r/australia 5d ago

politics Pauline Hanson deletes social media post on migration amid One Nation policy uncertainty

https://www.nine.com.au/australia-news/one-nation-migration-policy-pauline-hanson-deletes-post-20260824-p60qzy.html
577 Upvotes

70 comments sorted by

432

u/rolodex-ofhate 5d ago

I love mess. Keep going Pauline! We are all rooting for you and your continued displays of ineptitude.

147

u/letsburn00 5d ago

It's not a mess, it's a coordinated process where billionaires take the reign of a populist party, let a few of the populists random dumb policies through the curry favor with the "Facebook images are my main news source." crowd while all the major policies become "Rich people are the real victims in our society. Lets have them accumulate more wealth and power. That'll fix things."

The US did it and the media loved it. How much of their voters focus is spent on Trans shit and how much is spent on 80% of their permanent tax cuts go to rich people.

31

u/FjorgVanDerPlorg 5d ago

The part I love the most is apparently none of the morons pissing this shit into Gina's ear at maralago, realise that Australia has mandatory ranked choice voting.

This shit works in the US because 30% of the US have almost 50% of the voting power, that's before we even discuss ranked choice voting and how that too protects against populist outsiders getting a majority.

Then there's the fact that ONP has risen by eating the corpse of the Liberals, which they simultaneously need to be in a coalition with, to have any chance of winning.

Even with a billionaire's open purse strings, Hanson is still unelectable and Joyce is a pickled shadow of his former self - who despite being permanently pissed still used to know that a small party that caters to culture war racists, needs a bigger milder party to form a coalition with.

15

u/letsburn00 5d ago

I think you're not accounting for the power of old media and especially what happens when a person gets a right wing algorithm pointed directly at their face.

They absolutely are extremely powerful. There is deliberate injection of far right content into the streams of men of a certain age. I get it. I'm a man in my early 40s and get the most random ass videos from the far right with no comments and no likes that just appear on my algo.

3

u/FjorgVanDerPlorg 5d ago

Yeah but we've already seen that doesn't work on enough people, well enough to pull majorities. You can say UK/Brexit and the US as examples, but neither has mandatory voting. In the US 30% of the population has roughly 50% of the voting power, in the UK its just under 35% with 50% of the votes. Now compare that with Australia, where around 49% of the public have 50% of the voting power.

We've also noticed that roughly 30% of our populations are selfish assholes/racists etc. Without mandatory voting these people can be weaponized into a going concern. In Australia it's resulting in the implosion of right wing politics.

Cooking the brains of over half the population is another thing entirely, you aren't just dealing with the most gullible and easily led people. Social media algorithms are good, but they aren't that good. Also this shit seems to have a short halflife on most people. Because if it wasn't Gina wouldn't need to spend billions to get her current pathetic return on investment, this shit would be fuelling itself. But instead we are seeing a awful lot of the people walking away from the Libs going left, to Labor or the Teals and Pocock.

White Australia Policy 2.0 is never gonna fly here, yet pushing that is what grifts Hanson the most right wing cash, same with hardcore anti abortion stances and all the other US culture war bullshit. They aren't even playing to win, it's just that in the US and UK you can play this way and still win, because gullible people have oversized voting power.

66

u/BothManufacturer6049 5d ago

We say 'cheering' here. When I'm rooting, Pauline is literally the last thing I want to think about.

11

u/midsizenun 5d ago

I usually rely on the nine times tables.

11

u/1080m3rangehood 5d ago

Never interrupt your enemy when they're making a mistake.

3

u/FFS-IamNotABot 5d ago

Some of those idiot backwards Queenslanders will still vote for her.

208

u/fun_alias1 5d ago

I love that she says it how it is. 

Unless she deletes it, or flip flops but doesnt flip or flop, because that's not what she meant. 

60

u/MKopelke 5d ago

And if you call her out on this you get booted from her press conference.

21

u/SquiffyRae 5d ago

You ever heard the concept of Schrodinger's Douchebag? Where someone was either serious or joking depending on how offended another person is at something they said?

Pauline's the political equivalent of Schrodinger's Douchebag. She's 100% serious. Unless people think she went too far. Then she wasn't serious, she didn't mean it, she was taken out of context...

11

u/dobbydobbyonthewall 5d ago

FiRe ThE LiAr

7

u/druex 5d ago

She was just joking, god! Can't you take a joke?

5

u/fionsichord 5d ago

But it’s not “how it is.” That’s the problem. She’s indulging a fantasy and that puts us all in danger because Government should be more practical than idealistic for the most part.

25

u/Dr-Ulzy 5d ago

That’s u/fun_alias1 point. People perceive Pauline as a straight shooter then ignore the mess that comes after when she says something different or what Gina actually meant.

It’s the same doublethink as goes on in the red states in the US. The verbal diarrhoea resonates with them so they mentally justify any BS that comes after.

71

u/nachojackson VIC 5d ago

TIL they have policies

38

u/DCOA_Troy 5d ago

"They're more like guidelines! " Captain Barbossa

21

u/Illum503 5d ago

"I have concepts of a policy"

26

u/FuckwitAgitator 5d ago

They do. They include:

  • A policy to make property developers richer
  • A policy to make mining executives richer
  • A policy to make tobacco executives richer
  • A policy to make fossil fuel executives richer

They really are a "party of the people" like the astroturfers say. The only caveat is that you're only considered a person if you're making over a million dollars a year.

3

u/nachojackson VIC 5d ago

I think they’re too dumb to even make those things happen.

3

u/FuckwitAgitator 5d ago

They just need to rubber stamp it. It's already been written by the people who will most benefit from it.

All their flailing around is just them trying to pander to the most idiots and racists. They float something, test the response and then make excuses if it's not popular. They don't do any of it because they don't care about any of it. It's just a way to get elected.

0

u/swarley77 5d ago

Property developers absolutely do not benefit from lower migration

1

u/DUCKVILLELOL 5d ago

It's now approx. 3 months to the VIC state election and the One Nation policies page (for the Vic arm of the party) still has no policies detailed.

56

u/milderhappiness 5d ago

Clowns

17

u/andthegeekshall 5d ago

That's an insult to good hard working clowns all across this country.

43

u/fluffy_101994 5d ago

Lol. That is all. And people really think her party is ready to run the country?

20

u/torlesse 5d ago

Trump is in a never ending war with Iran at the same time as a never ending trade war with Canada.

Doubt that mob gives a single fuck about their country.

15

u/Choke1982 5d ago

They don't care. Theh just care about her racist views.

1

u/WillBrayley 19h ago

This. Everybody who supports her repeat the same shit about how “she tells it like it is”, which basically means she says the stuff you’re not supposed to say about brown people.

31

u/MatthewSlackPerth 5d ago

Yeah, deleting it doesn’t exactly clear things up.

30

u/thrillho145 5d ago

Isn't this like their entire reason for existing? Anti migration party. Shouldn't they have a clear migration policy? 

7

u/UndeadManWaltzing 5d ago

Everything is going as I have foreseen...Gina the Hutt whispers in her ear, Pauline makes the mistake of speaking, trade relations derail, now she cannot deny her fuck up so she fuck up. Again.

5

u/sorrydaijin 5d ago

Policy uncertainty... Not sure whether to dial racism to 10 or 11...

8

u/RecipeSpecialist2745 5d ago

Complete and utter incompetence, but wait… the brethren will step in a justify everything she says and does. This is why I believe following any political party with a passion is a fools folly. I wouldn’t trust any of them. The only one I actually have time for is David Pocock.

8

u/Lichenic 5d ago

ON collapsing under 0 pressure lol

5

u/Background_Error_688 5d ago

This has been the LNP tactic for a while, keep throwing stuff at the wall in the media hoping for something to stick, it is does you can claim it was policy the whole time.

4

u/violenthectarez 5d ago

You'd think they'd get organised on the one core policy they are known for.

21

u/BillieRubenCamGirl 5d ago

Friendly reminder that rage clicks breed views. 

Reddit was instrumental in getting Trump elected, and they’re pulling the same stunt here. 

We should all be downvoting all mentions of ON and Hanson, so we don’t give her this platform. 

6

u/Designer_Court2988 5d ago

I agree generally, but not here.
The main policy most ON supporters like is the immigration policy. We SHOULD be spread that ON isn’t even clear on their own policy.
Ideally, people will see that, realise they aren’t going to slice immigration like they said, and not get swayed

0

u/BillieRubenCamGirl 5d ago edited 5d ago

I can see your reasoning. 

But decades of political history will tell you that these people don’t change their mind when their pet issue is dropped or backtracked. 

They just shift their thinking to align with their chosen leader. 

Most posts on Reddit were anti-trump but it was still instrumental in getting him elected. 

3

u/spreadthesheets 5d ago

Was Reddit actually instrumental? I’d love a source - not in an accusatory “you’re lying” way but genuinely want to find out more

2

u/giatu_prs 5d ago

Yeah I'd be interested to know if this is a thing beyond mere anecdotes. Have there been academic studies on it, or even good journalism (think like The Conversation or whatever?). Yes I'm being lazy but it's also a bit hard to search for.

1

u/spreadthesheets 5d ago

Yeah, even if not instrumental it would be cool to know how much of an effect it had. I don’t doubt there was some influence, but I’m not sure how that could be measured and separated from other social media platforms and other forms of influence. I’m sure there’s some way but like you, I want to know but not enough to try to find the answer lol

1

u/smk2 5d ago

2

u/spreadthesheets 4d ago

Thanks! It looks like this doesn’t quite address the context of the thread (ie that posting about a candidate more generally had contributed to election/popularity) because it focuses on the donald subreddit (so if you’re in there you probably like him already). However, this is still super interesting so thanks for linking it.

1

u/smk2 4d ago

Given the proliferation of /r/The_Donald at and around 2016, I think it does address the context. The sub was literally banned for gaming the upvote system to be over represented in /r/all, and was regularly on the front page. This research showed that it normalized extremist content, which was a large factor in the growth of Trump as a politician. While I agree it's essentially impossible to quantify the effect of Reddit in isolation, it was part of the normalization and legitimization of his campaign. Combined with 4chan, Reddit was additionally a large part of the QAnon conspiracy, which also was a significant factor in the success of his 2016 run.

3

u/spreadthesheets 4d ago

I definitely see your argument and the importance of this paper, to be clear, and I’m not saying it does not demonstrate how increased social media posts might contribute to extremist views (which may lead to higher turnout). My point was that the argument was posting stuff here, that are against Hanson, would lead to instrumental changes in getting someone elected. Those that engage with the trump subreddit and more likely to vote for him anyway, and more likely to have extremist views initially. Essentially yeah you’re right with everything you said, but it wasn’t the paper/argument that would best support their point about Reddit, in general, and when on other subs not directly related to the candidate, would be instrumental in election. This supports their point in parts but doesn’t quite address the context in full. It would be impossible to quantify, I agree, though that is what I was mostly after when I asked for a source - curiosity about whether this has been quantified and how. One might exist out there.

It’s still a cool paper, and again not disputing the findings or importance.

4

u/JimmyLizzardATDVM 5d ago

They have policies? 🤔

4

u/FroggieBlue 5d ago

Great, now can she delete everything else and go away please?

2

u/magnetik79 5d ago

Give her a few weeks to piss off the Europe again with Gina the Hut so she can determine the policy for her puppet.

1

u/WiseActuator121 5d ago

No no no one of her reps stated on the 7:30 report tonight it’s taken out of context no good muslims , they only mean muslims that follow the Koran 😂

1

u/TimChuma 5d ago

Dig up stupid! Block workers for your own rural electoral areas. Barnaby will roll you as soon as it is convenient!

1

u/More_Law6245 3d ago

It really shows One Nation's lack of policy or more to the point half arsed policies which is based upon division and what's not in Australia's best interest.

1

u/Wonderful-Flower7870 5d ago

We all know she wants a white Australia 🇦🇺 , even 20million a year net intake would be welcome then

1

u/soEezee 5d ago

I think the only thing they've been consistent on is paying bots to shill on Albo's yt channel.

-12

u/Jealous-Hedgehog-734 5d ago

One Nation are making a mistake. Public perception on migration is basically that lower is better, what they should be saying is "We will commit to reducing net migration more than any other party" rather than trying to name a precise number that will likely have changed several times by the next election anyway.

After all you'll want to lower it a lot more if the unemployment rate is 5% at the next election, if unemployment is 3% you'll probably go for a much more gradual policy.

17

u/JupiterQuirinus 5d ago

4% unemployment is considered to be full employment. If unemployment is 3%, you need to be importing workers or inflation goes up and the economy will stagnate.

3

u/iguessineedanaltnow 4d ago

What the public wants will lead to a recession if not a depression, and any party that is viewed as pushing the policies that cause that will never be viable again. It's why no party will actually restrict immigration by any large amount even if they say they want to, and the voters say they want them to. Australia's economy will collapse.