TOPIC:

Grassy wrote:

ArkRoyal wrote: How is Abbot an extremist? He has a view, the same way the gay lobby has there opinion on the question.

Hitler and Stalin were extremists both in their ideologies and actions.

We are suppose to have 'freedom of speech' in this country, but it is in danger of late. One man's 'freedom of speech' is another man's 'hate speech'. The country needs to decide.

I can think of some pretty divisive politicians just in my life-time, startting with Keating and Hewson.

Naaah,Hewson was just divisive amongst his own mob in the Coslition,between the Wets.

Abbott however is viewed either as a 1st Class C*** by one side of the political divide and a Top Bloke by the other.

The timing to say the least was Appalling and WILL damage the Yes Vote amongst Swinging Voters,despite that Incident in Queensland.The Assault on Abbott has Centre Stage.

Of course facts won't get in the way of the story; from all reports that I have read the alleged motivation was one of general antipathy toward Tony Abbott.

Grassy wrote: Maybe Swan.

But that careless and appalling timing won't help the cause of the Yes Case.Despite that other incident,it's a fair bet the Abnott incident will stick in the mind of many undecided voters,no matter what the context of that Incident.

That galah in Tasmania should be having his own fellow supporters "braining" him for his carelessness.

Are you sure he wasn't adopting the role of a 5th columnist?

Since Bazza wanted a minimal number of political topics it looks as though Bill English's National Party are struggling to get over the line.

Further NZ have some wonderful electorate names magnificently pronounced. Exciting election count on ABC News and 601.

NZ should have stayed with the 'first past the post syestem'. The one they have importted from Germany is suppose to be more democratic, which is nonsense, as a lot of the vote from the minor parties is actually excluded under the 5 per cent vote threshold rule for each party.

The Nationals have won easily.

ArkRoyal wrote: NZ should have stayed with the 'first past the post syestem'. The one they have importted from Germany is suppose to be more democratic, which is nonsense, as a lot of the vote from the minor parties is actually excluded under the 5 per cent vote threshold rule for each party.

The Nationals have won easily.

AR the Nationals did NOT win the majority of seats.

that true Swan, but they certainly won a very big simple majority; not bad for a fourth term government to be honest. Personally, I can see Winston sidding with Bill English's lot when it comes to the crunch time. Arden, said herself, that she was a wee bit disappointted with the result.

ArkRoyal wrote: that true Swan, but they certainly won a very big simple majority; not bad for a fourth term government to be honest. Personally, I can see Winston sidding with Bill English's lot when it comes to the crunch time. Arden, said herself, that she was a wee bit disappointted with the result.

AR not being too pedantic he didn't get a simple majority. The majority of seats were won for a change of government.

swan 42: yes, but what about the rest of what I wrote. That was true, unless, of course, Winston suprises everybody.

ArkRoyal wrote: swan 42: yes, but what about the rest of what I wrote. That was true, unless, of course, Winston suprises everybody.

Interesting on the programme I was watching they suggested that 80% of his policies align with the Labour Party.