I would like to see the education system focus on why peace was not lasting after WW1 but we did much better after WW2. I would like us to ensure that those lessons are not forgotten.

The ALP proposed a world-leading ETS in 2007 - and spent 9 years in opposition. In 2025, the Greens didn’t grow their vote, and ~40% backed pro-coal/gas parties.

I suggest that this decision reflects where the community is at.

We’ve still got more work to do to bring more people with us.

Agree. I would not call it a “cost of living” crisis. I would call it an “inequality crisis”.

Is there a way to analyse where we'd be now if Bill Shorten’s 2019 policies had been implemented? Our vote matters. This isn’t just on politicians - it’s on the community. We had an alternative vision and rejected it. Why would any leader propose those policies again?

Agree with the principle, but what is a lie and who decides?

Elections have consequences. The politicians we elect today shape the future candidates. If we vote for a certain style, we’ll get more of the same.

We need to share the message - today's vote shapes future politicians.

When people on the left criticise Albo and don’t promote his policy successes, they help people in the centre feel comfortable voting LNP.

The right have played a long game. The left need to do the same. Promote the successes, highlight the problems with LNP policies. Rome was not built in a day.

Understand the frustration. Problem is political parties evolve to match how we vote. And we have not been voting for working class issues.

We need parties offering distinct directions. Vote Green to move left quickly, ALP for a slower left shift, Coalition to move right, One Nation for far-right, and Teals for old liberal values with environmental focus.

ALP should reject the offer and let voters decide.

Does the graph show we performed strongly from 2008 to 2013, then plateaued until the gap closed in 2020? We then borrowed heavily for COVID and are still battling resulting inflation.

It seems like the damage began in 2013, and fixing it will take more than one parliamentary term.

When I read this, it feels like you're unhappy with the ALP and would prefer a Coalition government.

If you meant you're unhappy with the ALP but want a Green or ALP/Green minority government, I missed that. I wonder how many others might misinterpret this too.

It seems to me that each Palestinian killed in Gaza is likely to increase the number of fighters against Israel. Does anyone understand the logic for why this wouldn’t be the case?

Because the least desirable outcome is a Coalition government, the Greens need to grow their support without pushing Labor voters to the Coalition. Instead of “softening”, could the Greens reframe it: progress is happening, but too slowly, and we need to accelerate it?

Understand the perspective, but the greens have only grown their vote from 9% to 12.5% since 2007. It looks like the criticism directed at the ALP drives voters to the Coalition.

Perhaps the way the criticism is phrased needs to change, because it does not seem to be getting the desired outcome.

I would like to see the election debates in a school debating format.

So the economic debate would see the finance minister, treasurer, and PM against their shadows putting their case forward. No journalist questions.

You could then have other topics with different ministers / shadows.

And what about don't treat an election like a sports race. We don't need a commentary of who is in front and by how much. That is all we hear with opinion poll led commentary.

We need information about their policy platforms, and analysis of the pros and cons from a cross section of society.