The Noisy Elephant
@TheNoisyTrunk • 5,696 subscribers
There are no words, Josephine.
Shorts
Videos
WE DO NOT NEED FLUSTERED in government. This is an example, and it is not an isolated case. How could this woman ever be prime minister if she can't even keep her thoughts together in a simple interview? Video below In this transcript, the leader of the Protest Vote Party gets completely tripped up by her own words. She states that the polls show support for her to 'be leader' and that she hasn't made a final decision yet, even though she is already the established leader of One Nation. What she clearly meant to say was that the polls show support for her to become Prime Minister. However, because she struggles to articulate her thoughts clearly under pressure, she accidentally backtracks and creates a confusing contradiction: asserting she hasn't decided whether to be the leader, while simultaneously reminding everyone that she already is." Essentially, her verbal stumble exposes the awkwardness of her position. By getting confused between being the "leader of the party" and "leader of the country" (Prime Minister), she ends up stating that she hasn't decided whether to take a job she has held for years. We can't wait to hear it at the National Press Club on June 17, 2026, 11:30 am - 1:30 pm. It's going to be hilarious.
The Noisy Elephant11,137 Aufrufe • vor 2 Tagen
Have you heard #DaveHughes "Hughesy" RANT on social media? The wealthy property investor, once a funny comedian, beneficiary of #WealthyWelfare, having a fucking whimpering sob about the CGT capital gains tax? Well, not only is he a fiscal fool, he doesn't understand the budget, he doesn't understand finances, and he doesn't understand superannuation. All of which he's now concluded means we should call a fucking election, because he's gonna get hit in the hip pocket, just a tiny little bit more. Here is a man with multiple properties, one of his houses in 2017 was apparently valued at $3.06 million, if that was in my suburb, it would it be worth $5-7 million now. And that's just one of them. And he's fucking carrying on as if he's gonna lose his shirt, which, incidentally, he's never had a nice one. Noisy doesn't hold back:
The Noisy Elephant26,070 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen
And Tim Wilson gave us MORE. As if the "Salon" - which is seemingly a predominantly online business 'run' by an 18-year-old, wasn't enough, he gave us this also: See Speers very specific questions: David Speers asked at the #NPC: David Spears from the ABC. Thanks Tim Wilson for your address. The government says there's a whole lot of misinformation around its capital gains tax changes. I wonder if I could ask you to explain the example you just used in your speech. You talked about Sienna who started Tweenyskin five years ago, done well, business has grown. You said half of her profits will be taken by the silent shareholder, the Prime Minister. Can you just explain how that would happen? The government says existing exemptions for small business would remain. So how exactly would Sienna lose half her profit? And here is what goober TIM replied - Remember, NPC rules mean Speers cannot ask another question so Tim's reply goes unchecked. Read this bullshit, or better still, watch him say it. ▓ Skip the bit BETWEEN the bricks ▓ if you are going to watch the video, but read the explanation below. ▓ Tim's reply and its full of shit: Well it depends on when Sienna chooses to opt out of her business and sell it and for what price. I mean she started from her bedroom, her cost structures were zero so of course she's going to have a maximum uplift associated with her businesses. A lot of the people who are setting up businesses are the treasurers out there today spinning a message, as often he does, highlighting existing exemptions for CGT. Most of those are focused at the back end of people's lives, particularly as they head towards retirement and also based on the price at which they sell. I can't tell you what Sienna's going to sell but I can tell you the work, saving and sacrifice and everything they have put into it could, depending on the exit strategy and price, ultimately face up to 47%. But is it possible she could pay no capital gains tax as well? Well I can't give you, we're dealing with hypotheticals, I'm telling you what her story is. It depends on when she decides to exit, it depends on what she sells for, it depends on what stage of life she's at based on the current application of the law. But there are a lot of small business owners all around the country that are looking at the proposals put in this budget and not just do they think it comes in a tax them, they are looking at it and saying we worked, we sacrificed, we saved, we were there at 2am on a Sunday morning when nobody else was there. And all of a sudden the government, which traditionally takes some of the capital gain, no one's disputing that, is essentially working towards doubling that and in some cases it would be that much. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>▓ 1. The Hypothetical Dodge Tim Wilson explicitly admits his example is hypothetical: "I'm telling you what her story is. It depends on when she decides to exit, it depends on what she sells for, it depends on what stage of life she's at..." Translation: He has no concrete evidence that Sienna (or any small business owner like her) would face a 47% tax under the current or proposed CGT rules. Reality: The government’s proposed changes do not affect small business CGT concessions. Sienna, as a small business owner, would still qualify for: →15-year exemption (100% tax-free if she retires and owned the business for 15+ years). →50% active asset reduction (only 25% of the gain is taxable after discounts). Retirement exemption (up to $500k lifetime exemption). →Roll-over relief (defer CGT by reinvesting). Result: Her effective CGT rate would likely be 0–25%, not 47%. His answer is a word salad to avoid admitting the truth: His example is baseless. 2. The "Silent Shareholder" Myth - Tim claims: "...the government, which traditionally takes some of the capital gain, no one's disputing that, is essentially working towards doubling that and in some cases it would be that much." Reality Check: The current top marginal tax rate is 47% (45% + 2% Medicare levy), but this only applies to salary earners on income over $190k. For small business owners like Sienna: If structured as a company (Probably not she is under 18 or just turned 18, so likely, we will come back to this, 'held' by her ex-beautician mother/family): 25% company tax rate. If selling the business: 0–25% CGT after concessions. No scenario exists where the government takes 47% of her business sale profits under the proposed changes. The "doubling" claim is false. The budget does not double CGT for small businesses. It tightens loopholes for high-income earners (>$450k) and super funds, not small business owners. 3. The Emotional Manipulation Tim leans on melodrama: "...we worked, we sacrificed, we saved, we were there at 2 am on a Sunday morning..." Irrelevant to tax policy. Hard work doesn’t justify false claims about tax rates. Distraction tactic: He avoids the Speers direct question ("How exactly would Sienna lose half her profit?") by appealing to emotion. 4. The Press Club Rules Loophole David Speers couldn’t follow up due to Press Club rules. Tim knew this. He used the format to dodge accountability, knowing he couldn’t be pressed for details. TIM IS SPREADING MISINFORMATION like a PRO COOKER. Quote - Tim Wilson: "We're dealing with hypotheticals"
The Noisy Elephant25,563 Aufrufe • vor 15 Tagen
Sky News, what are they good for? They're so shit they have to change their name. Headline: Labor grilled over massive Snowy Hydro 2.0 cost blowouts NUMPTY'S, Labor inherited the Liberal mess, just like the NBN, inflation, debt, and everything else the LNP fucked up. Katie Gallagher sets the Gotcha grubs straight.
The Noisy Elephant19,650 Aufrufe • vor 29 Tagen
SYDNEY. HARBOUR. BRIDGE. In 2005, they shut down the Sydney Harbour Bridge for five hours… So a Formula One car could do laps on it. The whole stunt lasted a few minutes. That was for a CAR race. Today’s closure? It’s for lives. For hunger. For a humanitarian crisis. So to anyone crying inconvenience — Get the fuck over it. #GazaGenocide #MarchForHumanity
The Noisy Elephant61,209 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten
BREAKING LIVE FOOTAGE (3:15PM AEST 5th Nov 2024): #AndrewClennell LIVE announces #BridgetMcKenzie got not ONE, not ELEVEN, but MORE #Upgrades and some were for PERSONAL flights. How does a Shadow Transport thingie FORGET being upgraded from cramped legs to "DRINK SOME FREE WINE stretch your legs out BUSINESS CLASS" - Clennell asked that, not us.
The Noisy Elephant73,229 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Liberal Leadership OR Labor Sworn in? - The #ABC had a choice, what did they do? 🎥 What you’re about to see is real. It’s taken directly from the ABC’s own YouTube channel — as shown in the clip below. No edits to change the story, just a spotlight on how the stories were told. From start to finish, this segment ran 3 minutes and 33 seconds. And here’s how they used that time: 88.7% was spent on the Liberal leadership circus Just 6.1% covered the Labor Government’s official swearing-in — a historic event And the rest — 5.2% — was neutral filler or transitions That’s 3 minutes and 9 seconds hyping up internal Liberal drama, vs 13 seconds acknowledging the formation of a new government. This wasn’t journalism. It was narrative. And it was bias. Pure and simple. To spare you the boredom of the full Liberal worship session, we’ve sped up their airtime, and played Labor’s 13 seconds at normal speed — to drive home the imbalance. But here's the kicker — even those calling out the lopsided timing missed this: 👉 While the ABC is talking about Liberal leadership drama, they visually overlay footage from the Labor swearing-in ceremony. They visually bury Labor’s history-making moment under a Liberal voiceover dialogue. Ask yourself: Why? This tactic — talking about the Liberals while showing Labor — is a trick straight out of the Sky News playbook. They did it before the election. They’re still doing it now. 📺 Watch closely. 📊 Look at the graphs. 🧠 Then ask: When is the ABC going to admit it’s joined at the hip with Murdoch media? This is not public broadcasting. It’s propaganda. And it’s fkng disgraceful. The full ABC clip remains live on their official YouTube channel — at the link visible in our footage. (We’re not typing it here for obvious reasons). Check it before they delete it.
The Noisy Elephant50,412 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
MURDOCH and HIS MULCH We received TWO emails within THREE minutes of each other just now (10:46 AM - 10:49AM). BOTH "BREAKING NEWS" in the subject line: The Australian (Murdoch) Breaking news: 'We don't want you here', shout hecklers, as PM cops spray over wind farms Sky News (Also Murdoch) 'We don't want you here': Albanese heckled by locals over offshore wind farms Hang on a minute, did the same person write both headlines? Let's just investigate what the fuck really happened and how #Murdoch's manipulation played this into something that it wasn't. There were two Bogans that turned up at an otherwise normal gathering, and these fuckers call it chaos. They actually use the word CHAOTIC - see footage attached, unbelievable. This is classic Murdoch media manipulation—two outlets under the same corporate umbrella pushing a misleading narrative through selective framing. Let’s break it down and compare Sky News' version with The Australian’s version, and then contrast it with what actually happened. 1. The Reality Albanese visited Lake #Illawarra to introduce #CarolBerry, Labor’s candidate for Whitlam, replacing Stephen Jones. Two bogan-looking men heckled him—literally two—and shouted anti-wind farm remarks. Albanese responded casually with "Nice dog, mate", then continued with the press conference. That’s it. Not a protest. Not "chaotic." Not even a significant disruption. 2. Sky News’ Version – Hyperbolic Sensationalism Headline: "Albanese heckled by angry locals over offshore wind farms" Implied Scale: They say he was "heckled by multiple local residents," exaggerating the situation. Word Choices: "Confronted," "angry locals," "heckled," and "taunting" — designed to create the illusion of a hostile crowd. Visual Trickery: Repeats the same two people multiple times, as if they are a larger group. Agenda: Pushes the anti-renewables narrative while making Albanese look weak or unpopular. 3. The Australian’s Version – Faux Serious Spin Headline: "We don't want you here: PM cops spray as wind farm anger boils over" Implied Scale: "Boiling over" suggests a major protest—when it was two random blokes shouting. Word Choices: "Cops spray," "boils over," "grave concerns" — again, all implying a groundswell of opposition when it was two people with a loud voice. Sneaky Misdirection:Buries Carol Berry’s name deep in the text—likely to downplay the real reason Albo was there. Frames the wind farm inquiry delay as "Labor-Greens controlled Senate holding it up" (ignoring LNP stalling tactics). Covers Trump’s tariffs, China’s fighter jets, and NSW rail strikes to drown out actual context. 4. Murdoch Playbook: How They Manufactured the Outrage Exaggerate a non-event: Two guys shouting = "chaos" and "heckling" Frame it as public backlash: Pretend two hecklers are representative of "the people" Push an agenda: Make offshore wind look unpopular & frame Albanese as weak Bury inconvenient details: Don’t name Carol Berry up front, downplay Albanese’s actual responses Tie in anti-Labor talking points: US tariffs, China, rail strikes—none of which were relevant to the visit Final Verdict This is Murdoch media propaganda 101—a coordinated effort by The Australian and Sky News to manufacture a narrative: 🔹 A "chaotic" visit that never happened. 🔹 A "massive backlash" that was two guys. 🔹 A "heated confrontation" that Albanese brushed off with "Nice dog, mate." If this was #PeterDutton, they’d call it "a spirited exchange with concerned Australians." If this was Morrison, it’d be "Scotty from Marketing greets passionate locals." Instead, because it’s Albanese, it’s "chaos," "heckling," and "boiling anger." Pathetic. Predictable. Murdoch media wankfuckery at its finest. #StaySharp #MediaBias #CarolBerry
The Noisy Elephant58,417 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Angus Taylor posted a video on X yesterday. And to be totally clear, it was authorised by him. Authorised. In the clip it has Jane Hume and David Crisafulli talking about what coffee they like, and if pineapple should go on pizza. Yep, $1.3 Million a year personnel yapping to camera about skinny fkng flat white. Then Goober Angus pulls faces for us. Edited version of the video with a VoiceOver. This video tells you everything you need to know about the liberals.
The Noisy Elephant18,030 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten
The "Martyr" of Mar-a-Lago 🥂💅 Painline Hannibal is back, everyone. She’s posted a video playing the victim, claiming she was "banned" from Parliament for 7 days. She wants you to think she’s a martyr for the "common people." But let's look at the calendar she forgot to mention: •The Voluntary "Junket": In late October 2025, Pauline took two full weeks off while Parliament was sitting. •The "Work": She wasn't in Canberra representing you. She was in Florida, staying at a $66 million Palm Beach mansion and partying at a 1920s-themed Halloween bash with Donald Trump. •The Transport: She didn't fly commercial like a "battler." She hitched a ride on a billionaire’s Gulfstream 700 private jet. •The Paycheck: She did all of this while still collecting her $230k+ taxpayer-funded salary. So, when she says she was "banned" for 7 days, let’s be clear: She was censured for a desperate piece of political theatre (the burqa stunt) that she staged immediately after returning from her luxury overseas holiday. She wasn't "banned" from representing us—she’d already proven she’d rather be at a $25,000-a-head gala in Mar-a-Lago than sitting in the Senate. The Verdict: Pauline says we shouldn’t increase the number of politicians. For once, we agree. Let’s start the reduction right now by getting rid of the ones who skip work to party with billionaires on the public purse. Ok, let's not INCREASE the number of politicians, let's DECREASE it—starting with you, Pauline. That’ll save us half a million right there. Now, off you go. ✌️🚫
The Noisy Elephant19,179 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten
The Liberals recently wheeled out #JohnHoward because #PeterDutton is still in hiding. Lest we forget how BAD the walking dandruff factory was: For your pleasure. Get a coffee and popcorn. Paul Keating vs John Howard: The Ultimate Smackdown Ah, 1995. The year Paul Keating stood before Parliament and delivered one of the most ferocious take downs in Australian political history. If you’re too young to remember or you’re just looking for a reminder of why Keating remains the Don Bradman of political insults, let’s dive into this masterpiece of a speech. Picture this: John Howard, freshly recycled as Opposition Leader after Alexander "Curly" Downer tripped over his own leadership aspirations, tries to revive his political career. But standing in his way is Keating, armed with wit, facts, and the kind of delivery that could turn a seasoned politician into a puddle of regret. Highlights from Keating’s Verbal Evisceration: The Opening Jab “How are you going over there, Curly? Old Darling?” Straight out of the gate, Keating goes for the jugular, mocking Downer’s brief, disastrous stint as Opposition Leader. A fresh start, indeed! Howard’s Economic Record: The Horror Show Keating doesn’t just critique Howard’s tenure; he scorches it:📉 Low growth: Under 2%. 📈 High inflation: 11%. 💸 Astronomical interest rates: 22% at their peak. 🚫 Unemployment: A whopping 10.5%. 📊 Tariff city: High and growing. He paints Howard’s Australia as “an inward-looking industrial graveyard.” Ouch. A Tax Avoidance System for the Ages “A criminally evaded tax base,” Keating called it, recalling how Howard seemingly handed him an economic dumpster fire when he became Treasurer. And Howard? He sat on the opposition benches, presumably thanking the heavens someone else had to clean up the mess. The Bishop of Autun Returns "Scraping his way back into Australian history," Keating mocks Howard's return to the front bench as if he were an ancient relic, better suited for a museum than modern politics. Education Reform, or Lack Thereof Under Howard, fewer than 3 in 10 kids completed secondary school. Keating flipped the script—now it’s 8 in 10. But hey, who needs education when you’ve got Howard’s “Anvil Industries of the pre-war years”? Industrial archaeology, anyone? The Big Spender Hypocrisy Keating gleefully points out Howard’s anti-government spending rhetoric, comparing it to his time as “Mr 28.8% of GDP.” A thrifty shopkeeper? More like the guy who cleared out the register and called it fiscal conservatism. The Closing Blow: “Don’t waste your time on me, son. Don’t waste your time on me. I’ve been around. I know you. I know where the skeletons are in your closet.” A mic drop before mic drops were a thing. Keating didn’t just rebut Howard—he outlined his entire political life in a few devastating lines. This isn’t just a speech; it’s a case study in how to utterly dismantle an opponent without breaking a sweat. If you’ve ever wondered why John Howard was overlooked after Hewson lost, or why Keating’s name still echoes in Australian political lore, this is it. 🎥 For the full experience, watch the video and read the transcript below: Paul Keating vs John Howard's first censure motion as new Opposition leader (1995) - 240p Sit back, grab the popcorn, and let Paul Keating remind you how political brilliance truly sounds. Transcript: 00:01 - 00:07 Downer vows a fresh start. How are you going over there, Curly? 00:10 - 00:19 Old Darling? It'll take more than a decade-long recitation of old rhetoric to win the next election for you. 00:20 - 00:27 Mr Speaker, it was not by accident that the Liberal Party passed over John Howard when John Hewson lost the last election. 00:27 - 00:41 Mr Speaker, this is the man who left behind, after seven years of opportunity, a moribund, inward-looking industrial graveyard. An inward-looking industrial graveyard. 00:42 - 00:52 A low-growth, low-investment, low-profit, high-inflation, high-interest rates, high-unemployment, high-tariff country. 00:53 - 00:59 And nobody can deny any one of those claims. Low-growth, you average less than 2%. 01:00 - 01:13 Low-investment, low-profits, 11% inflation, 22% interest rates at their peak, high-unemployment, 10.5%, and high and growing tariffs. 01:13 - 01:18 And on top of all that, undeniable. Undeniable. 01:19 - 01:23 And on top of all that, an unproductive, inward-looking economy. 01:23 - 01:28 The Australian economy today is 40% more competitive than when he was in office. 01:28 - 01:36 And I'll tell you what else he left behind, Mr Speaker, a criminal tax avoidance system. A criminally evaded tax base. 01:36 - 01:41 When I became Treasurer, he was like a man reborn. 01:41 - 01:46 He sat on the opposition benches to thank God somebody else could inherit the problem and do something with it. 01:46 - 01:56 And here it is after 12 years of change, 12 years that has made us now the fastest growing economy in the Western world, with 01:56 - 02:07 the lowest inflation rate on that combination. 12 years later he brings his miserable political carvers back to the front bench of the Australian Parliament. 02:08 - 02:15 Here he is politically limping in like the Bishop of Autun, the Tellurian of the Liberal Party. 02:16 - 02:20 Scraping his way back into Australian history. Seeking to put his miserable politics. 02:20 - 02:30 Mr Speaker, what possible use in the modern Australia of the country joining the world, of its region for the first time in 02:30 - 02:36 its history, of becoming an outward-looking country, of getting its low inflation, its high productivity. 02:36 - 02:43 What possible use could it have for a man who described himself as the most conservative leader the Liberal Party has ever had? 02:44 - 02:53 Mr Speaker, when he was in government, less than 3 kids in 10 complete secondary schools. Less than 3 in 10. Now it's only 8 in 10. 02:53 - 03:01 Was the cultural policy supporting our arts and multimedia and CD-ROM and the information highway not about the future? 03:02 - 03:09 Was APEC, Building for Australia Abroad and Asia Pacific Rim Market not about the future? 03:09 - 03:11 And are you telling us you could have done it? 03:12 - 03:19 You say in your tawdry, opportunist way that we have scattered out on families and small business. Yes, you believe in families. 03:20 - 03:26 You arrogantly believe that you can speak for families as if there's something you know about families that the rest of us don't. 03:27 - 03:32 Yet, yet, you believe you say in families but you don't believe in family support. 03:32 - 03:35 You don't believe in payments to low-paid families. 03:35 - 03:40 You don't believe in a family allowance supplement, additional family payment. You don't believe in Medicare. 03:41 - 03:44 He talks about interest rates and small business. 03:44 - 03:47 Mr Speaker, small business died when he was in office. 03:47 - 03:51 He left an industrial graveyard, industrial archaeology in his wake. 03:52 - 03:58 It was basically the old Anvil Industries of the pre-war years. 03:58 - 04:04 They were watching them close in Alexandria and all the industrial areas across Australia. 04:04 - 04:09 He's had three policies, three policies in public life only. 04:09 - 04:13 I've been here with him his whole political life. He came in 1974. 04:15 - 04:21 His three policies, income splitting for families to give income to the high-income earners, that's one. 04:22 - 04:28 Labour market reform, which is code for cutting the wages of people under $35,000. 04:29 - 04:35 He opposed every wage increase since 1983 for the workforce, every single one. 04:36 - 04:40 That's the sort of Australia this conservative apparatchik believes in. 04:40 - 04:51 And then, of course, this sort of morbid rhetoric, this sort of small, thrifty shopkeeper gnarlishness with the red tape of government spending. 04:51 - 05:04 So we've got all this anti-government spending rhetoric, but in his day he was the big spender. The big spender. Mr 28.8% of GDP. I mean, how can you... 05:04 - 05:12 Look, John, don't waste your time on me, son. Don't waste your time on me. I've been around. I know you. I know you. 05:12 - 05:15 I know where the skeletons are in your closet.
The Noisy Elephant52,123 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Jacinta Price received just 3,309 personal votes across the entire Northern Territory in the 2022 election. That’s 3.19% of the total formal Senate vote. Just 3,309 people put a number next to her name — that’s it. She wasn’t elected as a local MP. She got in through the Senate — and only because most voters ticked the CLP box above the line. That’s how the system works, but let’s not pretend she had a personal mandate. And yet... Peter Dutton is floating the idea of making her a key minister — in charge of a slash-and-burn portfolio straight out of the Elon Musk, Donald Trump, Dogecoin economic playbook. Cut jobs. Cut services. Put people on the unemployment line. All that power — with just 3,309 personal votes. That might be legal, but does it feel like democracy? And this is the same woman you’ve seen in photos wearing a MAGA cap, clutching a Trump figurine. Is that what you want steering Australia? Someone with almost no individual backing, making decisions that could wreck livelihoods? Think about it — really think — before you vote for Dutton or the Liberal Party.
The Noisy Elephant43,349 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
🎥 #SkyNews Ambushes Dr. Monique Ryan Dr Monique Ryan MP — and Laura JAYDED smacks herself in the face. Literally < See bonus clip below Sky News just served up a masterclass in manufactured outrage — and they forgot to cut the blooper reel. 📰 The Setup Laura Jayes and Sky’s Oscar Godsell tried to ambush Dr. Monique Ryan during pre-polling. They didn’t get a response to an interview request… …so they brought a camera crew anyway, went live, and pretended to be shocked when she still said no. 📜 The Transcript Proves It “She hasn't taken up that invitation to us…” ← their own words Ryan: “I’m here to engage with voters... not ideal for you to be interrupting.” Staff: “She’s already declined the interview.” Sky News: “But… transparency!” 🎯 Translation: They knew she said no. They filmed anyway. They cried victim when she stuck to her no. 🧂 And because that wasn’t dramatic enough, they: Dragged up old, irrelevant dirt about her husband Claimed she’s “stumbling” through the campaign Screamed “integrity” like it’s a drinking game 🐘 Noisy Take: This wasn’t journalism. This was Sky News cosplay — Laura Jayes playing “investigator” while flinching into her own mic. (Yes, there’s a clip. Yes, it’s glorious, see below.) Imagine if the ABC hijacked Peter Dutton during a Bunnings sausage sizzle after he declined an interview. Sky would be shouting “media intimidation!” But when they do it? It’s “in the public interest.” Nah. It’s Murdoch theatre. And they’re pissed Monique Ryan didn’t read their script. Fiuck Sky News.
The Noisy Elephant39,493 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
🟠Confirmed: Over the Last Two Months, some #OneNation’s “Support” on X is Astroturfed - Paid Trolls We’ve been tracking every single reply to our posts that fact-checked One Nation officials. This isn’t a casual observation—this is a forensic record of what’s actually happening online. Here’s what we found: Account Profiles Almost all replies come from accounts with 1–200 followers, some newly created but often inactive for 4–5 years or longer. The accounts are aged but post almost nothing original. Many have generic names or profile pictures. Suspicious Follower Networks They all follow the same types of accounts: fake Elo;n accounts, crypto bots, “massage” DMs, lottery winners giving away millions. These are classic signals of bot farms or troll networks “warming up” accounts to bypass platform filters. Reply Patterns The replies are always illiterate, ranty, off-the-mark, and irrelevant. They never engage with facts. Instead, they flood threads to create the illusion of support. This has happened consistently over the last month, with nearly 500 separate accounts exhibiting this behaviour. Tactics in play These seemingly One Nation supporters' replies use a few clear strategies. Sentiment manipulation makes their posts appear more popular than they really are. Engagement suppression buries intelligent critiques under a swarm of low-quality replies. And intimidation is used to create the feeling that you’re shouting into a void, discouraging further fact-checks. Why This Happens This is textbook #astroturfing: a fake support prop for a movement. It may involve AI-generated responses, low-cost foreign labor, or troll farms. It’s common globally for fringe political groups, though it violates X’s terms of service. The takeaway This is not an anomaly. It’s a clear, deliberate strategy to amplify One Nation’s perceived support online. These accounts are not normal followers—they’re part of a coordinated effort. We’ve logged every single one of these replies and their patterns. The evidence speaks louder than any claim. A popular movement does not need to do this; a desperate one will.
The Noisy Elephant13,245 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten
They hope you have short memories. #Watergate boy is now Leader of the Opposition. How the VERY FK does that work? This is Angus Taylor. The guy tied to an $80 million Murray-Darling water buyback where: • Public money paid at inflated prices • No open tender • No independent valuation • Department warned it was bad value • Seller linked to his family interests • Auditor-General tore it to shreds No resignation. No accountability. No consequences. Just a quiet shrug, a memory hole, and a promotion. We didn’t forget. The Liberal Party just decided it doesn’t care. From Watergate to Opposition Leader #AngusTaylor. If this is their idea of “standards”, imagine the rest.
The Noisy Elephant13,899 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten