Some fun graphics demonstrating it, but this isn't nearly as interesting in terms of actual substance as I was hoping. Just the exact same three points people have been saying since the week after the election. And I agree that these three are the most relevant factors. But they're not especially actionable or insightful.

Another point I heard some voters actually discussing was that they wanted the Greens, but they thought it was more important to keep Dutton out. In other words, problems with voters misunderstanding how our electoral system works.

And of course many people have tried suggesting it's the Greens' fault for being too oppositional. Purely as a matter of fact this is obviously incorrect, but it could have been interesting to know if there's data to back up whether a perception of that might have been a factor. Or something else.

[–] pineapple@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

That misunderstanding of voting system could be true. But there is an even broader picture that Labor has been targeting this time. I got Labor papers telling me not to vote for greens because if greens won this seat then that's one less seat for Labor giving the liberals an edge.

In reality this kind of thinking obviously doesn't hold up.

[–] ziltoid101@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There is definitely that perception of 'being too oppositional' unfortunately, even though the stats show they support Labor policy like over 90% of the time. Any reasonably politically engaged person will tell you that it's not the job of the senate crossbench to pass policy that isn't within their elected platform, although I empathise Labor is kinda between a rock and a hard place on that front (but that's the cost of being such a big tent catch-all centre party imo).

A few years ago I had a bit of respect for Labor for their political civility (compared to the coalition) but in the last few years I must say I've seen way too many Labor MPs/influencers/rusted-ons spread disinformation (and not just debatable stuff, but stuff you could easily disprove quickly if you bothered to check - mostly about preferential voting and fear mongering about smaller parties). And also just repeating statements from the mining lobby?? Maybe that's just a WA thing!

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

There is definitely that perception of ‘being too oppositional’ unfortunately

There are definitely a lot of people who say that online. But I don't think I've seen any evidence to support the claim that it had a significant effect at the election. I haven't seen evidence to oppose that claim either, but that's my point...we're lacking in real data.

Maybe that’s just a WA thing

WA Labor definitely seems like the worst version of Labor when it comes to the environment...(NSW Labor is the worst in pretty much every other way, from what I've seen) But the federal party kowtows to their WA colleagues far too often. Remember when Plibersek had a deal for some climate policy with the Greens, only for Albanese to come in and destroy the deal, at the request of the WA Premier?

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

As a Greens voter I don't think theres much more the Greens can do ? Albeit I'm open to suggestions.

As a long time Greens voter, their policy platfrom doesn't sit with most voters (science and expert based mixed with kindness and inclusivety)

The issue is, if they morph to recgonise that's not what people want, they will need to look into the abyss and become the abyss and turn into something truly ugly like Labour have done. Albanese literately says that in the AFR today.

[–] maniacalmanicmania@aussie.zone 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

This is going to sound strange - because the perception is that The Greens are a radical leftist activist party - but they could do more to build grass roots campaigns, bring together progressive coalitions and be more of a popular front for radical social change. I don't think this would harm their electoral support and could well see it increase. Their current, and possibly only strategy, of being an electoralist party may well have plateaued.

Just one example off the top of my head. While the Greens were championing housing reforms in federal parliament were they also arguing for and helping to organise mass popular protests and movements on the streets? Campaigns that could bring together workers and families from across the political divide to put even more political pressure on Labor? I didn't see it. I know the public housing campaign in Sydney didn't see it.

I don't think much will change for The Greens right now. The federal election results are not as big a deal for them as pundits are making out. I think The Greens know this and will bide their time and change nothing. Which will be a massive waste of an opportunity to reorient to the grass roots coalition building that The Greens formed out of.

[–] ziltoid101@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I've seen a lot of analysis and discussion for a very small percentage change in a single election. If I were the Greens, I'd definitely be reviewing policy and protocol because the party should be steadily growing rather than stagnating. But as a single data point I probably wouldn't make any radical changes unless subsequent elections also produce disappointing results.

A lot of their stagnating performance is probably quite superficial. I'm reasonably fond of the Greens, but I think Bandt (and MCM too tbh) were probably a bit grating to the general public - and I think a lot of us have realised that with Bandt's mediocre concession speech. I feel like a decade (or more) ago it was a lot 'cooler' to like the Greens, when they essentially branded themselves as "the science party". They still have a lot of these policies, but it feels like their image in 2025 is a lot more... I don't quite know how to put a finger on it... rage-baitey?

Australian voters emphatically rejected Dutton's culture war bullshit, but Greens need to not be careful to get caught on the other side of the culture war battle and face similar rejection...

[–] spiffmeister@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

I've seen a lot of analysis and discussion for a very small percentage change in a single election.

Well you can't exclude the fact that it's fun to shit on the left wing party.

[–] BilboBargains@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

English DNA and the green party do not mix. You will never explain that car culture, shit education and healthcare are a problem to these people. What you need to do is directly access their feels and leverage their innate sense of entitlement with a populist message and a cultish leader. Or wait for the ecosystem to collapse, that's a good option.