I found the whole "silence for a week thing" extremely childish given how much work there is to do, poor leadership IMO. Imagine
I get it. They have put in years of hard work of trying to get a solution, one presents and it is not accepted by the public. This is a big knock back for them. They need some time to digest, process and think about 'what next'.
Certainly hasn't stopped Peter Dutton getting straight onto the front foot and whacking it back over the sightscreen.
His true colours are back on show for all to see. No new referendum , no treaty, give 'em nothing!
Sprung! Yes, we Statists are known to meet monthly, deep in darkly treed forests, wearing our white dust coats emblazoned with numbers praying to the gods, Divisionist, Plus, Multiply and Minus. The great god's name, Graph, is only whispered, with bowed heads.
Graph is but one of the minor supreme beings. The true messiah is Correlation.......
Fair dinkum...there is some absolutely absurd judgements being made.
The reasons for voting 'No' were widespread and diverse. There is no intellectual superiority in the 'Yes' case. That's purely a personal opinion, and perhaps that arrogance is arguably one of the reasons the case was lost.
If the question had been...."Do you think first nations people should be recognised in the constitution?... it would have romped in".
The fact is that indigenous folks have a Voice. It's a strong voice. It's heard often. You only have to look at indigenous input on both sides of the debate. It was impressive...yes, even Lydia Thorpe (who may be a bit out there, but who is a strong and commited advocate for her people) But it is a diverse voice.
Many government departments at both a state and federal level have an indigenous input...its especially so in things like education and health If you think governments aren't aware of the problems indigenous folk face you're mistaken. They're well aware of issues and locations.
The Voice isn't the problem...it's the Ears. The voice is loud and clear. It needs to be listened to, and there need to be a willingness by governments to close that gap. ...and we've just wasted a heap of money that could have been better spent
No one is saying there is an intellectual superiority in voting yes - far from it, if people consider the facts and vote 'No', then that is democracy at work, and I have no doubt that many 'No' voters are in that category.
But if people voted 'no' simply because they didn't know what the issues were (or couldn't be bothered finding out), then that is ignorance at its best. And the fact that the 'No' campaign legitimised the fact that remaining ignorant was acceptable, is, in my book, the biggest shame of this whole process.
Einstein said the true definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So something has to change in the relationship between First Nations peoples and our elected leaders, or we will be talking about the same issues in 20 or 30 years' time.
As for needing 'Ears' - ears can listen, but it doesn't mean they understand. It's the last bit we need to get a better handle on.
The room has just told them that when it comes to Indigenous affairs, much of the country is either against it or doesn't want to know. All the more reason why the thought of a female indigenous leader in charge of the Liberal party would be electoral suicide.
If there was a election tomorrow and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price was running for PM, I'd vote for her in a heat beat. I'd not heard much about her prior to the Voice debate, what a breath of fresh air, the future of Australian politics I reckon. Thoughts?
Impressive though she has been, she has as much chance of being the leader of the Coalition as I have of lining up at full-forward in the first game next year. She has served her purpose, and the Libs will ensure that normal service is resumed as soon as possible.
The voting patterns turned out to be pretty interesting, both sides post the vote are spinning like crazy to run their preferred agendas.
As far as I can tell, it seems inner city and academia was Yes, and pretty much everywhere else in the country was No.
A couple of odd standouts;
- The NT which holds the highest percentage of indigenous population strongly voted No.
- Inner City Melb which apparently has one of the countries lowest Indigenous populations, voted strongly Yes.
Overall, it seems to indicate just how wrong the referendum was, a niche question that was seen by the vast majority as waste of time and money.
Not sure it's the 'vast majority'. If 10% of the swinging voters would have seen a different outcome. The 'If you don't know, vote no' catch-cry was well and truly on display where I voted, and I would suggest that many of the people walking in to vote had only that message ringing in their ears, because many people (I use my 4 adult children as exhibits) couldn't be bothered finding out what this referendum was about. Perhaps that explains why the inner-city academics voted yes, while the outer-suburbanites voted no?
Interesting to read the take on the outcome in the international media. Pretty much universally suggested that the campaign was hijacked for political purposes and the electorate was by and large conned with a barrage of half-truths and fabrications. Of course, Albanese should have been smarter and read the mood of the room, because referenda never pass unless they have bi-partisan support.
Funny now to hear all the local politicians saying we must now 'work together to get real improvements for Indigenous peoples', or words to that effect (we've done well on that one for the past 122 years, haven't we...?) Why do I find it hard to believe that will be the case when it comes to voting on legislation....?
I think we can take great heart from the fact that we could have beaten either of those sides on the MCG yesterday. For the first time in probably 20 years, we can tackle the start of the season knowing (and not wondering) that our football is good enough to go all the way.
The next piece in the puzzle is do it consistently, not just week-in, week-out, but quarter by quarter every week. Consistency is built above the shoulders, not in the gym. Time to train the mindset to believe that we are the best, and stop doubting.
Apart from the obvious on-field performance improvement, I think the desire of Cook et al to make CFC a 'good club' is well on the way. It's one thing to get your act together on the field, but it has been said many times that success is born out of a stable, supportive and forward-thinking administration (which we haven't had for 25+ years).
'Stronger Together' is the best way to sum that all up. Kudos to those who are working to make this happen.
I questioned Marchbank over Kemp v Lions. Marchbank fumbled early on but improved across the 3 finals. Kemp held his own extremely well given the number of games he's played.
The real surprise for me was Boyd. He has improved as he's got more games, which is terrific. What I didn't expect was an almost faultless performance in a preliminary final. Given he's only played how many games for us?
Boyd could turn into a Sinclair/Coleman/Daniel type, and that is a clear missing piece to our defensive run. Throw in Williams as well and the run out of our backline will certainly improve.
That's the key to unlocking the Charlie and Harry double-headed mosnter - get the ball in deep and fast for lots on one-on-ones.
Through the lens of a side that was 4-1-8 not that long ago, we have gotten far more out of this season that anyone could ever have imagined. Sets up a fantastic pillar for 2024 and beyond.
The learning we have to absorb is the difference when we take the game on. First 20 minutes and most of the last quarter, we ran hard together, and dared to win. In the middle bit, we were stodgy and reactionary, and totally got our comeuppance. And any time we come up against sides with fast-running half-backs who set up play, we are in trouble (Coleman and McKenna completely owned us tonight), we need some harder working half-forwards who do not let this happen.
But we have certainly proved we are there or thereabouts, and I can't help thinking that if that game is at the MCG, we turn the tables.
Disappointed, but wrapped that we are relevant once again.......
Sam Newman is nothing but a grumpy old man who is still looking for headlines.
He made a living on the Footy Show by going out on the street and making fools of unfortunates who didn't know any better, and he is still poking a stick at those he feels are beneath him.
I know it is said he is a top bloke, but his public persona is one of an irrelevant flog who doesn't deserve the oxygen that he keeps getting from his old mates in the media. He should look up the word respect and see if he can find a scintilla of it in his rantings.
What also comes with freedom of speech is the responsibility of free speech. You can't have one without the other.
