mistreatment in the juvenile justice system today, I was shook by it almost to the point of disassociating, gently caress there are some scum running this country lynch them
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 12:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:46 |
|
|
here is the link if you haven’t seen it: https://tv.press.abc.net.au/australias-shame-four-corners
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 12:28
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 12:38
|
|
|
Guess I'm voting 1 labor
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 12:43
|
|
|
G-Spot Run posted:Guess I'm voting 1 labor Bring on the red wave.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 12:49
|
|
|
If that is their plan when they get cocky then i’m in
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 12:58
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 13:09
|
|
|
JBP posted:Also people liked Ludlam because vidja games. and that one time he said "for the lulz" in the senate what a mad lad amirite
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 13:42
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ABCthedrum/status/1023880608878014464
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 13:42
|
|
|
"When a poo poo apple falls from a tree and grows up in a field of poo poo, it doesn't have a choice. Just like
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 14:19
|
|
|
Beetphyxious posted:the greens have an image problem that is an issue of their legacy of tree hippies. re branding allows that image to be shed quicker than just charging ahead and pretending there isn't a problem. Nah, I don't think that's going to work. Dunno about anywhere else but my impression is that'd alienate a lot of the existing members here (can anyone say splits?). I mean, I'm not sure I'd remain involved if they suddenly rebranded (partially coz I'm not sure I could tolerate defending it for the next however long to everyone I know who isn't a member) So far what I've found works best at dispelling the myths is getting involved in the community and being upfront about your party membership. I get the impression many people have discounted the greens because of this cultural meme they're all lunatics and hippies, but it's harder to discount people you know who seem to regularly shower and wear shoes but are also campaigning to end mandatory detention or whatever. It's a bit disappointing a lot of people are so easily swayed by the mainstream media, but it's also encouraging that you can affect the people around you. It would probably never have occurred to my partner to vote Green if it weren't for me, and I probably would have never joined if it weren't for all the goons in here who are members. That seems to be how it works for most members I've met - they met or knew someone involved and decided to join in. This all being said, I think the main myth that needs dispelling is that nothing can change, we have to wait for all the baby boomers to die and millennials can do gently caress all about everything going to poo poo - I admit I'm definitely guilty of this train of thought. But things don't get better if you stay at home, and if me and everyone I know who complained converted the effort they spent complaining into the unglamorous and thankless task of trying to enact change, change would happen faster. I get why people don't want to get involved - it's unpaid work, few people really want to spend their free time doorknocking or phone banking or handing out leaflets and the moment you show you're not an idiot and somewhat reliable the organisers tend to ask you to do more stuff, but... A couple of hours on polling day or doing one doorknock with a friend is a relatively small commitment and helps them cover more ground. I guess I'm preaching to the converted, just I've heard "I'm just one person" a bit too much recently. I get it, I understand completely, I'm just frustrated
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
froglet posted:Nah, I don't think that's going to work. Dunno about anywhere else but my impression is that'd alienate a lot of the existing members here (can anyone say splits?). I mean, I'm not sure I'd remain involved if they suddenly rebranded (partially coz I'm not sure I could tolerate defending it for the next however long to everyone I know who isn't a member) Nice meltdown
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 16:52
|
|
|
You would stop being involved with the greens if their policies remained, but they rebranded? I don't believe that, it makes absolutely no sense outside of sports team politics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
They're not going to rebrand, it's a global movement. Just drop it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:10
|
|
|
starkebn posted:They're not going to rebrand, it's a global movement. Just drop it. nah, i'll keep posting about what I want to thanks champ.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
Beetphyxious posted:nah, i'll keep posting about what I want to thanks champ. i love those kissy lips *smooch*
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
I want to rebrand into a good poster
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
starkebn posted:They're not going to rebrand, it's a global movement. Just drop it. okay so i went and looked right? and there's nothing in the global greens charter that says you must call your part '<insert country name here> greens' so i think we're safe. it's almost like the greens policies and the whole movement are greater than just a name. also of interest, i decided to look which greens/verdes/verts around the world actually had any power. out of 91 member's there are 7 that have some power, in a coalition or on their own. that comes to ~ 7.7% of all member orgs. an eerily similar number to the 8.7% primary vote in the last two federal elections. that's some real winning branding there to cling to. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:41
|
|
|
Anidav posted:I want to rebrand into a good poster anidavyxious
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
Re-branding would be giving in to a sustained NewsCorp campaign to either ignore or discredit the Greens so gently caress that idea. Also changing names would lead to a big dip in votes from your average not engaged with politics punter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:44
|
|
|
nah sorry it wouldn't, for all those things you said.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
Beetphyxious posted:anidavyxious Beetphyxious posted:anidavyxious Different brand, same posts
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
van beetham
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
Birdstrike posted:van beetham she says some good stuff
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
anyway im saying this for the benefit of the greens, not to attack them, but some people can't seem to accept anything less than blind allegiance
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
Birdstrike posted:van beetham actually i was looking for a new name
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
actually I've always been interested in what turned van badhams so hostile against the greens. the venom is more than just derived form policy and ideology.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
MysticalMachineGun posted:Re-branding would be giving in to a sustained NewsCorp campaign to either ignore or discredit the Greens so gently caress that idea. Maybe Newscorp is right? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
I mean look at all the cool populist party names in Europe like Five Star movement or uh Golden Dawn. Wait gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
Beetphyxious posted:actually I've always been interested in what turned van badhams so hostile against the greens. the venom is more than just derived form policy and ideology. My understanding is she was an “active member” in the same way she’s an “independent journalist” for Labor. She was invested, semicompetent and loud so was on track for candidature at some point. But in the course of six months, Vic Greens started going hard against pokies and Fed Greens supported the part pension changes. Her parents are apparently “working class” owners of several pubs with large investments in pokies companies and were in the process of retiring. The changes materially impacted her parents wealth. All the political capital she thought she’d built up in the party wasn’t enough to change their positions on these things. Her allies and MP contacts weren’t supporting her positions. So she left and basically vowed to destroy the Greens for betraying her personally. (see also why she’s constantly trying to make pokies and greyhound racing “Labor working class” issues)
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
froglet posted:Nah, I don't think that's going to work. Dunno about anywhere else but my impression is that'd alienate a lot of the existing members here (can anyone say splits?). I mean, I'm not sure I'd remain involved if they suddenly rebranded (partially coz I'm not sure I could tolerate defending it for the next however long to everyone I know who isn't a member) An excellent post and I agree completely. I'm a Greens member and I've never hugged a tree in my life. My issues are societal - I believe that right wing economics damages our economy and thus our country with purported gains that have never materialised, and I believe that climate change is real and threatens all of us and that doing nothing about it is not an option. I have managed to convince a fair number of friends and co-workers to vote Greens who would have never even considered the thought. Not because they hate our policy platform (and often they agree with it when they actually look into it) but because we just aren't in peoples' minds due to how little attention we get from the media, and how negative most of that attention is anyway ("The Greens are a leftie rabble who put fluffy animals, drugs and sexual freedom above the economy"). When I show that I am a Greens member for serious non-esoteric reasons, and that I'm not a hippie stereotype but a relatively boring computer programmer, it normalises the image of the party a little. That they are an actual choice to vote for in the election. Whenever the Greens get bashed in discussion, in this thread and elsewhere, it's rarely over their policy platform.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 23:36
|
|
|
The Greens branding and name is, if not fine (it is perfectly fine IMO) not the main thing dragging down our potential successes considering we face probably the most hostile media landscape out of any party not because our logo is a triangle but because we actually want to seriously improve most people's lives and standard of living. As long as that's the case the smears will never ever stop but if that does change then there's no reason to vote Green anyway and they'll continue as long as we're even slightly to the left of Abbott so 
Aesculus fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Jul 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
I just want a leftist party that tastes like real left
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
Whitlam posted:Genuine question: if not the ALP, where should they have gone? I don't know; perhaps they should sell their preferences more dearly though. ALP benefit doubly by throwing rocks at them publicly and doing deals in the back room, don't imagine the electorate can't see that. If you listened to the current Buzzfeed political podcast, the narrative from the big parties is, don't cozy up to them, they'll steal your primary vote, and that's absolutely true because they're supposed to. They're supposed to lose their primary vote to other parties if they keep playing this business as usual bullshit and neither major party so far has been willing to face that honestly. That too, riles the electorate who feel ignored. I feel as long as the Greens play this game the way the ALP wants, they'll get nowhere. If they're forced to give their preferences somewhere, give it to the least likely to win, or perhaps do a preference sharing deal among minor parties so the message finally gets through to the majors: no preferences for you today. Of course this is merely frustration with the current state of affairs, I don't think the Greens are up to playing hardball, its my biggest gripe with them. Beetphyxious posted:You would stop being involved with the greens if their policies remained, but they rebranded? I don't believe that, it makes absolutely no sense outside of sports team politics. I wish you would rebrand your posting. ewe2 fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Jul 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 23:53
|
|
|
bell jar posted:I just want a leftist party that tastes like real left the blind sip test favours one nation
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
ewe2 posted:
don't need to when you're on top 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
The intelligentsia run this loving town now, dawg
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 23:56
|
|
|
bell jar posted:I just want a leftist party that tastes like real left This is also a part of the problem I think. If we have strong leftist policies such as free universal access to tertiary education, and dental care for all but nobody ever talks about them, nobody publicises them, our spokespeople for them spend their time talking about the environment instead, and we're not given any campaign materials for them, do we have strong leftist policies?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2018 23:58
|
|
|
Kafka Syrup posted:My understanding is she was an “active member” in the same way she’s an “independent journalist” for Labor. She was invested, semicompetent and loud so was on track for candidature at some point. hmm this is an interesting and somewhat new (to me) theory. i can't find much in a quick search about her parents owning several venues, just that her dad worked as a manager in one. i'll look into that a bit further.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:46 |
|
|
Aesculus posted:This is also a part of the problem I think. If we have strong leftist policies such as free universal access to tertiary education, and dental care for all but nobody ever talks about them, nobody publicises them, our spokespeople for them spend their time talking about the environment instead, and we're not given any campaign materials for them, do we have strong leftist policies? no no aesculus, it is us who are wrong. the greens are doing great atm. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 00:09
|
|