Where to from here?

[Psyber]

Well surely that makes sense? The Greens are complete radicals with a simplistic and romantic view about life. They are sadly out-of-touch with reality and their approach could never work. I mean, most of us know and accept that surely? For all its faults, at least Labor is ineffective and passive and has the best interests of whatever is going on at any given moment at heart.

Only the far-right hold the ridiculous view that the Greens are radicals, especially given how measure and composed Bob Brown is. I know you lot run this garbage because you're fearful of how big the Greens could get (1.5 million people voted for them last year if we had proportional representation that would equate to 17 seats, balance of power in the Senate now too) but the reality is they are clearly the third biggest party in Australia now and growing.
Nothing you or The Australian newspaper says can stop that.

The Parallel Universe thread here suggests there are not any right wingers in this Forum.
(Wedgie seems to be the nearest we have to that, and he hardly qualifies either from his score.)
Yet there are those among us who have disquiet about the Greens real aims, as distinct from their declared ones, and about their grip on reality.
My own score on that Political Compass score should put me right in the Green camp, yet after meeting several of them at recent functions, I find their ways of thinking deeply disturbing.

[redandblack]

Interesting point, Psyber.

I think The Greens generally have a lot of good policies, which many of us would have no problem supporting. Their problem is that with no realistic chance of governing, they suffer from the "impotence is pure' syndrome and have a few policies that most of us would think are either silly or unworkable.

Many people (1.5 million voted for them) realise this and are happy to give them a vote, understanding that their more extreme policies won't ever see the light of day and are therfore happy to have them there as a balance and alternative to the 2 major parties?

[Gingernuts]

Interesting point, Psyber.

I think The Greens generally have a lot of good policies, which many of us would have no problem supporting. Their problem is that with no realistic chance of governing, they suffer from the "impotence is pure' syndrome and have a few policies that most of us would think are either silly or unworkable.

Many people (1.5 million voted for them) realise this and are happy to give them a vote, understanding that their more extreme policies won't ever see the light of day and are therfore happy to have them there as a balance and alternative to the 2 major parties?

I'm happy with them as a balance of power. I am worried though that if Labor keeps up their current form there is a real chance they could challenge for government, as part of a coalition at the very least.

[Psyber]

Interesting point, Psyber.

I think The Greens generally have a lot of good policies, which many of us would have no problem supporting. Their problem is that with no realistic chance of governing, they suffer from the "impotence is pure' syndrome and have a few policies that most of us would think are either silly or unworkable.

Many people (1.5 million voted for them) realise this and are happy to give them a vote, understanding that their more extreme policies won't ever see the light of day and are therfore happy to have them there as a balance and alternative to the 2 major parties?

I can see your perspective there R&B. I have no issue with some of their policies.
But, I'd be worried about supporting them at all in case they somehow accidentally do get into power and really wreck thing trying to implement some of their more odd ideas.
(I've assumed that's how Pauline Hanson got elected too - core supporters reinforced by those who thought she had some good ideas.)

[redandblack]

Interesting point, Psyber.

I think The Greens generally have a lot of good policies, which many of us would have no problem supporting. Their problem is that with no realistic chance of governing, they suffer from the "impotence is pure' syndrome and have a few policies that most of us would think are either silly or unworkable.

Many people (1.5 million voted for them) realise this and are happy to give them a vote, understanding that their more extreme policies won't ever see the light of day and are therfore happy to have them there as a balance and alternative to the 2 major parties?

I'm happy with them as a balance of power. I am worried though that if Labor keeps up their current form there is a real chance they could challenge for government, as part of a coalition at the very least.

I think you can relax, GN.

The latest poll had Labor's vote at about 33% and The Greens at about 12%.

Their record high poll vote is about 15%. Labor's record low is about 27%.

[Gingernuts]

Interesting point, Psyber.

I think The Greens generally have a lot of good policies, which many of us would have no problem supporting. Their problem is that with no realistic chance of governing, they suffer from the "impotence is pure' syndrome and have a few policies that most of us would think are either silly or unworkable.

Many people (1.5 million voted for them) realise this and are happy to give them a vote, understanding that their more extreme policies won't ever see the light of day and are therfore happy to have them there as a balance and alternative to the 2 major parties?

I'm happy with them as a balance of power. I am worried though that if Labor keeps up their current form there is a real chance they could challenge for government, as part of a coalition at the very least.

I think you can relax, GN.

The latest poll had Labor's vote at about 33% and The Greens at about 12%.

Their record high poll vote is about 15%. Labor's record low is about 27%.

In all seriousness I actually expect Labor to recover their losses before the next election. They've pushed through the big issues early in their term, now they'll sit back and let them drop off the radar.

Once that happens I reckon Abbott will battle without major issues to sensationalise. The only area I see that they might still have a problem is around asylum seekers.

[redandblack]

Yes, I think that's quite possible.

Your point about a coalition is well made, though, although winning lower house seats will be hard for the Greens without Lib preferences.

[CK]

I think Shorten is waiting for a later, more propitious time.

Plibersek is good, but well back in the line, IMO.

Soj, Zappia is a good local member, but has had little parliamentary experience and would be 200/1 at this stage.

It would be interesting to see where history would have placed Peter Garrett's chances of winning the leadership had he a) entered parliament five years earlier and b) not had the insulation debacle. In terms of popular support, he may have run rings around other candidates five years prior to his actual entry time.

The downside of that, of course, is that we would have been robbed of Midnight Oil's highly underrated "Redneck Wonderland" album in that case

[Gozu]

The downside of that, of course, is that we would have been robbed of Midnight Oil's highly underrated "Redneck Wonderland" album in that case

What a song too!