Jump to content

Aussies LXV - what choices have we?!


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Squab said:

You could multibet Trump + Shorten at odds of $10.40.  Read the T&Cs as there is usually a maximum payout and they take any and every opportunity to separate you from your money.

Oh, you can multibet anything. I can get Labor winning the next election + Deez Nuts winning the US 2016 election for 1603.20 odds. God betting is dumb. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/05/2016 at 9:00 AM, Yukle said:

By far the most important issue, and I understand that this may be too soon and cut too close to people's emotions, is the utterly evil and disgusting (bordering on inhumane and criminal) changes to the Arnott's Shapes.

The boxes say "New and Improved."

This is a lie. The older shapes were better in every way. I am barely able to function any more. It is inconceivable that a brilliantly excellent product should become so atrocious.

Sorry if this opens too many wounds for everyone else. This is an issue close to my heart, though.

My kids are refusing to eat them, I havent tried them yet. Why change a good thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18 May 2016 at 10:06 AM, The Winged Shadow said:

We obviously need to hold a BwB meet before the election to vent our spleen. Or perhaps one after the election, to shed bitter tears and drown in beers?

Sydney (or non-sydney) folks keen? It's been a while!

Love the idea, but I've been very slack at attending!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I don't know much about predicting the average punter, but I never put much stock in gaffes.

Everyone's bound to have them at some point in their career and to be honest, on a campaign trail with heaps of media people asking "gotcha" questions it's unavoidable. Goodness knows I'd make a lot of fluffs if I were out there and had to know something about everything.

I might indulge in a little schadenfreude here and there (especially if I don't like the politics of whoever makes the gaffe) but I don't actually think it makes much of a difference to voters. Either the person making the gaffe is already well known (e.g. if Turnbull or Shorten made a faux pas, it probably doesn't change much because there are so many other things that people know about them to base their opinion on), or the person making the gaffe isn't known and as such it isn't particularly big news that anyone would notice it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might be closest geographically but there's no bats here. If the number in that article is accurate though, it's hard to overstate how awful it would be to live in that town. Even living near a small colony is annoying. They're smelly and noisy and they have very seedy (literally) shit that is a pain to get off windows and windscreens. I had a friend who lived very close to a bat colony and they gradually started moving onto his land which they were quite concerned about. Last I heard the plan was to literally chop down all their trees if it kept up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We lived near a massive colony of bats a couple of years ago. You could hear the screeching from over a kilometre away in the evenings. But the bat population was decimated in the heatwave of 13/14. Less than 10% of the local population survived...

Bat droppings are a problem, but it's their habitat we're encroaching upon. Cutting down trees so the bats have nowhere to go is a terrible idea. It should be upto us to adapt and co-exist.

On 02/06/2016 at 9:16 PM, Jeor said:

I don't know much about predicting the average punter, but I never put much stock in gaffes.


I agree. The attention these gaffes get is pretty much an epiphenomenon of modern media coverage of political news. If you're looking to score a cheap shot and you're persistent, you will the get the opportunity to land a few, as our esteemed media organisations have demonstrated.

But you've got to admit, there is the odd gaffe that's quite entertaining eg Jaymes Diaz on refugee policy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not so the bats have nowhere to go it's so that you don't have a colony of bats living on your property lol. This isn't out in the sticks with acres of land, this is a suburban town with a small chunk of land next to the house. I'm all for trying to avoid disrupting native species but if I had a colony of bats living next to my house every option would be on the table...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apart from the acidic guano that eats paint and causes Histoplasmosis plus the noise, I think the main problem with fruit bats (or flying foxes) is the diseases they carry.  Generally people only come in contact with sick ones and bats can be affected by Lyssavirus, similar to rabies, but worse.  I know of someone who got it and, after a very long stint in hospital, never really recovered. Hendra virus is also pretty bad but I am not sure if bats are affected.  I know horses get it first then transfer it to humans and the fatality rate is above 50% for both humans and equine. 

Bats commonly carry dangerous diseases, I think they have an advanced immune system that allows them to live with stuff other animals cant.  e.g. They are suspected to be a reservoir for Ebola between outbreaks wherever it occurs.  I found this interesting: Ebola Bat Arms Race

From experience, they also decimate fruit crops and quite often don't eat the whole fruit before moving on to another one so leave a tree where all the fruit is either partially eaten or on the ground.  I know they love mangos and lychees.

My partner thinks I have chiroptophobia.  I think I'm rational.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

So Bolt is flipping his shit.


You assassinated a Liberal Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, who’d won an election by a huge margin.

You promised to do even better than him.

You then treated the Liberal base like dirt, smashing it with a huge super tax, refusing to speak to conservative journalists, repeatedly humiliating Abbott.

You referred to the colonial settlement of Australia as an “invasion” and even held an end-of-Ramadan meal with known Muslim bigots.

You called an early double dissolution election on the excuse of needing new laws to tackle rogue unions with a building and construction commission, but with the true aim of getting rid of crossbench oppositionists in the Senate.

You went to the election with basically only one policy to sell - a pathetic 10-year promise to cut company tax.

And now look. Almost everything turned to ruin.

You have lost so many seats that you could even be forced into minority government, if pre-polling and Western Australia go against you.

You have, if anything, lost ground in the Senate, which will block most of your plans.

You will be unable to get the numbers to get your building and construction commission through in any joint sitting of parliament.

You have asked for no mandate for real reform, and will have almost no power to undertake any.

Your popularity, already plummeting, will fall further.

There is no way you can seriously claim that this result is better than anything Abbott could have achieved.

Abbott picked up seven seats at the 2010 election and another 15 in the 2013 election. You have lost between 10 and 15 seats and dumped key Liberal values in doing so.

You have been a disaster. You betrayed Tony Abbott and then led the party to humiliation, stripped of both values and honour.


stripped of both values and honour


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qualification: Coalition are close to clinching this, and they'd be in the box seat if they fall short, but the internal dynamics of this are so bad for Turnbull.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually think a hung parliament is a good result for Labor.

It weakens the Coalition dramatically in that they'll have to negotiate constantly with the minor parties to get things done, and it severely undermines Turnbull's leadership. I suspect there will be at least a lot of talk of infighting, if not an outright spill motion. The Liberals might be smart enough not to throw another leader under the bus (after so many changes in leadership in both parties) but it's not good for Turnbull whatever happens.

On the contrary, for Labor, they didn't win power, but I think this hurts the Liberals and no one is going to be talking about Shorten having to stand down. Labor's leadership is probably more stable. This actually might be a good 'intermediate' result in that people get more used to Shorten having an actual chance (most wrote him off in this election) so that when a hung parliament breaks down in the next 12-24 months, he'll be in a stronger position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...