First up, I should note that elections will be held for two seats in Tasmania’s state upper house today (UPDATE: Make that three), as part of the 15-seat chamber’s cycle of annual periodical elections. Read Kevin Bonham’s rolling posts on the subject, for the electorate of Montgomery here and Pembroke here (UPDATE: and Nelson here), and you’ll be a lot better informed about it than I am. Nonetheless, I will make a probably half-hearted effort to live blog the results from 6pm this evening. Second up, a good word for the latest episode of the Seat du Jour series, which today covers the famous outer Sydney seat of Lindsay.
Now to business. The misadventures of sundry candidates are making it a constant challenge for me to keep my federal election guide up to date. The tally of candidates who will remain on the ballot paper despite having “withdrawn” to head off embarrassment for their parties now sits at six – although there is nothing to stop any candidate on the ballot paper winning election and taking their seat. Indeed, the two Senate candidates could theoretically win on recounts if the lead candidates end up being disqualified under some or other provision of Section 44 (or, in the case of One Nation candidate Malcolm Roberts in Queensland, re-disqualified). In turn:
• The second candidate on Labor’s Northern Territory Senate ticket, Wayne Kurnorth, was found to have shared anti-Semitic videos on Facebook in 2015, one of which featured popular British conspiracy theorist David Icke’s thesis that the world is run by shape-shifting Jewish lizards. Shorten overreached in distancing himself from Kurnorth, asserting he had never met him, a claim belied by a photo of the two that shortly emerged.
• Another “zombie” Senate candidate is Steve Dickson, who is placed second on One Nation’s ticket in Queensland. Dickson held the state seat of Buderim for One Nation for most of 2017, having previously been a Liberal National Party member since 2012. His troubles arose earlier this week when footage emerged of him offering poetic musings on the art of love while in a strip club, specifically relating to the deficiencies in that field of “Asian chicks”. This revelation for some reason reduced Pauline Hanson to tears during one of her daily appearances on commercial network television on Wednesday.
• Labor’s candidate for Melbourne, Luke Creasey, withdrew yesterday, two days after a report appeared in The Australian regarding his social media activity in 2012, at which time he was a 22-year-old university student. The most publicisied of Creasey’s infractions was to click “like” on what those who know their way around social media would recognise as a “psycho girlfriend meme”, in this case involving a joke about false rape allegations. He at first offered only an apology for what he acknowledged was “stupid, immature” behaviour, but a divide reportedly opened within the party between Creasey’s own Left faction, which wanted him to tough it out, and some on the Right, who insisted he be dumped. Importantly, The Australian reports the latter included Noah Carroll and Sam Rae, respectively the party’s national and state secretaries.
• Isaacs candidate Jeremy Hearn was one of two Liberals to announce his withdrawal on Wednesday, after it emerged he had written a number of comments on Facebook to the effect that the Muslim community wished to overthrow the Australian government and institute sharia law.
• Also pulling the plug on Wednesday was the Liberal candidate for Wills, Peter Killin, who wrote on a Christian conservative forum in 2016 that its readers should have participated in the Liberal preselection in Goldstein, as their doing so would have ensured the defeat of a “homosexual MP”, Tim Wilson.
• Jessica Whelan withdrew as the Liberal candidate for Lyons yesterday over anti-Muslim posts on Facebook, although she says she will continue to campaign as an independent. Whelan’s problems began on Wednesday when The Mercury reported she had posted that Muslims should not be allowed to live in Australia, and that Donald Trump should deal with Muslim-sympathetic feminists by giving them clitoridectomies and selling them to Muslim countries. She initially responded that the screen shots were fabricated, and referred the matter to the Australian Federal Police. Scott Morrison’s position on Thursday was that this was good enough for him, although he appeared to go to some lengths to avoid getting too close to Whelan when the two appeared together at a pre-arranged promotional opportunity at an agricultural show. However, Whelan appeared to change her mind about both the views expressed and their having been fabricated when she announced her withdrawal yesterday, prompting Morrison to complain he had been lied to. The Liberals will now encourage supporters to vote for the Nationals candidate, Deanna Hutchinson.
Horse race latest:
• In his column in the News Corp tabloids today, David Speers relates that “hard heads” in the Liberal Party doubt they can win. As one such reportedly puts it: “If we had another three months, who knows”.
• Steven Wardill of the Courier-Mail reported on Thursday that Labor sources said the party was “losing its grip” in Coalition-held marginals in regional Queensland where it led early in the campaign.
• Jennifer Hewett of the Financial Review reported on Monday that Liberals were “increasingly optimistic about internal polling” in Flinders, where Greg Hunt was “no longer at real risk”. Elsewhere in Victoria, Deakin was “considered solid”, although Corangamite was “much less certain”. The only seats in Victoria the Liberals were giving away were Dunkley and Chisholm.
• Andrew Clark of the Financial Review reports Liberal polling in Wentworth shows them “in a winning position, though the numbers are extremely close”, while in Warringah, Zali Steggall’s campaign is spruiking a poll that has her leading on the primary vote, with Tony Abbott said to be stuck on around 40%.
• For the second time in the campaign, the Liberals have provided the media – in this case Matthew Denholm of The Australian – with polling conducted by TeleReach that shows Bill Shorten with poor personal ratings in northern Tasmania. The poll gives Shorten a 29% approval and 63% disapproval rating in Braddon (compared with 55% and 37% for Scott Morrison), 37% approval and 56% disapproval in Bass, and 37% approval and 50% disapproval in Lyons. However, as was the case last time, no voting intention numbers appear to have been provided.
Self-promotion corner:
If you’re interested in my take on the state of play in my home state of Western Australia, you can hear a shorter version of it on Monday’s edition of the ABC’s AM program, or a much longer one on The Conversation’s Politics with Michelle Grattan podcast. Then there are my two paywalled articles for Crikey this week, lest anyone be worried that I haven’t been keeping myself busy lately.
From yesterday, an account of the importance of the Chinese community at the election:
Labor won enduring loyalty among many Chinese voters after the Hawke government allowed students to stay in Australia after the Tiananmen Square massacre, and John Howard did lasting damage with his suggestion that Asian immigration should be curtailed during his first stint as leader in 1988. When Howard himself suffered his historic defeat in Bennelong in 2007, the result was widely attributed to the transformative effect of Chinese immigration on the once white middle-class electorate. Increasingly though, the rise of China’s middle class is bringing affluent new arrivals with economic priorities to match, together with a measure of cultural resistance to the broader community’s progressive turn on sex and gender issues.
And from Monday, on Clive Palmer’s preference deal with the Coalition:
If Palmer can get ahead of the third candidate on the Coalition’s ticket, who will have what remains after the first 28.6% is spent electing its top two candidates, a quarter of their vote will then flow to Palmer, if Coalition voters’ rate of adherence to the how-to-vote card in 2016 offers any guide. That could give him a decisive edge over Malcolm Roberts of One Nation, his main competition for a third seat likely to be won by parties of the right. But so far as the Liberals are concerned, the significance of the deal is in showing up what a dim view they must be taking of their prospects, and their readiness to grasp at any straw that happens to come within reach.
Confessions @ #34 Saturday, May 4th, 2019 – 8:22 am
I think we can safely say that Bernie Sanders is an unreconstructed communist at heart. 🙂
Mayor Buttigieg can fulfill his promise to win an era, not just an election.
He could use his dynamic personality and his compelling personal story to correct widespread misconceptions about federal government finance.
It is a good thing to increase taxation on the wealthy in order to reduce inequality of wealth. It is a good thing to increase taxation on social bads such as pollution and resource depletion in order to discourage activities that add to those problems. But those tax measures don’t pay for the United States Government’s spending.
Tax liabilities generate demand for the government’s currency, which enables the government to buy the goods and services that it needs to achieve its goals. Tax liabilities reduce the non-government sector’s spending power, which is important to controlling inflation. But the way that the United States Government spends is simply by keystroking numbers into reserve accounts at the central bank.
There is a seminal academic paper on this topic by one of America’s foremost macroeconomists. Today her name is Stephanie Kelton. It was Stephanie Bell when she published this paper:
Bell, Stephanie. 2000. ‘Do Taxes And Bonds Finance Government Spending?’ Journal of Economic Issues 34(3) 603 – 620.
The United States Government’s spending is constrained by real resource availability and political considerations, not by revenue.
If there are unused real resources for sale in the government’s currency, the government can buy them without increasing taxes or cutting spending on other priorities.
Right now there are ample unused real resources for sale in the government’s currency. The evidence is that there are 6.2 million unemployed people and 9.7 million hidden unemployed people in the United States. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics March 2019 figures cited at https://njfac.org )
Right now the United States Government could run a significantly larger annual deficit without causing an inflation problem.
There is a lot of scope for the United States Government to increase its net spending without causing an inflation problem. It would depend on how the extra spending were targeted.
A federally funded, community-administered Job Guarantee is the most efficient way of maintaining genuine full employment with stable prices at all times. NAIRU full employment is not true full employment.
There is a recent detailed study of the likely macroeconomic effects of a Job Guarantee in the United States:
http://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/public-service-employment-a-path-to-full-employment
So by all means advocate higher taxes for the wealthy as a way to reduce inequality and bring about a more equal society. But it is wrong to claim that those tax increases would “pay for” health care and education and so on. The federal government could do the extra spending right now without raising any taxes or cutting spending in other parts of its budget.
If the economy were at full employment it would be a different conversation. Then it would be necessary to increase taxes and / or cut government spending on other things in order to expand a government program in a non-inflationary manner. But that isn’t the macroeconomic situation that the United States is currently in.
Chaos and cuts.
It’s a good line for undecideds and will sink the LNP.
Keep at it for two weeks.
“Tim Soutphommasane says that at last we have a choice – social democracy or a Trumpified Liberal Party. A good contribution here.”
I also fully agree with Tim, BK, that’s exactly the significance of this Federal election.
“The libs/nats combined primary vote would need to be over 45% for them to retain government and be in a majority , the libs/nats will need 43% + just to retain the 74 seats they hold”
———————-
Not necessarily. Winning a bunch of marginals and copping huge swings (but still retain) in their safe seats could easily be done on a national primary well below 40%
Victoria @ #35 Saturday, May 4th, 2019 – 8:23 am
Joe Biden copped it even before he announced his candidacy! But Trump gets away with worse. The Americans, I shakes me head. 😆
An example of why the Liberals are losing badly on Climate Change..
RMIT fact check says this claim, incomprehensible as it may be, is tosh
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-11/fact-check-coalition-emissions-reduction-angus-taylor/10936652
This one’s for you, Nicholas 🙂
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/24/magazine/pete-buttigieg-smart-harvard-rhodes-scholar-norwegian-language.html?fallback=0&recId=1KfwAr2hJUkhVT6O2lwvVTwnZeR&locked=0&geoContinent=OC&geoRegion=NSW&recAlloc=story&geoCountry=AU&blockId=home-featured&imp_id=801413018&action=click&module=editorsPicks&pgtype=Article®ion=Footer
C@t
Gaslighting is the modus operandi. Same being used here by the fiberals and their fellow travellers. No moral ethics. It is a sad state of affairs.
Thanks BK for the Dawn Patrol.
From the BK Files.
You’ll have to use the Google trick to read this article from Janet Albreschtsen who really unloads on Pauline Hanson.
pauline-maybe-the-problem-is-you/news-story/a68b7aa1ac29b442d8245eb023bf7add
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/pauline-maybe-the-problem-is-you/news-story/a68b7aa1ac29b442d8245eb023bf7add
and
There’s quite a bit more in the same vein which seems like shooting fish in a barrel.
I eagerly await Ms. Janet Albrechtsen’s similar shootout with Mr. Morrison in which she gleefully lists the lies, evasions, distortions and cunning plans of the last few years.
Ms. Albrechtsen has already done over Mr. Shorten more than once.
Don’t get up Muriel I’ll make the coffee and toast. ☕ 🍞
Why is there no emoji for vegemite ❓
New Politics says that this is a ‘change’ election, where there’s a possibility that it could realign conservative parties forever and, if Labor wins, create the conditions for future governments to be more adventurous in policy development.
https://newpolitics.com.au/2019/05/03/most-exciting-2019-election-campaign-continues/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=most-exciting-2019-election-campaign-continues
Would be interesting to see new polls this weekend?
Mayor Buttigieg’s candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination would be useful if he focused his campaign on highlighting these issues:
unemployment
inequality
Job Guarantee
how federal government finance actually works
I find it amazing that people on here automatically believe Right Wing and/or Russian propaganda aimed at both Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn.
Oh dear,
Liberal candidate Mina Zaki’s eligibility to sit in parliament questioned
Re the debate last night, which I watched with interest, I don’t entirely understand how one can rate these things in terms of a “win” or “loss” : is it a case of who puts forward the best arguments, who wins over the audience in the room, who the media thinks won, or simply a matter of who had the biggest foot in mouth moment? Or some weighted combination of all of them?
Anyway, on any of these counts, I would have to say that I thought Shorten performed a little better than Morrison, and that his win was more clear cut than on Monday. I have never seen Shorten so fired up, and this is very much to his advantage: as is anything that moves him away from his standard speaking style (which is reminiscent of a nervous young man at a school prize-giving ceremony).
However, I also think that there’s something in the suggestion that Shorten came across as being a bit arrogant. And, let’s face it, that’s because he is a pretty arrogant guy: I have heard people from Vic Labor who said that, as far back as 2000, he gave the impression that he thought he was on an inevitable path to the Lodge. And then there was Beaconsfield back in 2006, which – fairly or unfairly – many people still seem to see as a rather unashamed bit of grandstanding.
Of course, aspirant PMs should be arrogant: it didn’t do Menzies, Hawke or (until the sad end of his career) Gough too much harm. But Gough, Hawke and Menzies (in his second time round) all went through long political apprenticeships and experienced many hard knocks along the way which rounded out their political personalities, tempering their hubris with a bit of pragmatic pessimism and a willingness to listen to others. Shorten, like Rudd, has had something of a dream run to the top, and his inner hubris sometimes stands out as needing a bit more sandpapering.
But, whereas Rudd IMO never amounted to much more than a stream of self-promoting verbiage, Shorten is a practical bloke and a highly effective wheeler-dealer who is able to get important stuff done: ask anyone in the disability sector, where his lingering reputation from his time as Minister remains very large. I continue to think that, while he is a poor campaigner, Shorten’s would make a pretty good fist of the job of PM.
And, last night, for almost the very first time in a campaigning situation, I saw a little bit of that side of Shorten come through as well. The content of some of his answers was very good and demonstrated a deep understanding of what he was talking about: alas, once again, not in relation to dividend imputation (but his heart really doesn’t seem to be in that policy: I’d love to have a candid conversation with him about what he really thinks of it).
The really good content of Shorten’s answers, plus his could of excellent quips (particularly the one on the NEG), was a little tarnished IMO by the rather stilted stuff of asking questioners their names and promising to talk to them afterwards. Peta Credlin – who I acknowledge knows more about campaigning than most – seemed to think this was first rate stuff, but, while it might work well for an Abbott or Morrison, Bill really struggles to make it seem at all natural. I like him the best when he tells us exactly what he thinks: eg re the NEG. In some ways, for most of the last 5.5 years we seem to have been seeing a Bill who has been pre-programmed by the minders. It hasn’t really worked that well for him, and perhaps, just perhaps, if he can throw the minders off for the next two weeks and give us (if you’ll forgive the term) the “real Bill”, he might just nail this.
Otherwise, I’m continuing to feel that Labor might just pull up short of the finishing line.
The Liberal Party twitter account is posting this..
sprocket_ @ #67 Saturday, May 4th, 2019 – 9:04 am
No its not, car sales are down, house prices are down, wages are stagnant, the dollar is below 70 US c, coal is crashing, etc etc etc…
https://www.thecut.com/2019/05/the-hypocritical-policing-of-caster-semenyas-body.html?utm_source=fb&utm_campaign=nym&utm_medium=s1&fbclid=IwAR3zelcbs7putnXbLsuC57PKh-RAx8PZWqO9qv0Swelzq_rQZwJX2eI3_O4
It is a complex issue because Caster Semenya was raised as a girl and identifies as a woman. Socially and culturally she is a woman. I can only imagine how hurtful it is to be told that you aren’t female enough to compete against other women unless you take testosterone-suppressing medication. Biologically Caster Semenya has some female attributes and some male attributes.
The reason for separating men and women in competitive sport is because male testosterone levels give male athletes significantly more muscle mass, muscle strength, and capacity to supply oxygen to the muscles.
If a person’s natural testosterone level is in the range that is typical for males, there is a logical fairness-based argument that this person should be competing against male athletes.
Competitive sport would be boring and unfair if people with testosterone levels in the female range were competing against people with testosterone levels in the male range.
‘How clever was Shorten in walking a step forward as Morrison moved towards him, getting him close enough to make the space invader comment work? Very well done.’
Your not related to Erich von Daniken by any chance, are you Burgy?
Our great PM win the second leaders debate by a mile and he will lead our great LNP to victory on May 18.
bill shorten just looks like a bully and is not fit to be PM of this great country of ours
meher baba
All the good ones have had an apprenticeship and Shorten is no different. Shorten has had most arduous apprenticeship and has come through it better for experience.
On meeting Shorten on his arrival in Canberra it was impossible not be aware of his self-assured arrogance and political intentions.
Shorten’s connections both social and in business are impressive. They will be a great help to him in “keeping his feet on the ground”.
Shorten will be a successful PM because he has achieved everything already to get to the position of PM elect.
Everyone qualifies comments about Shorten and never really give an accurate and truthful reason why they qualify.
With regard to my minor experience with Shorten, Shorten was about to have his twig snapped, sensed it and pulled back to rethink. Impressive.
In no more than half way through Shorten’s first term the accolades will be prolific and broadly diverse.
Sit back and enjoy the ride.
Looks as if yet another Liberal candidate has a s44 problem: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/04/liberal-candidate-mina-zakis-eligibility-to-sit-in-parliament-questioned
Taking into account William’s comments above about Dunkley and Chisholm being conceded by the Liberals, I am trying to get my head around what that means when the redistribution in Victoria is factored in.
There were three seats I think that the redistribution effectively handed to Labor, but I cannot recall which ones they were. If Dunkley and Chisholm were two of them, then presumably that would mean Labor would end up gaining three seats in total in Victoria (assuming no others changed hands).
Can anyone shed some light on this please?
Darn
Seat of jaga jaga now encompasses some of scullin
Darn
Should add will only help jaga jaga be more safe for Labor
Darn
The redistribution in Victoria has turned the Victorian seats of Corangamite and Dunkley from Liberal seats into notional Labor seats. Labor notionally holds the new seats of Bean (ACT) and Fraser (VIC), but loses a seat with the abolition of Port Adelaide (SA).
2018 Federal Redistribution – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting …
https://www.abc.net.au › news › elections
Thanks BK for this morning’s wrap. I agree Bongiorno’s column is excellent.
Even PvO said this was a terrible look for Morrison.
By the next election the growth in Melbourne will be such that there will be an extra seat there at the expense of rural Victoria – probably somewhere in the north-west & west will go.
By 2025 the growth in Victoria will see one more seat there and one less in W.A.
Best one yet I think:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D5o7gdQUUAErj0X?format=jpg&name=small
That’s a beauty Zoidlord!
Nicholas: “It is a complex issue because Caster Semenya was raised as a girl and identifies as a woman. Socially and culturally she is a woman.”
It isn’t that complex IMO. My view on this is exactly the same as the one expressed by Martina Navratilova, for which she was howled down by the LGBTIQ and whatever constituency. (Actually, I believe the current alphabetical soup is LGBTTIQQAP, and I might have missed a letter in there somewhere).
On the one had you have Semenya, who is clearly a woman (albeit a biologically unusual one) and should be considered as such, and consequently be allowed to compete in women’s sporting events.
On the other, you have – however they wish to portray themselves in a cultural sense – is, in biological terms, a bunch of males representing themselves as females and thereby wanting to compete in women’s events on a totally unfair basis: and, if we are talking about sports in which there is any body contact involved, at considerable risk to the biological females involved. IMO, no sensible person could possibly consider this situation to be the least bit fair.
The real problem here is the rapid elevation via the political left to mainstream discourse of what I consider to be a fringe and scientifically ludicrous view that “gender is an artificial continuum” and that biology should be considered to be irrelevant.
I have several transexual/transgender/intersex friends, one relative and several work colleagues over the years. I have always been strongly sympathetic and supportive towards them, and I think it is terrific that the varied ways of living they have adopted have become more recognised and accepted in many western societies. But, in the same way that I believe in the science of climate change, I also believe in the science that says that male and females, particularly in mammalian species are creatures with a number of significantly different biological characteristics. I support the right of anyone to live culturally and socially as whatever gender they want, but (subject to future scientific breakthroughs) the biology remains what it is and, in instances such as sporting competitions, it needs to be seen as having a continuing relevance.
Our great PM win the second leaders debate by a mile and he will lead our great LNP to victory on May 18.
bill shorten just looks like a bully and is not fit to be PM of this great country of ours…..
This is an interesting breakout.
https://twitter.com/MichaelPascoe01/status/1124450681023156224
The federal redistribution made Corangamite line-ball and Dunkley marginal Labor. Chisholm on the other hand was made a little safer for the Liberals by the redistribution, the new Liberal margin is 2.9% there.
I think/hope that the problem that the Libs have is that the more people see of Morrison, the more that they are turned off him, whereas at the moment, the more they see of Shorten, the more they may be warming to him. From the first debate, to 7.30 to the second debate, he is performing better than most expected.
The entire LNP narrative, supported by the media of course, was that Shorten was so unpopular, Morrison would wipe the floor with him during the campaign etc etc.
Policies?
Who needs them, when Shorten’s unpopularity, the likelihood of him stuffing up, and a fear campaign is enough.
Two weeks is a long time, and they’re sure to dig some dirt on Shorten, but at the moment the LNP strategy looks to be disintegrating before our eyes.
Darn @ #74 Saturday, May 4th, 2019 – 9:27 am
Dunkley, Corangamite and the new seat of Fraser.
Michael: “Looks as if yet another Liberal candidate has a s44 problem: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/04/liberal-candidate-mina-zakis-eligibility-to-sit-in-parliament-questioned”
Well, maybe, but it isn’t it an abysmal state of affairs that someone in such a situation should be barred from running for Parliament.
I harbour a negativity towards judges, barristers and most other varieties of lawyers which I sometimes feel borders on the irrational. And then I am reminded of something like the High Court’s verdict on s44 and it sets me off again. What an enormous and unnecessary waste of time, money and effort that pedantic verdict has produced.
May I ask what the chances of a Liberal Party split is going to be if the Coalition loses the election. Also how likely that Phelps, Steggall, maybe Oakeshott, along any-other similar sort of Independents that could be elected form the nucleus of a new Liberal Party?
Thanks Victoria. Much appreciated. That looks like three certain gains (Dunkley, Chisholm and Fraser), with Corangamite very likely. Not a bad platform to build on.
Surely a little space invader game is needed that goes viral for people bored at work or elsewhere. Comprising of invaders of Scomos head moving down towards a labor gun that takes them out. Upon destroying each invader a phase is displayed such as climate change, banking royal commission, etc.
There was a helicopter game involving Bronwyn Bishop that worked a treat and was fun.
Thanks GG
Thanks Tristo
The real Dave @ #91 Saturday, May 4th, 2019 – 9:55 am
See my post at 7:49am
@HughRiminton
I pay a subscription to the @dailytelegraph. Now my access is blocked unless I agree to a @newscorpaus website sharing information about me. Can this be right? Why would I pay to have my information used by #Newscorp? Are they nuts?
Tristo:
The Liberal party seems to be aping the Republicans: moderate voices ditching the party membership, or being excluded, leaving a rump of ideologically-driven, narrow-casted claque of mostly men in the party. If a new party is to emerge it needs to be based on values and policy, rather than personality which is driving UAP and PHON at present.
meher
Yep, in full agreement there. ‘Reasonable steps’ was, well, reasonable.
There are constant complaints about the lack of diversity in parliamentary representation. This will only get worse if the only people who can run as candidates have lived immaculately pure lives and have not a trace of migrant ancestry.
As it is, even a hotly contested seat usually attracts fewer candidates for preselection than a cleaning position advertised in the local paper would.
Holden Hillbilly says:
Saturday, May 4, 2019 at 9:37 am
Do the AEC know about this redistribution?
meher baba
And then I am reminded of something like the High Court’s verdict on s44 and it sets me off again. What an enormous and unnecessary waste of time, money and effort that pedantic verdict has produced.
So you want the judges to decide which parts of the constitution should be upheld & which shouldn’t. An idiotic idea.
You are totally undermining democracy
Don’t be surprised if ScoFo’s “Latham handshake” Space invasion has pretty much finished the LNP off.
He looked like a shit with no self-control. Shorto was just laughing at him, and the audience laughed along too.