Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Pauline Hanson: Her Resurrection

Jump to new
Membership requirements have changed over the years. To join either major party now you need to have a criminal record that can be used against you for refusing to tow the party line :)
 
To think that in 2011 Hanson went so close to a seat on the NSW upper house, and might still be there. It went to preferences, and she challenged the vote in court. The major parties will be wishing she'd won that seat.

It will be a movie one day. From being expelled as One Nation leader, to a stint in jail for alleged electoral fraud, to...who knows, becoming a phenomenon.

The feministas will adopt her as a heroine one day, I just know it.
 
Logique said:
To think that in 2011 Hanson went so close to a seat on the NSW upper house, and might still be there. It went to preferences, and she challenged the vote in court. The major parties will be wishing she'd won that seat.

It will be a movie one day. From being expelled as One Nation leader, to a stint in jail for alleged electoral fraud, to...who knows, becoming a phenomenon.

The feministas will adopt her as a heroine one day, I just know it.
Click to expand...

That fraud charge was instigated by that clown Peter Beattie and the charges were ultimately dropped.
 
Logique said:
To think that in 2011 Hanson went so close to a seat on the NSW upper house, and might still be there. It went to preferences, and she challenged the vote in court. The major parties will be wishing she'd won that seat.

It will be a movie one day. From being expelled as One Nation leader, to a stint in jail for alleged electoral fraud, to...who knows, becoming a phenomenon.

The feministas will adopt her as a heroine one day, I just know it.
Click to expand...


They could try asking Willard if he'd lend Queenie to play the role of Tony in the electoral fraud fiasco.:laugh:
 
noco said:
That fraud charge was instigated by that clown Peter Beattie and the charges were ultimately dropped.
Click to expand...

Say wot?

You mean Terry Sharples and you (Sharples) “will not be further out of pocket” from the legal action,Tony Abbott.
 
So what did people think of Pauline's Insiders appearance ?

I didn't know she had the hots for Vlad. :D
 
SirRumpole said:
So what did people think of Pauline's Insiders appearance ?

I didn't know she had the hots for Vlad. :D
Click to expand...

IMHO, she handled herself with fineness......Cassidy was no match for her.....Every time she had Cassidy over a barrel he would try to change the subject into a GOTHCA questions but she proved to be much smarter than Cassidy......What a difference 20 years makes.

The political revolution is well under way.
 
SirRumpole said:
So what did people think of Pauline's Insiders appearance ?

I didn't know she had the hots for Vlad. :D
Click to expand...


I missed it. Will catch up on Iview.

Was it good and did Pauline make any valid xenophobic statements?:D

You know Tony called himself Vlad to all his journo mates when he was writing articles while training to become a Mick Priest....true
 
SirRumpole said:
Same old same old. She had a good crack at Muslims though.
Click to expand...

Rumpy, "same old, same old", NO!!!!!!!!!!! she is now far more mature and astute from the "same old"....Only a rusted on lefty would make those remarks because they don't like the way her popularity has risen so fast....You know as well as most of those in the two major parties, she is listening to voters and is saying what a hell of a lot of people are thinking but afraid to say.

The two major parties are too interested in political point scoring and ignoring the real issues on the average persons mind.
 
noco said:
Rumpy, "same old, same old", NO!!!!!!!!!!! she is now far more mature and astute from the "same old"....Only a rusted on lefty would make those remarks because they don't like the way her popularity has risen so fast....You know as well as most of those in the two major parties, she is listening to voters and is saying what a hell of a lot of people are thinking but afraid to say.

The two major parties are too interested in political point scoring and ignoring the real issues on the average persons mind.
Click to expand...


Rumpole has been known to take to task (on other forums) those lefties you vilify. I'd put him at centre of current politics and slightly right of centre if we used comrade Whitlam as left.
 
Hanson now has a fellow traveller in Le Pen. One Nation's influence grows daily.

As for Abbott and Turnbull? How the world turns.
 
I feel that the
noco said:
Hey fellas, just look at Pauline go....The political revolution is well on the way....Voters are well and truly sick to death of Labor, Liberals and the Greens....Keep up the momentum Pauline and you will governing Queensland in your own right.

The Major parties are $hitting themselves.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s/news-story/e3d6786186f7316c6f1f9d92080bcab1
Click to expand...
Geens not even mentioned in this debate, but you hate them, jeeezz noco, you must really love that coal.

In fact as the penny drops on the need for children to be insulated from disease id say Pauline may soon start to fall. It flies in the face of over 70 years of science/medical experience.
 
explod said:
I feel that the

Geens not even mentioned in this debate, but you hate them, jeeezz noco, you must really love that coal.

In fact as the penny drops on the need for children to be insulated from disease id say Pauline may soon start to fall. It flies in the face of over 70 years of science/medical experience.
Click to expand...

The general public will hopefully soon start to develop a basic comprehension of scientific method. Even just the basics can help a lot. Knowing what to ask, and then being able to interpret the answers to such questions:

1. How recently was the research performed?
2. Was the research independently funded?
3. Were the findings statistically significant? Was the methodology sound?
4. Was the sample size adequate?
5. Can results be generalized to the rest of the population?
6. Were the findings published in a reputable journal?
7. Have the findings been replicated elsewhere? What did others find?
8. Has there been a meta-analysis? What did it find?

and so on...

When it comes to a child's health, of course you'd err on the side of caution. But it's also important to consider downside risks of inoculation as part of the decision, if there in fact are any.

Pauline has done herself a disservice - she knows it, we know it. She's applying her anti-authority stance in an indiscriminate manner.
 
Gringotts Bank said:
The general public will hopefully soon start to develop a basic comprehension of scientific method. Even just the basics can help a lot. Knowing what to ask, and then being able to interpret the answers to such questions:

1. How recently was the research performed?
2. Was the research independently funded?
3. Were the findings statistically significant? Was the methodology sound?
4. Was the sample size adequate?
5. Can results be generalized to the rest of the population?
6. Were the findings published in a reputable journal?
7. Have the findings been replicated elsewhere? What did others find?
8. Has there been a meta-analysis? What did it find?

and so on...

When it comes to a child's health, of course you'd err on the side of caution. But it's also important to consider downside risks of inoculation as part of the decision, if there in fact are any.

Pauline has done herself a disservice - she knows it, we know it. She's applying her anti-authority stance in an indiscriminate manner.
Click to expand...
Agree Pauline should have remained silent on the vaccinations thing.

Nothing much that is risk free in this world, but the balance of probability is firmly in favour of vaccination.
 
Gringotts Bank said:
The general public will hopefully soon start to develop a basic comprehension of scientific method. Even just the basics can help a lot. Knowing what to ask, and then being able to interpret the answers to such questions:

1. How recently was the research performed?
2. Was the research independently funded?
3. Were the findings statistically significant? Was the methodology sound?
4. Was the sample size adequate?
5. Can results be generalized to the rest of the population?
6. Were the findings published in a reputable journal?
7. Have the findings been replicated elsewhere? What did others find?
8. Has there been a meta-analysis? What did it find?

and so on...

When it comes to a child's health, of course you'd err on the side of caution. But it's also important to consider downside risks of inoculation as part of the decision, if there in fact are any.

Pauline has done herself a disservice - she knows it, we know it. She's applying her anti-authority stance in an indiscriminate manner.
Click to expand...
Logique said:
Hanson now has a fellow traveller in Le Pen. One Nation's influence grows daily.

As for Abbott and Turnbull? How the world turns.
Click to expand...

Or do you mean how the worm turns.
 

Similar threads

N
The Australian Human Rights Commission: A national disgrace
3 4 5
Replies
85
Views
15K
Tisme
Tisme
Top