I'll be voting yes for the most simple and pure of reasons.
I'll be voting yes for the most simple and pure of reasons.
It will make Pauline Hanson angry.
13 comments
-
Anything that makes Pauline Hanson angry is probably the right decision.
-
I would still vote yes if voting "no" would make Paulie angry.
-
happily she's on the wrong side of most issues so it's easy to have both
-
-
Pauline is someone who needs people to be angered and enraged about small cultural differences to be relevant. The best thing you can do is forget she even exists. Just go about you're normal business and she'll be relegated to after hours sky news segments watched by less than a thousand people.
-
Isn't that the one who tried to climb Uluru to protest the ban on climbing it and failed miserably?
-
Horrible person Hanson is, I'll be voting yes to help better my friends future and kids lives; pissing Hanson off is just icing.
-
I'll be voting yes because it's the right thing to do.
-
When there's an issue I do not know enough about to have an educated opinion about, I have found a simple way to make sure you're on the right side of history: Do whatever the opposite of the conservatives want to do. Conservatives are always wrong eventually. The more conservative, the more wrong.
-
Careful with such absolutes.
Conservatives were right about fixing how we teach kids to read and we ignored them.
As a result of us pushing Three Cueing, the last 30 years has show a decline in literacy.
-
-
-
I've always found voting for the opposite of what Pauline wants to be a sound strategy
-
It works out that way, but doing so to be contrary is basically being her.
-
One should always properly research the issue and come to a decision based on logic and humanity. That said, starting from the assumption that she is wrong is generally a sound strategy.
-
-
-
And Dutton.
13 comments