Australia went to the polls today to elect their next federal government. The polls have closed, and counting of votes is still in progress. However, the current trend suggests that the Australian Labor Party (the major left-wing party) will retain government. Thank you, Donald Trump. About six months ago, the polls suggested that the people were not happy with the current government due to the cost-of-living crisis and were looking to change government. But it seems to me that what is happening now in the US is causing people to shy away from right-wing parties. This may be the one beneficial thing Trump has done for the world... to be the example of what not to vote for.

Although the counting is incomplete, the election has been decided... the Australian Labor Party has won what has been described as a landslide victory. The leader of the opposition party has lost his own seat in parliament. The election result was quite unexpected. Recent polls suggested that Labor would win with a reduced majority or even a minority government (requiring support from other parties or independents). But instead, they increased their majority.

Edited May 3May 3 by KJW

Just now, KJW said:

Although the counting is incomplete, the election has been decided... the Australian Labor Party has won what has been described as a landslide victory. The leader of the opposition party has lost his own seat in parliament. The election result was quite unexpected. The recent polls suggested that Labor would win with a reduced majority or even a minority government (requiring support from other parties or independents). But instead, they increased their majority.

A re-run of the Trump effect we have just seen in Canada. Quite a few right wing parties have made the error of copying Trump and, now that Trump has antagonised everybody in the democratic world, they are finding that was a huge strategic blunder. Trump is radioactive, politically.

I expect rightwing populists like Farage, Meloni and Le Pen (or rather Bardella, now) will be trying discreetly to put as much distance as they can between themselves and Trump. 😉

26 minutes ago, exchemist said:

A re-run of the Trump effect we have just seen in Canada. Quite a few right wing parties have made the error of copying Trump and, now that Trump has antagonised everybody in the democratic world, they are finding that was a huge strategic blunder. Trump is radioactive, politically.

I expect rightwing populists like Farage, Meloni and Le Pen (or rather Bardella, now) will be trying discreetly to put as much distance as they can between themselves and Trump. 😉

It's a good day to be an Australian. Some time ago, I posted an example of an evil policy of the previous right-wing government of Australia. Although it wasn't part of the election campaign for this election, I did hear it mentioned that the opposition party wanted to reintroduce this policy. It's a relief that they didn't win.

It's also a good day for the rest of the world. It shows that sanity still exists in the world. Australia has people who like Trump... a disturbingly large number of them, actually. There was even a party called "Trumpet of Patriots" (the name says it all). But in spite of that, the majority of voters decided that it was best to keep the power of government with the left.

I will eat a Vegemite sandwich in honor of the occasion. RW setbacks in France, Poland, Canada, and now Australia, a good trend and one furthered by MAGA, as others note.

Seems Australia went the same as Canada.
D Trump is making all conservative leaders in elections seem like 'boogeymen' and costing them votes, even when they might have viable platforms, or the opponent is a 'dud'.

Used to be Russia and China that did the election interfering; now it's the US.

5 minutes ago, TheVat said:

I will eat a Vegemite sandwich in honor of the occasion.

Vegemite is good on buttered toast, but don't spread it too thickly. You're not in Canada are you? There's a bit of a dispute between Australia and Canada over Vegemite. Apparently in Canada, there's a law against fortifying food with vitamins, which has led to Vegemite being banned but not Marmite for whatever reason.

Edited May 3May 3 by KJW

I wouldn’t call being the cautionary tale “interfering”

12 minutes ago, swansont said:

I wouldn’t call being the cautionary tale “interfering”

Vance and Musk most certainly have interfered, very overtly, in European politics. But I don’t know about Australia.

8 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Vance and Musk most certainly have interfered, very overtly, in European politics. But I don’t know about Australia.

The other way round, isn't it? Australia sent them Rupert Murdoch.

12 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

The other way round, isn't it? Australia sent them Rupert Murdoch.

Well, in Germany Musk, Vance etc. tried to boost the now officially declared extremist party (AfD). While it did not seem to improve their election results, it also did not seem to have a significant negative impact. And at least according to polls the AfD only gained support...

1 hour ago, KJW said:

Vegemite is good on buttered toast, but don't spread it too thickly. You're not in Canada are you? There's a bit of a dispute between Australia and Canada over Vegemite. Apparently in Canada, there's a law against fortifying food with vitamins, which has led to Vegemite being banned but not Marmite for whatever reason.

I think the rules are that only certain foods are allowed to be fortified, but I am quite certain that there is no general ban. Labeling is one of the most common issues.

2 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Well, in Germany Musk, Vance etc. tried to boost the now officially declared extremist party (AfD). While it did not seem to improve their election results, it also did not seem to have a significant negative impact. And at least according to polls the AfD only gained support...

Yeah but Musk and Tesla cars ("swasticars") are now a hate object across much of Europe. And from what I read, the AfD did not do as well as many people expected, so their intervention may have had a -ve impact - though it's hard to prove a counterfactual.

19 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

The other way round, isn't it? Australia sent them Rupert Murdoch.

Good point!

31 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Vance and Musk most certainly have interfered, very overtly, in European politics. But I don’t know about Australia.

Did Musk do any hidden donations, like Russia contributing to the NRA, or the Russian oligarch that used middlemen to launder contributions? I know there was an issue with how he amplified things on Xitter.

I’m not sure what “interfering” Vance did; he made some awful and idiotic comments, but speech isn’t interference, either. Not like the state-sanctioned disinformation campaigns. Just a doofus politician being a blowhard, being amplified by the media. And with the anti-Midas touch similar to Trump’s.

18 minutes ago, swansont said:

Did Musk do any hidden donations, like Russia contributing to the NRA, or the Russian oligarch that used middlemen to launder contributions? I know there was an issue with how he amplified things on Xitter.

I’m not sure what “interfering” Vance did; he made some awful and idiotic comments, but speech isn’t interference, either. Not like the state-sanctioned disinformation campaigns. Just a doofus politician being a blowhard, being amplified by the media. And with the anti-Midas touch similar to Trump’s.

He met the AfD while over for the Munich security conference. And did NOT have the courtesy to call on the Chancellor.

Foreign politicians just don’t do that sort of thing, especially when the country they visit has an election coming up. It’s interference all right, though obviously I wouldn’t claim it was in the same league as Putin’s sustained attempts to interfere. Very shocking, for the Vice President of what used, for 70 years, to be our strongest ally and firmest upholder of democracy.

Edited May 3May 3 by exchemist

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

Yeah but Musk and Tesla cars ("swasticars") are now a hate object across much of Europe. And from what I read, the AfD did not do as well as many people expected, so their intervention may have had a -ve impact - though it's hard to prove a counterfactual.

From my read, they pretty much did exactly as expected. Polls projected something around 20% and they got 20.8%. The folks hating on Teslas are not those who vote for the AfD in the first place and heavily mask the change that goes through German society. You should also know that the AfD is not really trying to appear like a serious conservative with some mild Trumpism as the Canadian and Australian conservatives did. They went all in on 3rd Reich, and will not be dissuaded by US antics. The main thing is that they were somewhat anti-USA and pro-Russia, but now obviously the US is also in the fold now.

The polarization is most extreme between West and East Germany, though the AfD is again slowly getting more support. The fact that they have not hit their ceiling yet is really, really worrying.

Just now, KJW said:

Vegemite is good on buttered toast, but don't spread it too thickly. You're not in Canada are you? There's a bit of a dispute between Australia and Canada over Vegemite (apparently in Canada, there's a law against fortifying food with vitamins, which has led to Vegemite being banned but not Marmite for whatever reason).

Very interesting about the vitamins, I had no idea, especially in a northern country that lacks the environment to grow the more tropical and subtropical produce.

Many foods, including bread. are fortified by law in the UK.

Just now, CharonY said:

Well, in Germany Musk, Vance etc. tried to boost the now officially declared extremist party (AfD). While it did not seem to improve their election results, it also did not seem to have a significant negative impact. And at least according to polls the AfD only gained support...

I think the rules are that only certain foods are allowed to be fortified, but I am quite certain that there is no general ban. Labeling is one of the most common issues.

Noted

20 minutes ago, exchemist said:

A re-run of the Trump effect we have just seen in Canada. Quite a few right wing parties have made the error of copying Trump and, now that Trump has antagonised everybody in the democratic world, they are finding that was a huge strategic blunder. Trump is radioactive, politically.

I expect rightwing populists like Farage, Meloni and Le Pen (or rather Bardella, now) will be trying discreetly to put as much distance as they can between themselves and Trump. 😉

Bear in mind yesterday's local elections where Farage seems to have done rather well.

1 hour ago, CharonY said:

From my read, they pretty much did exactly as expected. Polls projected something around 20% and they got 20.8%. The folks hating on Teslas are not those who vote for the AfD in the first place and heavily mask the change that goes through German society. You should also know that the AfD is not really trying to appear like a serious conservative with some mild Trumpism as the Canadian and Australian conservatives did. They went all in on 3rd Reich, and will not be dissuaded by US antics. The main thing is that they were somewhat anti-USA and pro-Russia, but now obviously the US is also in the fold now.

The polarization is most extreme between West and East Germany, though the AfD is again slowly getting more support. The fact that they have not hit their ceiling yet is really, really worrying.

Look at this: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/03/marco-rubio-germany-afd

Rubio is way out of line here. The German constitution lays down criteria to prevent another Nazi party taking power - and the AfD has just triggered its provisions. He should stay the fuck out of European politics.

I'm not sure about Germany or Australia; I can only speak to Canada.

The Liberals in Canada, under J Trudeau, saw their support fall to the teens while the Conservatives were at better than 50 %, until D Trump started fiddle-fu*king with tariffs, and within a week, the Liberals, now under M Carney, pulled ahead of the Conservatives, where they stayed for the next three weeks until the election.
This was all before they had presented and costed their platforms; it was all due to the fact that M Carney is perceived as better protection against D Trump's madness, after all he is a businessman and can make the 'best deals' ( how did that work out with D Trump ?).

I'm hopeful that all's for the best, as Carney didn't get a majority, so it won't be 'back to J Trudeau's ways' too soon, and P Poilievre lost his seat in Parliament, but I would consider it interference if the only reason we have the current Government, is the head of our neighbor's Government.

I am not one to be political, but the right has cut scientific research drastically so I believe this would be a good thing.

2 hours ago, MigL said:

he is a businessman and can make the 'best deals' ( how did that work out with D Trump ?).

There's a myth in Australia that the conservative party is better at managing the economy. The opposition party tried playing that card, but they got nothing. All they could do was to try to blame the government for the cost-of-living crisis and claim that they would be better able to deal with the Trump administration. Interestingly, the government's response to Trump's tariff was to not impose a retaliatory tariff which would hurt Australians and unlikely to benefit Australian exporters.

Edited May 4May 4 by KJW

3 hours ago, exchemist said:

Rubio is way out of line here. The German constitution lays down criteria to prevent another Nazi party taking power - and the AfD has just triggered its provisions. He should stay the fuck out of European politics.

I would like to add some context here. One is that the report by the Verfassungschutz (Office for the protection of the constitution) does not trigger specific actions. It should be noted that prior, the AfD was classified as a potential danger to the constitution. At that level the Verfassungsschutz is allowed to use intelligence tools, including cultivating confidential informants and other actions. However, there are specific rules of proportionality. The difference now is that the thresholds for these rules are now lowered. I.e. for example surveillance could be intensified now.

However, they the Verfassungsschutz has no say in outlawing the party. This can only be done by the legislative bodies (Bundestag, Bundesrat) or the Government, which requires a process initiated at the Federal Constitutional Court. Such a discussion was initiated last year. I think it is still moving its way through the procedural points. However, it is not about abolishing as such, but just to discuss if it the decision to abolish the AfD should come to a vote. Or I think that is where it is, German procedure is complicated, to say the least.

Obviously, the new classification will add fuel to the debate, but some are rather careful. The reason is if it is unsuccessful, as it happened before with the NPD, it could trigger a huge political fallout. There are some folks who also argue that the AfD at this point is already too big too fail. Again, during the election they were the second-largest party with 20.8%. Now, have increased to about 25% are basically at the same level as the strongest party (CDU, conservatives). Things are bleak, to put it mildly.

The biggest irony here is that the US was involved in drafting the German constitution. Folks like Vance and Rubio are complaining about elements that their predecessors encouraged to have incorporated to stop fascims to rise to power again. We are living in the most stupid bizarro world imaginable.

10 minutes ago, KJW said:

There's a myth in Australia that the conservative party is better at managing the economy.

That myth is the prevalent opinion in many places.
After all, D Trump's Republicans are setting spending records and tanking the American economy.

My example was only related to the situation in Canada, where the new Liberal Government has already promised years of much increased deficit spending.
Their previous unchecked immigration policies only served to increase housing costs such that even Canadians could not afford them, never mind new immigrants.
The Conservatives proposed an immigration system tied to the housing market; no sense bringing in immigrants to freeze on the streets.

We should be looking at governing policies, not at the 'label' they assign to their party, nor what they could possibly do because they have the same 'label' as a party in another country.
I would hope we don't become like Americans, who have no idea what policies they are voting for, but go to the polling station and simply tick off the same party that they have always voted for, sometimes for several generations.

2 hours ago, Sohan Lalwani said:

I am not one to be political, but the right has cut scientific research drastically so I believe this would be a good thing.

This is a questionnaire sent by the Trump administration to Australian universities receiving US funding:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25595847-questionnaire-for-us-research-partners/

2 hours ago, MigL said:

Their previous unchecked immigration policies only served to increase housing costs such that even Canadians could not afford them, never mind new immigrants.

There is a housing crisis in Australia, and this is being exacerbated by immigration. The fundamental problem as I see it is that there are going to be winners and losers regardless of what the government does. Increasing the supply of housing will reduce the cost of housing, which will be beneficial to those seeking to buy, but detrimental to those who have already bought. And even left-wing politicians may have a disincentive to implement a policy that goes against their own self-interest.

1 hour ago, MigL said:

My example was only related to the situation in Canada, where the new Liberal Government has already promised years of much increased deficit spending.
Their previous unchecked immigration policies only served to increase housing costs such that even Canadians could not afford them, never mind new immigrants.
The Conservatives proposed an immigration system tied to the housing market; no sense bringing in immigrants to freeze on the streets.

We should be looking at governing policies, not at the 'label' they assign to their party, nor what they could possibly do because they have the same 'label' as a party in another country.
I would hope we don't become like Americans, who have no idea what policies they are voting for, but go to the polling station and simply tick off the same party that they have always voted for, sometimes for several generations.

I think a big issue is that increasingly political identity is tied to certain set of stances, regardless whether policies make sense or not. Neither liberals nor conservatives really want to curb immigration and the recent argument about tying it to housing, which does make sense, is just caused by a major blunder of the liberals (the sudden post-COVID spike).

However, both conservatives and liberals have enacted policies that encouraged real estate prices to balloon. From what I can tell, both parties encouraged housing as an investment tool (as part of the Canadian dream, so to speak) which ultimately would have led to an increase. What is problematic is that folks only can remember intuitive mechanisms (such as immigration) and often not recognizing that housing would still have outpaced salaries, just slightly slower. It goes back to the overall issue that most folks are not good at dealing with complex situation and just want simple answers to complex questions. Identifying as conservative or liberal is just much easier than to dissect policies as a whole (or beyond wedge issues).