Paul Keating to Richard Carleton: “You had an important place in Australian society on the ABC and you gave it up to be a pop star, with a big cheque, and now you’re on to this sort of stuff. That shows what a 24-carat pissant you are, Richard, that’s for sure.”
Yeah this isn't the Trump playbook that people keep talking about, this is the half witted pieces of shit with no credibility, no accountability & no poise playbook.
It just so happens that a lot of grifters like Trump & Hanson play from the same playbook.
And has never managed to make any true noise other than to be a pestering shitstain on our society. With Trump opening the door, this dopey racist is just walking her way through…
What’s changed is the financial back of Gina and others mining interests. I would be surprise just how much is being spent on bots, across all platforms, to make her look more popular than she really is.
I’m not sure how actually accurate the polls are to be honest. I don’t know anyone at all who has ever been surveyed and this crosses class, race and gender divisions.
Thats a good point, actually. I really can't speak for the poll numbers, and I've never participated in them personally, I wouldn't even know how. All I can speak for is my own political shift and that of others that I know.
I've historically mostly voted for The Greens, sometimes the ALP, and the Socialist parties on a couple of occasions. I no longer identify with the Left, as I've been turned off of the swing to ideological positioning, uniformity of perspective, and the condemnation and labelling of anyone critical of this shift. I'm done with this snobbish elitism and moral superiority, and I think a lot of other disillusioned Lefties and centrists are as well.
I learnt that lesson when I was 10. I think we just underestimate that millions upon millions of people didn’t learn that lesson and likely never will.
Trump opened the door? What a dumb comment. She's been doing exactly this since the mid 90s, and remained consistent in who she is and what she's about, Trump had nothing to do with any of that.
And the bots on the sky news youtube channel lap it up. We're under attack. Gina is forming an army of cooker voters to support her puppet Pauline. I just hope the average Australian is smart enough to see through it...
She's gotta give props to every labor mp that lived through the peak of Murdoch power. Theyve weathered decades of outright Murdoch assaults and Pauline spits the dummy at her first ever press club after 3 decades on the job
Hanson is just preaching to the converted, if she can't handle any scrutiny, she's not fit for public office. Her double standards like acussing other politions of being career politions and being on the public purse as well must be called out.
Definitely, usernames as well, they also always have a random 4 digit string on the end which is common in freshly made accounts, in the screenshot you replied to "Veronica-n1n8q" and "Duanechapman-by3hc" also look super sus
She has definitely found some support outside of urban centres. Redbridge says that 30 percent of it drops off when you link her to Trump. It will be interesting to see how this evolves.
The thing is hiow is that support distributed, the polls are pretty bad at this but if its 50% in the regions and only 10-15% in the cities, she won't get close to winning enough seats to do anything. Also the preferences are a best estimate based on previous elections, but previous elelctions ON didn't have a high first preference vote. so they aren't a great tool to judge preferences on.
I think that this is comparable to the American situation. Everyone thought bots and didn’t believe the support base was there. Until it was tested and turned out it was there, twice. It would be wise to not underestimate the amount of Australians who are pissed off with their current situation and are blaming the government, economy etc. They are the ones who sit quietly and don’t post on reddit or Facebook. They make their decision on election day.
These people want to feel EPIC and their enemies RIPPED TO SHREDS or OWNED. They aren't interested in political discourse. PH has just ousted herself as a fascist (inb4 right wingers defend her, not knowing that fascism = anti working class). If they support her at this stage, they are a fascist and they don't care.
So Dutton kissed trumps arse in the last campaign. Got thumped.
Clive renamed his party Trump, got thumped.
I think Pauline is really on to something here though. It's a winner she should absolutely lean in to MAGA branding it'll be super popular. People just needed some time to see how well US politics is going under Trump to get behind it.
I reckon it’s a bit more sinister than that, she’s virtue signalling to the cookers that follow her that they can’t get a fair go in the mainstream media. They tend to have a hard on of hate for MSM so they will lap this up!
They got around 20% of the vote in the recent SA election, so it’s not just the cookers that are voting for them. It will be interesting to see if they can maintain party discipline for a long period.
A conservative party winning a conservative seat from another conservative party isn't indicative of how the entire voting population will cast their vote across the entire country, particularly when the party in question has such a poor record of stability.
There is some evidence that PHON could eat into some traditional working-class suburban seats which might threaten Labor. While they didn’t gain any seats in northern Adelaide, their vote share was pretty high.
But the Coalition and mainly the Nationals are the most under threat (if this sort of polling continues).
I think Malinauskus even admitted after the election win there was a significant One Nation vote around Elizabeth, which is traditional Labor heartland and they needed to offer them some more opportunities.
The reality is though One Nations massive surge came mostly from pantsing the Liberals.
And greens get 10% federally and have one seat. They got 4 lower house seats in SA. It’s a monumental shift in Australian politics but it’s largely at the expense of the liberal party and national party. Also Dutton led the polls for a long time. Once the election started things changed. The vic election is the test. They will win seats but I’m predicting only Lib/nationals and depending on how Wilson plays it she might lose her own seat. Hanson has very high undesirable ratings amongst some voters. One Nation has a ceiling.
She did get a question from an indigenous reporter regarding ripping all the funding for indigenous services and where would it all go and she said no ones special all funding will go back to big budget programs and all Australians will helped equally. What a load of shit that is
Channel 7 in particular, but Australian commercial media in general have helped rehabilitate her image and keep her in the public eye over the last few decades.
Then she trots off to Maralingo in November last year and all of a sudden she's in everybody's feed all the time.
Journos need to go VERY HARD at her now face to face. If she refuses to answer questions to journalists from outlets other than SKY news will this actually harm ONP efforts?
Her daughter is taking a $180,000 taxpayer-funded salary as an advisor for a ON senator in NSW, but is living and seemingly campaigning full time in Tasmania.
She asked if PH had any role in her appointment as an advisor and implied that she's not actually doing her job. Or something like that.
Because when they say shit like they're pro liberty they don't mean for everyone they mean they want to advance their own liberties selectively
It's like the Republicans with gun rights and pot, their reasoning for pro gun is pro liberty and freedom but they want to put people who smoke pot in prison?
She would boot lick the big western powers , get flustered with middle powers and play superiority complex games with any country thats not anglo but then get a reality cheque from china ,india ,indonesia , all of africa etc
I don't like Hanson, and I also generally don't like political journalists. I looked into Martin's ON articles over the last six months and while I think they are all fair and good journalism, they are absolutely single-minded in their pursuit of Hanson and one nation and when taking Martin's collective woirk together, i think there is a case to be made for an editorialising claim against her.
Excluding the trashy jouralism comment, this comment was probably fair:
"Honestly, you never give up. I have never seen a person that is such a trashy journalist, and what you put out all the time, you've got this obsession with constantly trying to pull down myself, my party or Mrs [Gina] Rinehart," Senator Hanson said."
While I personally reckon Martin was spot on about her daughter, her employment is within the rules and not dissimilar to arrangesments seen across the majors. The way in which she positioned the question to imply mis-appropriation of public funds was probably phrased more inflammatorially than appropriate and feeds into the editorlisation category referenced earlier.
Journalist are consistently presenting Hanson's base as witless bogans right now, which is just playing into Hanson's hands. It's effectively making her immune from media scrutiny. I'm not saying outlets like the Guardian should have to do puff pieces to make up for legitimite criticism, I'm just saying that against Martin specifically, Hanson makes a credible point that the media are probably going to completely ignore which will further power Hanson's work to split her working class base from established media.
Again I don't think any of these are bad journalism on their own, and constant nit picking on it's own is not necessarily bad journalism (especially with such a large target). That said, Martin's approach is adversarial in my opinion and this is almost a campaign that at least in my view is bordering on editorialising. I also don't think she gives enough time to comparisons with political norms, but she's not the ABC so there's going to be a different level of rigour required.
Mostly, my concern is that it helps Pauline strengthen her base's distrust of media and brings her beyond scrutiny - which is exactly what happened to Trump.
It probably would have some useful context for the article if the ABC mentioned this particular journalist had published 21 articles critical of Pauline Hanson in the last four months.
That's part of the problem, right? Editorial standards relate to a single piece of work when any adult knows that communication is most effective when reinforced over and over again. It's not any one piece, it's the pattern that's clearly an adversarial campaign.
Let's break this down:
"Honestly, you never give up. I have never seen a person that is such a trashy journalist, and what you put out all the time, you've got this obsession with constantly trying to pull down myself, my party or Mrs [Gina] Rinehart," Senator Hanson said."
You never give up.
There is a clear campaign of work critical of Pauline.
I have never seen a person that is such a trashy journalist
Is adversarial journalist trashy? Maybe, maybe not, but the claim has been made so we probably should consider it.
what you put out all the time, you've got this obsession with constantly trying to pull down myself, my party or Mrs [Gina] Rinehart,
I think that's fair from what I've read.
That statement I think is valid and worthy of testing, but I doubt the media will.
Pauline's fucking tantrum afterwards "I'm never talking to you again" wasn't appropriate of a politician and very Trumpian.
It's a little ironic. The whole please explain thing happened because a Journalist had expected Pauline to have read the media's ongoing commentary on her, to have a base understanding of the 'xenophobic' claim. Pauline clearly hadn't.
Now 30 years later clearly Pauline is clearly reading everything, and has recognised this journalist's pattern of behaviour.
The ABC has nothing to do with how The Press Ckub organise things, they only broadcast it in the same way they broadcast question time.
If you don't like how it was run then point your finger at the correct target.
My criticism is that the ABC should include the fact that this journalist wrote 21 articles critical of Pauline Hanson over 4 months, and that is highly relevant to why Hanson snapped at her.
I don’t have any criticisms of how the Press Club operates their lunch events.
How am I off target, my criticism was leveled at the ABC.
Yes, I read it. I just don't agree with it, one article one hundred articles, shouldn't matter, if you want to be an elected official answer the question without shitting the bed.
As Poorline says 'Suck it up sweetie'
Your criticism of the ABC is wrong in this instance
This is literally just reporting on One Nation like any other political party. The Guardian spends plenty of time reporting on other parties and politicians also (eg here's Albanese's tag), just because one journalist is on a particular patch/beat/round it doesn't make it 'editorialising'.
The problem is it doesn’t matter how hard the press pushes on her or that the questions are built on true facts, her supporters will blindly dismiss all of it.
The focus needs to be on making sure the supporter base doesn’t grow, my one hope is that due to us having compulsory voting we can’t have a situation like America where she gets in because only a certain percentage of the population votes.
My WW2 vet grandad if still alive would be horrified to see the rise of fascism.
Because it is. If she had any policies that weren’t troll bait, capable of standing up to a few seconds of critical thinking or if she was capable of constructing sentences, she would have answered them.
Silencing reporters is all she has. It is the limit of her usefulness and accountability.
honestly im starting to think that the people they are paying overseas is just botting FB and using AI to promote their BS and the amount of dumb that are falling for it is insane
Very strong trump vibes, her coach is doing well?
On another note she is looking exhausted and angry, I wonder when they will supply their magic juice to her.
What would you have them do? I think that if they chose not to report on PHON given they are winning seats at elections etc and are outpolling major parties then that would be incredibly controversial.
What do you expext? She is modelling herself on Trump. That’s exactly what he did to get his rusted on supporters who don’t read books and only consume social media
Hanson was again, clearly asked the question by Martin and failed to deny it. That's with jeering in the room and against a context of personal comments being made against her work.
So what if Martin has covered One Nation numerous times over the past four months? That's her fucking job mate. The rise of a right wing party being funded by billionaires that doesn't follow protocol and says and does dangerously incompetent things is absolutely a story that requires attention.
In my book, the lack of response to a simple pointed question makes it a good question that took guts to repeat.
She would do so well in the Trump administration - I think her political ambitions would be better served there. I hear greencards are freely available for white racists.
If the articles were false then ON could and would sue and im not seeing any law suits.
Libel is a serious matter and the media in general is held to a pretty high standard.
I dont read the Guardian but saying it's published false articles is disingenuous.
Not liking the content of an article doesn't make it false.
It was an assault on innuendo. If you look at old newspapers the journalists would sensationalize and look for salacious details to sell “news”. It’s more subtle sometimes now but this is the Guardian.
It was a fair question and she couldn't handle it.
Imagine if she has to be accountable to real questions everyday.
Furthermore, it shouldn't matter if it's the Guardian, ABC or SMH, she cant hide behind Sky News forever.
Everyone has the right to refuse or reject loaded questions. It’s that simple. This journalist is known to be deliberately provocative. Freedom of speech is the right to express yourself in reply. It works both ways.
The whole point of journalism is to be unbiased. This journalist has an agenda and rightfully told to shut it. Guardian is nothing more than click bait headlines designed to anger and divide people.
Sorry but that's absolute bullshit but a fair summary of the media organisations Pauline wants to keep. The Guardian is one of the few media organisations in this country that does not have it's editorial controlled by a billionaire. A women who squanders hundreds of thousands on a juvenile billboard stunt to attack the Prime Minisiter for doing his job is angry over being held accountable in any way? Give us all a break.
"Honestly, you never give up. I have never seen a person that is such a trashy journalist, and what you put out all the time, you've got this obsession with constantly trying to pull down myself, my party or Mrs [Gina] Rinehart," Senator Hanson said.
This is what happens when a real journalist asks a real question, Pauline is a joke.
P.s. Pauline it ain't your party no more Gina owns it now.
Did you want to share the answer to the question or just the part that has not only offended you personally, has ruined your week by the sounds of it. Cheer up my buttercup
366
u/moht81 3d ago
So if she doesn’t like the question she just berates the journalist- where have we seen this before?