Prev
Next

So long, Pauline, and thanks for all the fish…

Malcolm Farr

by Malcolm Farr

12 Apr 01:00pm

Must Reads

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses - this is a caption

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses

16

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this - this is a caption

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this

51

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it? - this is a caption

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it?

123

Filed under: Federal Parliament, Nsw Election 2011, One Nation, Pauline Hanson, Politics

142 comments

Pauline Hanson today again pleaded: “They’re picking on me.”

Is Pauline Hanson now destined for the Restaurant at the End of the Universe? Pic: Glenn Campbell

She lost her bid for an eight-year sinecure in the NSW Upper House, the plushest retirement home in Australian politics, and has to blame someone.

The fact that the Labor Party, the Liberals, the Nationals, the Greens, Christian Democrats, Shooters and Fishers didn’t run dead for her was a sign of conspiracy.

The NSW electoral system was “clearly leaning towards the political parties controlling the voting in this state”, said Ms Hanson.

The fact that Hanson has won just one election since, above municipal level, would tend to indicate that the major political parties are well-oiled machines able to swing resources to a single purpose and carry out a plan flawlessly.

However, the evidence is entirely to the contrary. A federal election with no clear result and the failure of a rampant Liberal Party in NSW to get an Upper House majority are exhibits A and B for the case that parties never are so effective.

It’s the voters who run the electoral system and just as they have elected independents in other constituencies (there are four unaligned MPs in the Federal Lower House) they have consistently rejected Pauline Hanson.

Most likely this is because they do not believe she stands for anything…apart from Pauline.

Today, before her disastrous preference count was revealed, Hanson outlined what she represented.

She said she would “have respect for the people, and know that you are not a personality yourself”.

You are there working for the people. And that’s what I want to do.

What on Earth does that mean? Which of the 300-odd candidates for the Upper House wanted to be disrespectful to voters and not work for their constituents?

Hanson simply believes she should be in Parliament because she should be in Parliament, because that is the best way for her to be in Parliament.

She has taken heart from the fact that her vote was up on the tally from her first crack at the NSW Parliament eight years ago. And it might also have been an improvement on her campaign for a state seat in Queensland in 2008, and her attempts to get into the Senate in 2001, 2004 and 2007, and her failure to return to the House of Representatives in 1998.

It must be remembered that Hanson has been elected to just one Parliament, the federal one, and that was in 1996 and she lasted two years until the early election. Later, her own party rejected her, as have voters ever since.

Pauline, the magic has gone should it have been there in the first place. Take the hint.

Most commented

430Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
390There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
336Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
265Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.

142 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Ben81 says:

      01:59pm | 12/04/11

      Don’t give a crap about Pauline either way, the real worry here is that there’s another Greens member in a position of power.  Thankfully they’re most likely at their peak.

      Reply

    • Facts says:

      04:07pm | 12/04/11

      Um, the nationals took the last upper house seat, not the greens. But don’t let that get in the way of your fear mongering.

    • Facts says:

      08:23pm | 12/04/11

      Yep, news.com.au got it wrong as well.

      The last seat went to the Nationals. The Greens got the second last seat.

      Try the NSW electoral commission.

    • Ben81 says:

      12:33am | 13/04/11

      Oh, well in light of this new information that doesn’t change anything, i’ll just say that the real worry here is that there’s another Greens member in a position of power.

    • Tiny Dancer says:

      08:15am | 13/04/11

      The greens are scary

    • Syl says:

      09:18am | 13/04/11

      “Yep, news.com.au got it wrong as well.
      The last seat went to the Nationals. The Greens got the second last seat.
      Try the NSW electoral commission. “

      Ahhhh IC.  Well, to be fair it’s a little harsh to accuse someone of scaremongering when it was reported wrong.

    • Catching up says:

      02:05pm | 12/04/11

      All I can say is it will be good for democracy that the Coalition has some curbs on what they bring to parliement.

      Reply

    • bella starkey says:

      02:08pm | 12/04/11

      I can’t understand why anyone would have voted for her in the NSW election (policy positions aside). She has no interest in anything other than being elected. It is one thing for political parties to parachute promising candidates into safe seats, it’s another ball game to parachute yourself into an entirely new jurisdiction (? I’m not sure what word you would use for it).

      Surely, if one wants to enter a different level of government they would choose somewhere that they have some sort of connection to, like a state they actually live in, rather than cynically set up shop a few months before the election and expect the people of that state to believe you care about anything other than your own ambition.

      Reply

    • OMG says:

      02:48pm | 12/04/11

      ” She has no interest in anything other than being elected”
      And the difference between her and the rest is?
      Oh I get it, the rest wern’t interested in being elected.They just had nothing on that day. Sheesh. No wonder Labor was allowed to govern all those years. People like Bella are allowed to vote!

    • fml says:

      02:53pm | 12/04/11

      @OMG,

      I think what bella is questioning is, the amount of time Pauline has spent in the constituency she is running for? Will she be better able to represent the people in her new constituency better than the politicians that have been there for longer?

      Its actually quite a valid question.

    • Bobster says:

      03:06pm | 12/04/11

      Why do you think politicians get into it then, OMG? For the pay? For the adoration of the public?

    • Geoff - Brisbane says:

      03:14pm | 12/04/11

      @fml - Apparently so, as she received the majority primary vote.

    • OMG says:

      03:15pm | 12/04/11

      “I think what bella is questioning is, the amount of time Pauline has spent in the constituency she is running for?”
      Really? Im glad you said “I think”. We had years of home grown Labor politicians living all round NSW.Some lived in their electorates for years. Where did that get us? Now they’re all gone because they were useless and corrupt. Here’s a valid question. Why did you keep voting for them?

    • OMG says:

      03:22pm | 12/04/11

      “Why do you think politicians get into it then, OMG? For the pay? For the adoration of the public?”
      That’s a better question for Bella, Bobby Boy. She’s the one who slammed Pauline and barracked for the rest , not me. Ask her why her heroes are better than Pauline?

    • fml says:

      03:33pm | 12/04/11

      @OMG,

      Yes “I Think”, I cant be 100% sure what bella is saying because i am not bella. I thought that much was obvious.

    • Bobster says:

      03:34pm | 12/04/11

      I asked you. You were the one who implied politicians only seek election for election’s sake. I’d like you to elaborate so that the readers may have a better understanding of your position.

    • Fleeced says:

      04:39pm | 12/04/11

      I’m not exactly a fan of hers, bella, but I can did preference her ahead of the Greens, as she is (IMO) the lesser of two evils (and was bound to be entertaining).

    • OMG says:

      06:35pm | 12/04/11

      Really, where did I imply that? Bella implied that all Pauline wanted to do was get elected.I made the point that all politicians wanted to be elected. So again I’ll ask you. Why did you vote Labor when you knew it was a corrupt shambles ?

    • OMG says:

      06:38pm | 12/04/11

      fml “Yes “I Think”, I cant be 100% sure what bella is saying because i am not bella. I thought that much was obvious”
      You’re ready for Labor preselection with that much foresight !
      Jump on the next summit with Cate Blanchette.

    • Gerard says:

      07:14pm | 12/04/11

      When will people wake up to the fact that the Liberal and Labor parties don’t give a toss about what’s good for the country and seek power purely for its own sake? Whatever your view on Hanson, it is ridiculous to suggest that she could somehow be less committed to her constituents than the moral vacuums known as major party members.

      Also, I find the constant attacks on independents extremely ironic. The very fact that the integrity of independents is repeatedly called into question is an excellent reason for voting for them.

    • Bobster says:

      10:40am | 13/04/11

      “” She has no interest in anything other than being elected”
      And the difference between her and the rest is?”

      Right here. That’s where you did it. Bella said she wanted to be elected for elections sake. You said she was exactly the same as the rest, so I want to know what you think other politicians run for office for?

      Is your position that every single one of them is just there to feather their own nest? That there isn’t a shred of desire to serve the public amongst a single politician of any ilk in any house in any parliament?

      Basically, OMG, I want you to tell me if you have actually thought about your point or if you just decided to jump on the polly-bashing bandwagon without actually knowing (or caring) what it is they do or why they do it.

    • Ryan says:

      10:19am | 15/04/11

      ” She has no interest in anything other than being elected”
      I saw this in the nosebleed section and thought you were talking about Gillard right there, whoops my mistake.

    • Jesse says:

      02:08pm | 12/04/11

      People like to ridicule her, but a lot of stuff she says is true.

      Reply

    • fml says:

      02:37pm | 12/04/11

      People like to ridicule her precisely because none of the things she says is true and that she panders to the lowest common denominator.

      She knows nothing about politics and her political campaign is based on fear, scaremongering and her solitary political catch cry of “Asians go home”. At least the liberals have experience in running a country, which is presumably why they distanced themselves from her.

      The other politicians are smart enough (never thought id say that) to realise that giving her preferences will upset our Asian trade partners. Losing their export contracts would send this country bankrupt, how is this beneficial for Australia? Are you willing to sacrifice this just so you can stop a couple of thousand refugees a year?

    • weej says:

      02:38pm | 12/04/11

      What, stuff like I’m not selling my house to Muslims or I’m leaving Australia and moving to the UK?

    • Bobster says:

      02:41pm | 12/04/11

      Such as…

    • Rose says:

      02:43pm | 12/04/11

      Really, what has she ever said that is true? Not a damn thing!

    • Bobster says:

      03:09pm | 12/04/11

      I suppose you could see her as truthful if you yourself believe this country is in danger of being swamped by Asians or Muslims or any other dark-skinned race, or if you think Aborigines are cannibals (that one was my favourite).

    • John A Neve says:

      03:14pm | 12/04/11

      Fml,
      Please tell us what political party in this country is not about “scaremongering”?
      As to “Asians go home”, is that not what Tony is telling us we should invoke?
      Regarding the thought of “upset(ing) our Asian trade partners”, I see you are one of those who’ed sell their soul for a few bucks.

    • Paul says:

      03:22pm | 12/04/11

      “Well if I’m not from here, then where the bloody hell am I from”

    • fml says:

      03:39pm | 12/04/11

      @John,

      Yes most political parties are about scare mongering, Its just that Pauline does it with a flagrant disregard for our countries International standing. I cant stand Tony either, My point was that both major political parties are distancing themselves from ms hanson.

      “Regarding the thought of “upset(ing) our Asian trade partners”, I see you are one of those who’ed sell their soul for a few bucks.”

      So, insulting our Asian neighbors and stopping all trade with them means that you haven’t sold your soul?

      But conducting trade and keeping amicable relations with our neighbors means that i have no soul? really?

    • The Latte Jet Set says:

      03:42pm | 12/04/11

      The Latte Jet Set run on hot air Jesse. They all live in Brutopia with Krudd, dreaming on. Cameron has denounced multiculturalism, Sarkozy has denounced multiculturalism, Merkel has denounced multiculturalism.
      Hanson was ahead of her time and these inward looking public servants cant see the trees for the forest. All they can see is their own superfund.The Far Right in Europe is the fastest rising political movement there.All because they flooded their own countries with immigrants. When Le Pen stuns France in spectacular fashion,at the next election,perhaps the ostriches will take their heads out of the sand.

    • Ando says:

      03:47pm | 12/04/11

      No it isnt. Thats why she is ridiculed. You may agree with her sentiments but she really uses facts and never has solutiions .

    • Drew says:

      03:49pm | 12/04/11

      If you believe that, Jesse, you obviously have not listening to a single one of her policy announcements. Lets take, for example, the fact that she said that printing more money will boost Australia’s economy.

      Right, because that worked for Zimbabwe.

      You simply can’t get more stupid than this. It makes Sarah Palin look like a Mensa candidate.

    • Drew says:

      04:06pm | 12/04/11

      My mistake, she actually said we could print more money to pay for her policies. Same faeces, different aroma.

    • Sarah says:

      04:10pm | 12/04/11

      Hanson didnt get elected because she couldnt even get 3% of voters to support her.Hanson is an opportunist who spends her time jumping back and forth between NSW and Qld trying to get back on the taxpayer payroll.Pauline we hope you now realise we dont want you representing us.Go back to the fish shop.I bet she now goes back to Qld.

    • Seano says:

      04:28pm | 12/04/11

      I’d like to know what positive contribution Hanson has made in all of her years in public life? I cannot think of one positive achievement, unless of course you count Dancing With The “Stars”.

    • SG says:

      04:29pm | 12/04/11

      100% behing you Jesse.
      Here’s some “actual” Pauline Quotes:
      “ I do not believe that the colour of one’s skin determines whether you are disadvantaged. “
      ” If politicians continue to promote separatism in Australia, they should not continue to hold their seats in this parliament. They are not truly representing all Australians, and I call on the people to throw them out. “
      ” Immigration and multiculturalism are issues that this government is trying to address, but for far too long ordinary Australians have been kept out of any debate by the major parties. I and most Australians want our immigration policy radically reviewed and that of multiculturalism abolished. ”   
      ” My greatest desire is to see all Australians treat each other as equals..”
      ” The majority of Aboriginals do not want handouts because they realise that welfare is killing them. ”     
      ” The most noisy criticism came from the fat cats, bureaucrats and the do-gooders. They screamed the loudest because they stand to lose the most - their power, money and position, all funded by ordinary Australian taxpayers. ”     
      ” To survive in peace and harmony, united and strong, we must have one people, one nation, one flag. ”   
      ” We now have a situation where a type of reverse racism is applied to mainstream Australians by those who promote political correctness. “
      ” We must look after our own before lining the pockets of overseas countries and investors. “

      Sounds pretty mainstream to me. Not anything like the racist demon the media like to portray her as.

      (fml - fyi, I can’t find anywhere on the record where she actually said “Asians Go Home”)

    • Tubesteak says:

      04:35pm | 12/04/11

      She did once say that she’s a proud Australian. I guess that’s true. As for anything else, it is debateable as to what is truth, fact and opinion.

      Thankfully, she didn’t get a chance to run her version of “truth” in NSW. We don’t need that sort of poison here. It’s bad enough that the Christian Democrats and Shooters Party got 2 seats each.

      She only ran to push her personal barrow of ignorance and xenophobia. She has no real interest in NSW.

    • The Latte Jet Set says:

      06:43pm | 12/04/11

      Yea tubby steak,what a pity we didn’t get 10 more tears,I mean years of Liebor.What an improvement that would have been,eh tubby?The Rich Elite could have been back in business thanks to spinners like you.

    • Gerard says:

      07:28pm | 12/04/11

      Tubesteak, the Labor, Liberal, National and Greens versions of “The Truth” are also toxic. So who do you suggest should be running the state?

    • Dan says:

      12:18am | 13/04/11

      The Latte Jet Set, how can those European leaders denounce multiculturalism if they never actually practiced it? France in particular is an absolute disgrace.

      I am delighted that Hanson lost. She has the intelligence of a Sarah Palin, and she is also horribly racist. She proclaimed that she would leave this country; that is one promise I wish she had kept!

    • acotrel says:

      08:44am | 13/04/11

      @fml
      ‘People like to ridicule her precisely because none of the things she says is true and that she panders to the lowest common denominator’

      The fact that she even got more than one vote is an indictment of Australia’s voters!  I personally strongly object to anyone introducing poison into my life, be it family,friends, co-workers, bosses, business owners, or politicians - I DON’t ACCEPT IT !

    • Tom says:

      10:43am | 13/04/11

      SG, Please don’t try to bring truth into the debate, the left don’t like it. Stop using facts. Stick with slogans, vilification and thought ending cliches.

      The left is comfortable and smug in their belief that it is their right to dick with the truth. The left believe that misquoting and pigeon-holing of Hanson is somehow for the good of the punters. So SG, in future please leave out the facts, there’s a good fellow.

    • Johor says:

      01:45pm | 13/04/11

      Seems as if any Tom, Dick or Harriet in Oz can have a political point of view and freedom to express it without snotty opinionated criticism from nobodys except poor old Pauline. Yet there must be enough people around who share her views to have got her to 20th place. She would have got my vote to just to spite her critics and because the system is skewed anyway. As Morris West once famously said, “Australia is only a democracy on election day, thereafter it is a bureaucracy.”

    • Gladys says:

      02:11pm | 12/04/11

      TTFN, Pauline.

      Reply

    • Interested observer says:

      02:15pm | 12/04/11

      As I do not live in New South Wales I was watching the vote count more with amusement than trepidation.  Pauline Hanson has the right to stand for Parliament and the voters have the right to elect or reject her.  I trust the message to the Greens is also understood - one victory at the polls does not guarantee your political longevity.

      Reply

    • Drew says:

      11:16pm | 12/04/11

      Actually it was three victories (they had already won 2 seats). Plus they already held another 2 seats. So 5 seats.

      Does 5 seats gained over 12 years help with political longevity?

    • Knemon says:

      02:16pm | 12/04/11

      I thought Penbo would have written this article grin

      Bye bye Pauline.

      Reply

    • Chad C Mulligan says:

      03:55pm | 12/04/11

      Penberthy probably can’t see the screen through his tears.

      Ah, the tears of the Right.  They taste so sweet.

    • John C says:

      02:17pm | 12/04/11

      I have to admit that the final place going even to the Greens, the Shooters, Fred Nile and, God forgive me, the ALP, was preferable to this scold getting another run in the limelight.

      Reply

    • fairsfair says:

      02:22pm | 12/04/11

      If she means nothing, why has this article been written about her?

      Reply

    • CaptainCrunch says:

      02:59pm | 12/04/11

      Bingo!

      Then there are others here who say she knows nothing about politics. This woman has never left politics - she may not have a seat, but she is still here.

      And I dare say she will try to get more money out of the electoral system next time.

      If she means nothing, why does she lead news shows whenever she makes one statement?

    • Roland says:

      10:45pm | 12/04/11

      she’d not nothing fairsfair, she’s an enduring source of amusement

    • Global Guy says:

      02:32pm | 12/04/11

      Yeah, I don’t know what Pauline’s problem is. Immigrants just want to come here, become wealthy and see their numbers multiply and culture flourish.

      In Texas, the majority of children are now Hispanic. This transformation hasn’t caused any problems, so if by 2050 Australia becomes majority Asian/ African/ Middle Eastern, it shouldn’t cause any problems either - cultures change.

      Reply

    • anti-global guy says:

      03:19pm | 12/04/11

      yeh global guy. Care explaining why white people flourish wherever they go, but hispanics, blacks and asians resort to crime and violence, under the old catch cry of “we’re misunderstood, theres no opportunities, no jobs, no tolerance, white people are all racist” blah blah blah.

    • The Latte Jet Set says:

      03:28pm | 12/04/11

      Maybe Global Guy can tell that to Marine Le Pen from the National Front, now that she is the front Runner in the upcoming French Presidential Election.

    • Ali says:

      02:32pm | 12/04/11

      Hope we have heard the last of her.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      11:38pm | 12/04/11

      Not likely.
      She lost out on 8 years full pay in the NSW Upper House.
      She’ll want to retire somewhere where there is a pay-cheque, and concoct a scenario of fear and suspicion to ...‘keep the bastards honest’.
      She’s bullshit.
      Pure and simple.

    • Randy McCain says:

      02:37pm | 12/04/11

      Pauline Hansen reminds me a red headed female Tony Abbott.  But Tony is more pretty.  Although, Pauline has a better head for Economics.

      Reply

    • jf says:

      02:49pm | 12/04/11

      How so Randy? Please explain.

    • Randy McCain says:

      04:15pm | 12/04/11

      It’s simple jf,  Pauline is not as attractive as Tony.  Put Tony on dancing with the stars with one of those fancy dresses, and he’d look the goods.  Both have ‘slight’ cases of xenophobia.

    • The Latte Jet Set says:

      02:43pm | 12/04/11

      Poor old Farr.He can’t come to terms with the fact that Pauline is Miss 25%.
      If she forms a party,she’s guaranteed 20-25% of the vote straight away. With Labor’s vote at the same level, that means that Malcolm’s outdated and Soy Latte   ideaology is Kaput !

      Reply

    • bobw says:

      02:49pm | 12/04/11

      Ha ha ha - I hope this is a joke.

    • ramastar says:

      02:56pm | 12/04/11

      What? 25%???

      This, again another person on the punch posting nonsense without any fact.

      From Anthony Green:
      Hanson poll 2.23% of the vote
      polled 1.87% of all ATL votes, but has polled 21.9% amongst the much smaller pool of BTL votes

      Hardly miss 25%.

      Should be a name change on your behalf ‘The Latte Jet Set’ to ‘The Miss (or Mr) 100% Incorrect Jet Set’

    • The Latte Jet Set says:

      03:09pm | 12/04/11

      “One Nation gained 22 percent of the vote translating to 11 of 89 seats in Queensland’s unicameral legislative assembly at the 1998 state election and made major inroads into the vote of the existing parties. Federally, the party peaked at the 1998 election on 9 percent”
      Lucky we didnt have proportional Voting eh Phill?? She would have gained 19 seats. Our rigged system of Preferential voting kept her at bay. The reason she only got 9 % Federally was because she contested less than 25% of the seats. Keneally’s party polled 23%. Enjoy your latte.

    • Anna C says:

      03:13pm | 12/04/11

      Actually ramastar, ABC news has reported today that Pauline Hanson got the highest primary vote amongst the candidates; even though she lost the seat on preferences.

    • ramastar says:

      03:31pm | 12/04/11

      So Jet Set, your comparing two elections from over a decade ago? Right.

      Kenneally got 23% in 2011? Well then! Beazley and the ALP got 50.98% of the Vote in 1998. Lucky we don’t proportional voting or he would have gained over 75 of the seats. But that’s ok, our rigged preferential system won’t keep the ALP at bay.

      Oh wait, I’m using an old example and confusing my elections to compare and back up my flawed argument, oh silly me…

    • ramastar says:

      03:38pm | 12/04/11

      @Latte Set

      Also, nice use of Wikipedia as a source.
      FAIL

      Also research fail on your “The reason she only got 9 % Federally was because she contested less than 25% of the seats.”
      One Nation contested 138 of the 148 House of Rep seats in the 1998 Federal Election aprox 93%.

      Enjoy your instant coffee.

    • bobw says:

      03:55pm | 12/04/11

      @TLJS:  (a) How do outlier figures from a 1998 state poll prove that a Hanson-led party would be “guaranteed 20-25% of the vote straight away” in NSW now? (b) Why would a Hanson-led party get 20-25% of the vote when a Hanson-led upper house ticket only managed 2%? (c) “The reason she only got 9% Federally was because she contested less than 25% of the seats” - Wrong, as ramastar has pointed out.  Besides, it got 9% in Senate, not the House of Reps (figure closer to 8% there) - so number of candidates run is basically irrelevant; (d) Who is “Phill”?

    • The Latte Jet Set says:

      07:08pm | 12/04/11

      Beazley ?? Oh yes I remember that joke.He engineered the Collins Class Sub fiasco just like Gillkrudd engineered the Pink batts,the BER,the NBN,the boats,the Carbon tax,the Mining Tax and all the other failed Liebor fiascos, that never eventuated.
      I have no doubt you would confuse yourself. Beazley could have won a 100 seats, but like Juliar and Krudd ,he’s yesterday’s nobody.Labor is a stinking ship full of garbage about to go down like the Adelaide.Pauline on the other hand,has yet to form her new 25% Party!
      BTW Bobw, Out of 11,109,063 voters at that Federal Election, she got 936,621 votes which is 8.43% of the vote. Is that too hard for you? If she contested more seats,her percentage goes up.It’s not that hard Boob. KEV 747 !

    • Sindy says:

      07:14pm | 12/04/11

      Now that labor is on the verge of massive implosion, I can’t wait to see what her percentage will be when Labor voters cant stomach placing a one against the next farcial labor leader .

    • Gawd amighty says:

      10:32pm | 12/04/11

      Give up, you goose.

      “Miss 25%”  - your claim.

      Your laughable claim.  2.2% she got.

      Miss 2% -  in a fair porportional preferential voting system.

      Miss 2%.  Live with it.

    • bobw says:

      10:42pm | 12/04/11

      The Latte Jet Set:  “Is that too hard for you?”

      Not at all.  Do the maths.  One Nation nominated candidates in 139 of 148 seats for 936,621 first prefs.  If it had contested all 148, and if support in the additional nine conformed to the general pattern (a dubious assumption, but still), it would have pulled ~997,265 first prefs, ie around 8.98% of the vote (almost dead level with its Senate result).  Of course, it’s a ridiculous exercise given that:  (a) One Nation in fact chose not to stand the relevant candidates; and (b) if you repeated the exercise with all of the parties who fielded less than 148 candidates, you would artificially inflate the “elector base” and generate a wildly distorted overall picture.

      Not getting much closer to your 20-25%, are we?  Sorry about that.  Still working on your response to my substantive points above, by the way?

    • Phill Power says:

      02:45pm | 12/04/11

      What kind of informed article is this? Your desire to show your bloodmindedness beggars belief! I thought this country was all about giving people a fair go something you have clearly failed to do on this matter. I’d like to see how many votes you’d get for the so called plush upper house seat in NSW.

      Reply

    • fml says:

      03:05pm | 12/04/11

      So?

      Pauline’s policies are about giving people a fair go?

    • Warren says:

      03:07pm | 12/04/11

      Phill Power. Hanson had a fair go. Seven times from memory. About 2% of the population were willing to vote for her, its called democracy. What part of that don’t you understand?

    • James1 says:

      03:50pm | 12/04/11

      fml, Phill must be referring to Ms Hanson’s policy of running in an election every time she looks to be running out of money.  Each time she runs, she pockets a nice wad of cash.

      A fair go for Pauline Hanson, on the taxpayer.

    • Maureen King says:

      03:58pm | 12/04/11

      Exactly Phill. Despite all the naysaying she got 6,500 MORE than her nearest opponent. So what was her total vote? Obviously a hell of a lot of voters in that electorate voted for her.  What business is it of anyone’s outside of that electorate. Greens didn’t win outright.

    • Ish says:

      04:45pm | 12/04/11

      She didn’t run in an electorate, she ran for the upper house, we all had the chance to vote for her if that was our wish, but for the majority of us it wasn’t and the big parties directed their preferences away from her. She had another go and failed, again. So long Pauline, best to stick with what you know best…I’ll have a battered sav thanks

    • Tubesteak says:

      04:50pm | 12/04/11

      Maureen

      She was running in the Legislative Council. There are no electorates.

    • forgot how to spell it says:

      02:52pm | 12/04/11

      Im glad the will of the people can be overriden.We cannot have the tyranny of the majority having a say .I for one am glad they do lots of wheeling and dealing to keep anyone out they decide is not the right person for us .I also dont care if she got thousands more than anyone else in primary votes. So what is a democracy again ?

      Reply

    • Dazeddazza says:

      04:09pm | 12/04/11

      Thank you, Forgot How To Spell It,  preferential voting is a licence to rig and to wheel and deal to obtain the most favoured outcome for the major political parties.  Hanson has the right to contest an election, regardless of what bloggers say.  It is our choice to vote for whom we prefer to be in power, not to have our preferences redirected at the whim of party machines..

    • Steve says:

      07:53pm | 12/04/11

      If you want to avoid the so-called “rigging” of preferences, all you have to do is number every box below the line - it’s really not that hard if you take your civic responsibility seriously.

    • Ros says:

      08:09pm | 12/04/11

      I thought we lived in a democracy. Rigged voting is not democratic. This is setting an alarming trend in politics.

    • LeftRightOut says:

      10:55pm | 12/04/11

      I thought everybody votes below the line… I always have, and I ridicule anyone who admits to doing otherwise. It is pretty simple, and takes only a few minutes, democracy is surely worth a couple of minutes every few years…

    • Mr Speaker says:

      03:01pm | 12/04/11

      Oh Mal.  While i am not overly concerned about whether another “ginger” got elected or not, what i did find hilarious was this…

      What on Earth does that mean? Which of the 300-odd candidates for the Upper House wanted to be disrespectful to voters and not work for their constituents?

      Do you honestly believe everyone who puts their hands up to be a politician gives a flying fig about those they represent?  I mean take my own experience, i am sure the plebs who voted for me want me to do more than sit in my big chair throwing Pyne out as often as possible, singing the Superman song to Combet and learning the ancient art of Budgie smuggling origami from Abbott, but i can’t!.  I mean they don’t even let me have a vote on video game night (Rudd always picks Assassins Creed for some reason). 

      It’s a tough job being Mr Speaker, but someone has to do it.

      Reply

    • NicoleG says:

      04:46pm | 12/04/11

      I’m sick to death of you throwing Mr Pyne out for silly little things Mr Speaker! Can Swanny have a turn for a change? He’s like an angry little ferret, who constantly waves his hands,  literally spits when he yells and leaves everyone scratching their head, because he rambles. Besides that, I’m trying to give up smoking.

      Thank you in advance!

    • St. Michael says:

      03:09pm | 12/04/11

      “What on Earth does that mean? Which of the 300-odd candidates for the Upper House wanted to be disrespectful to voters and not work for their constituents?”

      By definition, all of them.  Representative in political parties put the party first, the country second.  Those who are single voices are hoping only for power: the power that Andrew Wilkie, Tony Windsor, and Bob Katter now wield—the power of an independent with a hung Senate.

      Reply

    • Gerard says:

      07:59pm | 12/04/11

      Well St. Michael, maybe you could explain what the objectives are of those organisations whose members put the party first? That’s right: power. So unless you disagree with this fairly self-evident premise, what you’re basically saying is that ALL electoral candidates are there simply to acquire power, either for themselves or for large organisations capable of hiding their activities from the public.

      Using strict rules and membership requirements, major parties are able to sustain support from their puppets in parliament over a long period of time, safeguarding their grip on power irrespective of what they do. Independents however, have no such party structure to rely on for support should they overstep the bounds of their legitimate authority. Their ability to control parliament comes only from the complicity of others: the federal independents appear to control proceedings in Canberra only because it’s in the major parties’ mutual interests to refuse to negotiate with each other and cut the independents out of the picture.

    • St. Michael says:

      10:52am | 13/04/11

      @ Gerard: that’s exactly what I’m saying.

    • Anna C says:

      03:09pm | 12/04/11

      Is it too much to ask for journo’s to even pretend to be impartial? Malcolm, while you may not like Pauline, plenty of people in NSW voted for her believe it or not. It’s been reported on the news that Pauline got the highest primary vote of any candidate, even though she missed out a seat. Can you honestly tell me that she would have been any worse than other wastes of space seat warmers Eddie O’beid and Eric Roozendaal? If it was up to me the upper would be abolished.

      Reply

    • Anna C says:

      03:09pm | 12/04/11

      Is it too much to ask for journo’s to even pretend to be impartial? Malcolm, while you may not like Pauline, plenty of people in NSW voted for her believe it or not. It’s been reported on the news that Pauline got the highest primary vote of any candidate, even though she missed out a seat. Can you honestly tell me that she would have been any worse than other wastes of space seat warmers Eddie O’beid and Eric Roozendaal? If it was up to me the upper would be abolished.

      Reply

    • Craig says:

      03:38pm | 12/04/11

      2.5% is “plenty of people”?

    • Seano says:

      04:43pm | 12/04/11

      “plenty of people in NSW voted for her believe it or not. It’s been reported on the news that Pauline got the highest primary vote of any candidate”

      She had a higher primary vote than the winners of the last two spots not the “highest primary vote of any candidate”. If she’d won on preferences and lost the primary would you have been arguing the same point?

      We have a preferential system, it works, she lost, again. Time for Pauline to move on, she is no longer relevant, if she ever was.

    • james milton says:

      07:59pm | 12/04/11

      @Seano

      “We have a preferential system, it works”

      Are you kidding? Australia is in the mess that it’s in because of those stupid preferences.. making sure entrenched parties are always in the system no matter how bad they are, as long as they keep preferencing each other, it’s nigh on impossible to ‘clean house’. Or for a better analogy in Australian politics, to flush the toilet.

      The preferential system is the most undemocratic part of Australia’s election process.

    • Seano says:

      08:47pm | 12/04/11

      The point of the preferential system is that the majority get their preference. I can’t see what’s undemocratic about that.

    • Gerard says:

      09:21pm | 12/04/11

      Preferences are only a problem as long as voting is compulsory. If voting was optional, the majority of people voting would be capable of thinking for themselves and would ignore how to vote cards and vote below the line.

    • My view says:

      03:17pm | 12/04/11

      It’s a sad day when I prefer Pauline Hanson to Julia Gillard and Bob Brown.

      Reply

    • Bruce says:

      04:13pm | 12/04/11

      In this case it was one “nut job” Pauline, over another bigger “nut job” the greens. Brother ! what a choice !!

    • My view says:

      05:05pm | 12/04/11

      And the ‘biggest nutter’ remains - Bob Green of the Brownies!

    • stephen says:

      11:45pm | 12/04/11

      I had a headache for 2 bloody days thinking that P.H. was gonna be dictating a Social Policy for us plebs.
      Now it’s Bob Brown, and I reckon a belly-aches’ (which is what I’m gonna cop now) is easier to cure if I just eat tripe and then just throw it up.

    • john says:

      03:24pm | 12/04/11

      Well done Mr. Farr.  thanks to the likes of you, Pauline, redeeming herself or having hope or another chance is probably dead & buried in this country, and your story sinks the boot in as well, a cowardly act. .....and if she won her seat, what would you have said then? What about the hypocrisy of her going to jail and other corrupt pollies roaming free?

      I see people like you all over everywhere, in the work place, universities, media etc etc.  These days I just smile and watch people silently ‘destroy’ each-other in so many different ways.

      Keep up the good work.

      Reply

    • jess says:

      03:26pm | 12/04/11

      Do you call the japanese racist? They do what they can to protect their culture. They do it a lot more “racist-ly” than we do it. Pauline had no peoblem with different nationalities and religions coming and living here, she had a problem when those nationalities and religions tried to change our own customs and traditions, because it was “offending” them.

      Her point was, if you’re going to complain about the condition of the country you decide to come and live in, why did you decide to come and live in it in the first place? She’s not telling anyone to “go home, we’re full”

      also when i was at school us kids had a fun time with easter hat parade and christmas parties and all the fun things now my daughter is at school and the school will not have a easter hat parade or christmas concert coz it fends the muslims i really think that is wrong…. i dont hate the muslims coz i have heaps of them as friends but it has to stop let our kids do the christmas and easter things.. if the schools shopping centers keep it up in a few years time there will b no such thing.
      please let our kids enjoy the fun times and if you are muslim or just against the hoilday stuff stay away from schools and shops
      plus we let you do your thing by wearing the burka and leaving work to pray and the list goes on please leave christmas and easter alone

      Reply

    • HappyCynic says:

      03:49pm | 12/04/11

      What’s wrong with wanting to improve the country you live in?  Leave aside the issues you’ve brought up about people banning xmas parades for a moment (almost never instigated by the minority groups you mention by the way, but rather instigated by some bureaucrat with a hard-on for political correctness), what you’re saying is that if you aren’t born here your contribution to this country is to work hard, pay your taxes and STFU because your opinion is shaped by the country you are born in.

      How wrong and how stupid.  Australia isn’t perfect by any stretch of the imagination and all Australian citizens have a right to express their views on how to improve Australia whether they’ve been here 5 minutes or 5 generations.

      Pauline Hanson is a moron, an idiot of stupendous magnitude.  The only people who support her are those that are just as stupid and just as ignorant as she is.

      As for “protecting our culture” if Australia had a single culture at any stage in it’s history your argument might hold a little water but from the beginning of white settlement Australia has had a number of culutres that have shaped this country.  Hell it was a jewish guy who was the first Australian born Governor General!!

    • rob foster says:

      08:11am | 13/04/11

      HappyCynic is a nutcase of the highest order

    • Super D says:

      03:35pm | 12/04/11

      Well we got another wacky Greens nutbag as a consolation prize.

      Reply

    • BD says:

      03:38pm | 12/04/11

      Well said, Malcolm, You might have added that Hanson had the name of the Liberal Party next to hers on the ballot paper the only time she actually was elected. From memory, she was disendorsed but it was too late to reprint the voting slips.

      Reply

    • Phill Power says:

      03:58pm | 12/04/11

      To Warren: I don’t need to be told anything, it is just an observation that people who live in glass houses, like yourself, should not throw stones. Malcolm Farr is so far off the mark with this article that is BEGGARS BELIEF!

      Reply

    • Fiat Lux says:

      04:19pm | 12/04/11

      She promised to emigrate to the UK a year ago . I hate people who raise expectations and then frustrate them . At least the UK has a fair and uncomplicated ‘‘First past the post ‘’ system . Preferences make voting a very complicted , tardy and messy business .

      Reply

    • Seano says:

      04:22pm | 12/04/11

      I couldn’t decide which news was better today Wayne Bennett signing to coach the Knights for four years or for Hanson deservedly getting the arse once again. Five State of Origins in a row the least QLD could do is take her back (and keep her).

      Reply

    • GB says:

      04:26pm | 12/04/11

      And now she is considering forming her own party. I don’t really give 2 hoots about her policies as she’ll never be able to push her own agenda through anyways. What I do have a problem with is this parasite constantly trying to suck at the public teat. It’s a complete and utter scam and needs to be eradicated.

      Reply

    • Realistic Swinging Voter says:

      04:36pm | 12/04/11

      I’m sorry there will be no more Perils of Pauline.  She at least had the guts to say things that others are too scared to talk about for fear of being called racists instead of realists.  Poor Pauline may not have been the best plank in the fence, bur at least she didn’t sit on it like many other politicians.  Nor did she want open borders like the green Greens.

      Reply

    • Joel B1 says:

      05:14pm | 12/04/11

      Stories like this really peeve me. It’s like reading a Crikey rant or a Greens Press Release or a Getup! stupidity.

      Show some bloody respect. If she was a Muslim you wouldn’t even think about writing half those comments.

      Sure she’s odious and not your cup of tea, but does that preclude you from at least attempting to write a balanced article.

      And the “We all think the same way about Pauline” really smacks of socialism/fascism gone off like a prawn in the sun.

      I wouldn’t vote for her. But I can tell BS when you write it.

      Reply

    • Skippy says:

      07:04pm | 12/04/11

      Onya Joel, hear hear, good man - only difference between you and I, I would vote for her! She is gutsy, has more balls than most men I know and while her she may lack a bit of decorum I reckon she has more commitment to address the issues this country faces than those we have elected - Go Pauline give it to ‘em!

    • Seano says:

      07:47pm | 12/04/11

      I fail to see how the article was disrespectful and I can’t find where it say “We all think the same way about Pauline” .

      She’s had her go (several of them in fact). At what point does she not get the hint?

      And I fail to see the logic behind wanting to censor an opinion on yet another Hanson failure. Surely in a free western democracy we want to be able to criticise our political leaders regardless of their religion or their political views.

    • bec says:

      05:18pm | 12/04/11

      Ridicule her all you want, but girlfriend found the easiest way to finance a kitchen renovation…

      Reply

    • Outraged says:

      07:58pm | 12/04/11

      It’s funny how whenever anyone criticises Julia Gillard, the lefties scream: “You are being sexist and judging her purely because she is a woman!!”...

      ...but whenever Pauline rears her head, the left spare no expense at spitting so much misogynistic, sexist vitirol at the poor woman…

      I don’t get it. On one hand, the lefties screech: “We need more women involved in Parliment/decision-making!?”...but when a woman tries to enter the political arena, the left rip her to shreds saying: “She isnt the right KIND of woman!”...you are never satisifed. Women are their own worst enemy.

      Reply

    • Daniel says:

      09:09pm | 12/04/11

      I think this result is a clear sign that the Hanson experiment has run its course. The Greens have beaten Hanson as well as most other candidates that went for the upper house. Maybe now News Ltd can get over the slimy attacks the Greens have copped during this state election Malcolm? This goes to show that Labor needs to stop running this “blame game” line. This also proves that a vote for the Greens IS NOT A VOTE FOR LABOR.

      Reply

    • Gerard says:

      09:11pm | 12/04/11

      Was this article really written by a professional journalist? It reads like Today Tonight in print form. The two quotes from Hanson which the author uses to support his opinion are inappropriate to say the least.

      The first, Hanson’s claim that the electoral system favours parties, may be dismissed as sour grapes, but certainly cannot be dismissed as wrong. Compulsory voting means that millions of apathetic voters are forced to nominate a preference on election day simply to avoid being fined. Since major parties are allowed to pour vastly disproportionate funds into their propaganda campaigns, who are these apathetic stooges going to recognise and vote for? These people who just don’t care are the “voters who run the electoral system” in whose wisdom the author so passionately believes.

      The second quote, a mindless cliche, is bizarrely attributed aggressive undertones which are clearly non-existent. Further, the sentiments allegedly contained in this platitude are entirely reasonable. Which candidates don’t want to work for their constituents? The ones that are there to work for their party of course.

      Reply

    • Drew says:

      11:24pm | 12/04/11

      Actually you don’t have to provide a preference or even write on the sheet. You only need to have your name crossed out. To appear in person at a school is the only thing that is compulsory.

      After that you can roll up a reefer with the paper for all they care.

      She can’t pull votes and her few vocal supporters are looking for excuse after excuse after excuse to explain the fact that we don’t want the likes of her in government. Good riddance.

    • Greg says:

      11:40pm | 12/04/11

      You’re right, but unfortunately this is what passes as allegedly “professional journalism” in Australia these days.

      It’s no wonder that journalists are consistently ranked at the bottom of the social scale in all public surveys, alongside career politicians and lawyers, who also earn their living by distorting the truth.

    • Greg says:

      11:26pm | 12/04/11

      If Hanson had won, it may have been fun for a short while to see all the usual suspects gnashing their teeth and telling us all about how “outraged” they were, but in the longer term it is better that she didn’t win.

      She would have achieved nothing parked in the back of a state upper house for 8 years, as David Oldfield discovered. It’s just a place where the parties send their MPs to take early retirement.

      As things stand, Hanson has recovered her confidence and is all set for the next federal election, which is where she should be focussed.

      She was ahead of her time in the past, but her time is now rapidly approaching, as clearly indicated by the increasing rejection of multiculturalism across Europe. Marine Le Pen should be an inspiration next year.

      She has also developed politically, and is less likely to get blindsided by a biassed media. On the contrary, the boot is on the other foot now, as shown by how she caught the media off guard in the NSW election - no time to discover fake photographs just before this election.

      She seems ready to start a new political party, and won’t leave herself open to the attacks that One Nation received.

      I suspect that she will run in the electorate of Lyne, or maybe New England, where she would be odds on for a win already based on the current feelings of the constituency.

      And her party doesn’t even need to win in many other electorates. A policy of voting for the sitting member last will cause a huge impact, even if her party only gets 2 or 3 percent.

      But she will get much more than that. Despite all the shrill demands that she is a “spent force” and should go away, her momentum is growing again.

      People can sense it, which is why her opponents are getting so desperate.

      Hanson will outlast Farr, just as she has outlasted Keating and Howard, and now time is on her side.

      Reply

    • Warren says:

      08:11am | 13/04/11

      “even if her party only gets 2 or 3 percent” So in other words Greg, maybe two or three people out of one hundred like her enough to vote for her. Hardly a ringing endorsement is it? Hanson will hang around like a bad smell, representing the disaffected and marginalised who like to blame minorities for their problems. The rest of us will get on with out lives.

    • Greg says:

      10:41am | 13/04/11

      Do try to pay attention, Warren. It isn’t a difficult concept to understand.

      The point that even in the most anti-Hanson electorate, where she might get only 2 or 3 percent of the vote, that can still be enough to determine who the eventual winner will be.

      And that is a very influential position to be in.

      And why aren’t you “getting on with your life”, instead of commenting on Hanson articles?

    • Dan says:

      04:35pm | 13/04/11

      “Marine Le Pen should be an inspiration next year.”

      As if that is a positive thing. BTW, Europe hasn’t even attempted multiculturalism, especially France.

    • Chris says:

      11:48pm | 12/04/11

      Well, her One Nation party did hold some seats in QLD a few years back, didn’t they? Her ideas weren’t the total disaster that she was.
      Millions of Australians have voted for her at one time or another, or her party.
      Her weakness is that she is an inarticulate politician and had no real answer to the bread-and-butter issues that affect voters.
      She has been called racist. Living in a rural town as I do, I know many people who also want to see a curtailing of Asian immigration and an end to the preferential treatment of Aborigines. Most people, in my experience, want to see absolute equality of treatment among all Australians—I think that’s what Hanson was advocating.

      Reply

    • youdy beaudy says:

      12:02am | 13/04/11

      She is thinking of forming a new political party. Now that should be interesting!!. Australia is not a true democracy anyway, and never will be until we get a proper constitution and a bill of rights for our peoples. Pollys in Australia spend much of their time tearing asunder any good the other side brings in while in Government. Labor will bring in some changes that could work out to be positive for the people in the future and the Liberals if they get government will pull much of it down to implement their policies which are more positive for the whos who.

      If we consider australia to be a democracy then anyone from any background can run and the reason they do many times is to bring in change by their influence. But the voters have the right to vote for her or not.

      So, she can run if she wants and let her run on her merits and quit the harassment. I feel that the old ways were best as we lived when life was more simplistic and a little more naive. Today our Governments make and govern over us as overlords. It is not our country, people are just slaves for the overlords. If someone comes along and changes that for the better no matter how ratty they seem then I say, they have the right to have a go at it.

      Reply

    • Aasq says:

      12:37am | 13/04/11

      Great headline, Mal. Thanks.

      Reply

    • Tired old man says:

      01:33am | 13/04/11

      We have had decades of party politicians whose first consideration has been themselves then the party and after that those constituents whom they like. Consider these three John Della Bosca, Milton Orkopolous and David Campbell. These three had two things in common all of them were Labor Cabinet Ministers when caught out cheating on their wives. Then we have not one but two MPs picking the peoples pockets by falsifying time sheets many of those involved in these conspiracies were family or party members. Neither of the fraudsters has been prosecuted.  I voted for Pauline Hanson. I took the trouble to direct my own preferences. I hope she starts another party because i am sick of the two parties not much preferred taking turn to ride on our backs!

      Reply

    • Justy says:

      07:40am | 13/04/11

      Malcolm,How about a bit of honesty and rather than talk of Pauline,s “disastrous preference result” include the fact she got the most votes in first past the post deal. Surely that tells you that a lot of the voters prefer her to the others?
      I am sick and tired of the media having a field day at her expense.How about writing about Julia Gillards efforts and her dismal failure as PM. I doubt it as most of the media are an excuse for the Labor Party and its failures.

      Reply

    • Seano says:

      08:15am | 13/04/11

      “include the fact she got the most votes in first past the post deal”

      No she did not. She got more primary votes than the people who finished in 19 and 20 places, not the most votes.

      You can’t claim that she would have won if it had not been for preferences, people vote knowing the system is a preferential one.

    • Greg says:

      10:36am | 13/04/11

      Wrong Seano. Again.

      Hanson got the most votes in first past the post as an individual candidate, just like she did last time she contested the NSW Legislative Council.

      The people who won the first 19 seats received a higher number of above the line party votes, but none of them received higher individual votes. They are just faceless party hacks used to fill up spaces for people who can’t count past 15, and are incapable of voting below the line.

      As for preferences, I have no problem with them. Hanson just has to turn the system to her own advantage. Overall, preferences can be very helpful to her cause.

    • Seano says:

      12:14pm | 13/04/11

      Can you verify that because I’ve looked and can’t find it. The article I read in the SMH said he had higher primaries that 19 and 20 not all 20.

      That said her the implication being made by many Hanson supporters is that there was an overwhealming ground swell of support for her that she was dudded. I’m afraid at 3% that is simply just not true. It’s a preferential system and people vote accordingly.

    • Gek says:

      01:47pm | 15/04/11

      It’s true, Hanson did get the highest number of votes of any single candidate - 20,004 in fact, an astonishing 0.49% of the total vote.

      So with a first past the post voting system the first candidate elected would have been someone who 99.5% of people did NOT vote for.

      This is of course ludicrous and would require a system which ignored all the Above The Line votes.

      Without preferences and using the quota system Hanson might have grabbed the last seat, edging out the Greens. However there are a large number of people like myself who cast their votes with preferences in mind. Most of these votes would have been cast differently without preferences, probably to the detriment of both the Greens and Hanson. The only beneficiaries would have been the major parties.

    • Benny says:

      08:18am | 13/04/11

      I see SG appears to be the only one here who has actually read her first speech to Parliament. And didn’t she actually get more votes than anyone else. There’s democracy for you.
      The rest of you are just jumping on the band wagon of what the press write. Anything can be shortened or edited to say what they want.
      Personally I’m not a fan of the woman, but I do agree with most of what she tries to say. Equality for all isn’t racist, separating and unequal handouts is….

      Reply

    • Tezza says:

      08:44am | 13/04/11

      The real farce about the result is that since only half of the Legislative Council faces the electors every four years, the Labor hang-overs from the last election are still there despite the recent anti-Labor landslide. The electors will have to wait another four years before being able to chuck them out.

      Reply

    • The Original Oz says:

      09:11am | 13/04/11

      This all raises a couple of old question -

      Should a candidate for election be a resident (of long standing) in their electorate?

      Is an elected politician who was placed into a safe seat outside of their own residential region (and in some cases state) really representative of the people within their electorate?

      Reply

    • Anonymouse says:

      05:00pm | 13/04/11

      I feel sorry for the bigoted, anti-multicultural, anti-PC, what have you people in this country, they really, desperately need a new and respectful figurehead to represent their ‘True Blue, fair-dinkum’ views and not some long recurring national joke.
      The joke unfortunately for them seems to be that she is the best they can muster, so for now they must constantly whinge while awaiting the inevitable multicultural apocalypse.

      Reply

    • Suzy says:

      07:26pm | 16/04/11

      Bwah!! She lost and now she says the voting system is unfair.  I am over people whining because they did not win.  The fish started stinking a long time ago.  Get over it and move on.

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

ToryShepherd

ToryShepherd 26 May 12 01:27PM

Cheeky beers with morning papers in unexpected sunshine http://t.co/MD7VPRne

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 01:27PM

http://t.co/Zq0nGxkf nice pic of Thredbo this morning

Paul Colgan

Colgo 26 May 12 12:52PM

@seamus yeah it's now called Smooth or Soft or Douchey Dad FM or something

Paul Colgan

Colgo 26 May 12 12:44PM

It's a Sydney thing, but 95.3FM... Why? It used to be all Bohemian Rhapsody and Walk this Way; now it's Father to Son and Country Road. Wah.

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

by Claire Connelly

11

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

I’d like to be able to say that sharing the world’s largest radio telescope with South Africa…

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

by Laurie Oakes

50

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

When North Queensland Liberal MP George Christensen got the idea of launching a new political organisation…

Please enter your password

by Lucy Kippist

28

Please enter your password

Help! I’ve succumbed to a crippling modern illness that can strike at any moment. Symptoms include:…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed