We are more progressive. The trouble is the amendment was too vague and if anyone asked questions or suggested that they might vote no, they got called a racist and told to educate themselves.
The Yes campaign ended up mostly using the argument that you should vote yes because conservative are telling you to say no.

It's very relevant. We need to decide if we want to irrevocably change the country. We need more than "don't worry about it"

Tell me about it. It took me about 15 minutes to do mine and my wife's taxes this year.

And only 2 temperatures. 180 or 200.

With the exception of the festival attack you could just as easily be describing the IDF. Hamas and the IDF are evil.

The whole thing was a fumble. They picked the wrong time and appealed to the wrong people. They also never sold why it needed to happen.
What does a Chinese, Afghan or Sudanese citizen even understand or care about a group of people when they probably have never even met one.
They appealed to the inner city rich snobs and no one else. The inner city was going to vote yes anyway. Why didn't they go where the no votes were?

This tastes like real milk, and only 2% fat.
Looks significantly at your stomach

I just gave up and went back to brushing my teeth like a caveman.

It's a star trek joke. Whenever anything goes wrong they reverse the polarity and that magically fixes it.

Something I have not seen discussed anywhere.
They do not specify that this group will be elected. That mean they will be appointed. I just can't see future for this other than a punch of politicians mates from the inner city. Completely out of touch with the needs of those they represent.
I'm still leaning towards voting yes but I don't see this actually helping. It's probably just going to cost the tax payers a bunch of money and do no good.
If they were elected then they could be held to account.

Maybe try some of the newer oat milks.
They don't taste the same but they taste good.

There were 2 main issues for me.

1. The wording did not specify how they would be selected.
2. The voice did not require that the members needed to be Aboriginal. So it would have been a bunch of non Aboriginal mates of politicians in the voice. Just like how Tony Abbott got to be the minister for women.

The yes campaign just said trust us it will do nothing so you don't need to worry. What was the point then?

As if anyone would want to visit Russia right now. Such a pity what Putin has done to that country.

The whole topic is now radioactive. No politician will touch it for at least the next 10 years.

There are also situations where there is no good option but you still need it. I live in Victoria. Most of our power comes from brown coal.
I have solar panels but that only covers part of it. I can't afford the $5-10k for batteries so I have no choice but to keep using grid power. Even if I did spend that, there is no guarantee that it will be better.

So if you encountered a criminal holding an innocent person hostage, you would shoot the hostage on the off chance that you might also hit the criminal. You would then shoot the paramedic trying to save the hostages' life.
Your version of the trolley problem must be pretty wack.

Tensions were rising not dropping.

There are very few in inner city Melbourne.

This is about ensuring it can't be abused. They could have specified how the members would be selected in the wording of the referendum.
They wanted to leave the door open for them to abuse it down the track.

The problem with that argument is that if a house is owner occupied then that still happens.
If the hot water goes then it doesn't matter who owns the house. A plumber will get paid to fix/replace it. In fact he will probably be paid more if the owner lives at the property because they will want a better system so that they can have longer showers.