SA Footy

Yes, it's disgraceful.
But is Oakden the smoking gun everyone thinks it will be?
I think an interesting question is, do people have enough anger to vote for Marshall?

Agreed, no and no.

I'd be putting my money on the ALP

Dogwatcher wrote:Yes, it's disgraceful.
But is Oakden the smoking gun everyone thinks it will be?
I think an interesting question is, do people have enough anger to vote for Marshall?

I tend to suspect rusted ons will stay to their rusted ons.

Swing voters will head towards X.

Don't underestimate how much the re-distribution will assist the Libs.

My rough guess we'll end up with:

Libs: 22
ALP: 16
X: 4
Ind: 4

In the circumstances where the ALP would need all 8 of the above Independents and X Team to form government I suspect that they will form a similar deal to the 2010 Federal Election whereby all will guarantee the Libs confidence and supply but have to negotiate on everything else.

Possibly Bedford will not guarantee confidence or supply.

Re will voters head to Marshall is a very interesting and relevant question. Hard to overlook that statewide polling has the ALP at a historically low primary vote. Could get very ugly for them in the LC.

For those who like a wager the $1.33 you can get for a hung parliament offers far better returns than the bank.

In terms of putting my money where my mouth is I've wagered:

40 u - hung parliament @ $1.33
1 u - gary johanson in Port Adelaide @ $8
2 u - Corey Wingard in Gibson @ $2
2 u - Frances Bedford in Florey @ $1.7
1 u - Vincent Tarzia in Hartley @ $8
2 u - Steven Marshall in Dunstan @ $1.6
2 u - Matt Cowdrey in Colton @ $2.20

As an aside, the overall "winner of the election" market has:

ALP $2.25
SA Best $2.70
Libs $2.75

The bookies will not allow you to put enough on to make it worthwhile arbing but given there's not a hope in hell SA Best wins enough seats to govern in its own right putting money down on both the ALP and Libs will lock in some cash.

jo172 wrote:As an aside, the overall "winner of the election" market has:

ALP $2.25
SA Best $2.70
Libs $2.75

The bookies will not allow you to put enough on to make it worthwhile arbing but given there's not a hope in hell SA Best wins enough seats to govern in its own right putting money down on both the ALP and Libs will lock in some cash.

Shhhhh....

Jo, by your reckoning of 22 seats, that will not be enough for Marshall to stay on as leader.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-22/x ... ns/9348584

This fact is the interesting part of the election, for mine.
Marshall may not wish to deal with Xenophon, but it would seem there are some Liberals who may, in their hunger to form a long-awaited government.
I was at a debate last night where Xenophon would not rule out working with either party. He said that if Mr Marshall steps aside in this fashion, he would be happy to take calls from Dan Van Holst Pellekaan or Vickie Chapman.
He was debating Stephan Knoll, Lib for Schubert (and a rising star) who flat-out said he did not agree with accepting Xenophon's support.
If your scenario eventuates, it will be interesting to see what impact this has on the Libs and the election.

jo172 wrote:

bennymacca wrote:not sure ill have time to read the report, but ill see how i go

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-28/i ... ed/9492008

judging by this article the minister definitely could have done more.

not good enough imo. will be interesting to see what effect it has on the election

That Vlahos maintained Weatherill's confidence after she failed to read the Chief Psychiatrist's report and did not arrange a meeting but "bumped into him at Bunnings Mile End" really shows you how slimy she was/is and how weak he was in dealing with her.

His hands were obviously tied by the factions but that no one did anything about her much earlier is both abhorrent, and astonishingly politically stupid.

Weatherill has done a very good job of distancing Vlahos from the ALP and an even better job from him, himself.

Dogwatcher wrote:Yes, it's disgraceful.
But is Oakden the smoking gun everyone thinks it will be?
I think an interesting question is, do people have enough anger to vote for Marshall?

Or does Marshall attack it so hard people fall into the mindset noted earlier in this thread, how about give us some of your own positives instead of highlighting the other sides negatives?

At this stage...Marshall hasnt said a word and apart from the ads...where is Nick?

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:At this stage...Marshall hasnt said a word and apart from the ads...where is Nick?

"If anybody needs any proof whatsoever that this is the worst government in the state's history they can read about it today," Mr Marshall said.

"Labor has failed our most vulnerable citizens — they deserve to be sacked on March 17.

"Jay Weatherill has been out there running a protection racket for his incompetent ministers over an extended period of time.

"He was out there saying Leesa Vlahos was doing a great job shining a light on the dysfunction at Oakden, well that is completely in contrast with the evidence."

He said "every South Australian should be outraged".

"To have a senior cabinet minister appearing at an ICAC hearing shouting at the Commissioner is nothing short of disgraceful," he said.

"Surely cabinet has discussed this Oakden crisis, this is another example of this government's cover-up."

I missed all that. I heard a snippett on radio.
Marshall needs a policy around this area. And really promote it. Get positive.

Im not sure the Oakden debacle has put a big enough dent into Labor....unfortunately in most other states they'd be voted out with a landslide...

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:I missed all that. I heard a snippett on radio.
Marshall needs a policy around this area. And really promote it. Get positive.

Im not sure the Oakden debacle has put a big enough dent into Labor....unfortunately in most other states they'd be voted out with a landslide...

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I am still getting my head around the state politics over here.... Labour running the show, despite cancelling a major contract to build a tunnel that would have joined the Monash freeway to the Tulla, and avoid the whole Collingwood/Richmond/Fitzroy area which is a debacle..... at a cost (legal) of almost the same as building the bloody thing! Just stupid. The Greens have strong foothold over here in some of the inner burbs. Daughter was approached at Uni yesterday to sign up to the ALP.... she politely declined.

Booney wrote:Or does Marshall attack it so hard people fall into the mindset noted earlier in this thread, how about give us some of your own positives instead of highlighting the other sides negatives?

The sole reason for the Liberal Party's formation was a coalition of big business interests uniting to try and keep the ALP out of government.

Dogwatcher wrote:Yes, it's disgraceful.
But is Oakden the smoking gun everyone thinks it will be?
I think an interesting question is, do people have enough anger to vote for Marshall?

Bring back Isobel!

Corona Man wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:I missed all that. I heard a snippett on radio.
Marshall needs a policy around this area. And really promote it. Get positive.

Im not sure the Oakden debacle has put a big enough dent into Labor....unfortunately in most other states they'd be voted out with a landslide...

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I am still getting my head around the state politics over here.... Labour running the show, despite cancelling a major contract to build a tunnel that would have joined the Monash freeway to the Tulla, and avoid the whole Collingwood/Richmond/Fitzroy area which is a debacle..... at a cost (legal) of almost the same as building the bloody thing! Just stupid. The Greens have strong foothold over here in some of the inner burbs. Daughter was approached at Uni yesterday to sign up to the ALP.... she politely declined.

It's almost too bad to be true, but that's what happens when a Liberal coalition makes a promise and a Labor premier is in place after the election.

The initial contract was for $5.3bn ( $5.3bn!!! ) for the East West Link and when they cancelled it, it cost them $1.2bn to do so ( $1.2bn!!! the cost of the nRAH ) and the whole project was between $15-17bn ( $15-17bn!!! ).

Corona Man wrote:

Dogwatcher wrote:Yes, it's disgraceful.
But is Oakden the smoking gun everyone thinks it will be?
I think an interesting question is, do people have enough anger to vote for Marshall?

Bring back Isobel!

No chance, too busy gassing up on chartreuse with @Psyber at Hamilton-Smith's manor.

Booney wrote:

Corona Man wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:I missed all that. I heard a snippett on radio.
Marshall needs a policy around this area. And really promote it. Get positive.

Im not sure the Oakden debacle has put a big enough dent into Labor....unfortunately in most other states they'd be voted out with a landslide...

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I am still getting my head around the state politics over here.... Labour running the show, despite cancelling a major contract to build a tunnel that would have joined the Monash freeway to the Tulla, and avoid the whole Collingwood/Richmond/Fitzroy area which is a debacle..... at a cost (legal) of almost the same as building the bloody thing! Just stupid. The Greens have strong foothold over here in some of the inner burbs. Daughter was approached at Uni yesterday to sign up to the ALP.... she politely declined.

It's almost too bad to be true, but that's what happens when a Liberal coalition makes a promise and a Labor premier is in place after the election.

The initial contract was for $5.3bn ( $5.3bn!!! ) for the East West Link and when they cancelled it, it cost them $1.2bn to do so ( $1.2bn!!! the cost of the nRAH ) and the whole project was between $15-17bn ( $15-17bn!!! ).

Yet now the Labor party are proposing a different option of an East/West Link, involving about 3 bloody tunnels. I tuned out at the cost part of it.

Booney wrote:

Corona Man wrote:

Dogwatcher wrote:Yes, it's disgraceful.
But is Oakden the smoking gun everyone thinks it will be?
I think an interesting question is, do people have enough anger to vote for Marshall?

Bring back Isobel!

No chance, too busy gassing up on chartreuse with @Psyber at Hamilton-Smith's manor.

Which is still a bigger contribution than my favorite Marshall is making.

The Greens run inner melbourne...

On the Greens...who heard that dickhead here who said the V8s should move from Vic Pk????

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Dogwatcher wrote:Jo, by your reckoning of 22 seats, that will not be enough for Marshall to stay on as leader.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-22/x ... ns/9348584

This fact is the interesting part of the election, for mine.
Marshall may not wish to deal with Xenophon, but it would seem there are some Liberals who may, in their hunger to form a long-awaited government.
I was at a debate last night where Xenophon would not rule out working with either party. He said that if Mr Marshall steps aside in this fashion, he would be happy to take calls from Dan Van Holst Pellekaan or Vickie Chapman.
He was debating Stephan Knoll, Lib for Schubert (and a rising star) who flat-out said he did not agree with accepting Xenophon's support.
If your scenario eventuates, it will be interesting to see what impact this has on the Libs and the election.

I agree it will be interesting.

I tend to suspect pragmatism would play out.

(Pragmatism being the politician's phrase for going back on what they said).

Likely be his, "no carbon tax under a government i lead" moment.

Also, for what it's worth my reckoning is 22 seats Libs + Williams + McFetridge which would be enough to govern.

Also wouldn't bet on the SA Best team maintaining party discipline once in the House either.

the libs will 100% do a deal with Xenophon if it means govt.

They just dont want to admit it now, because it might mean people that would otherwise vote libs in a safe lib seat voting xenophon thinking its the same anyway.

because labor votes in those areas will almost certainly all go do X on preferences if he polls more than what labor do.