The NYT can’t figure out why Aussies didn’t vote like they were supposed to because you know, climate change is real and how dare they vote for the party promising to put Australia first and work on their economy and job creation.

Granted, these are the same people who think tornadoes in Tornado Alley in May somehow prove THE WORLD IS ENDING but still …

From the New York Times:

Under Australia’s preferential voting system, votes for candidates from minor parties can be used to help allies reach a clear majority in the lower house of Parliament. Nationally, United Australia secured 3.4 percent of the vote, while One Nation picked up 3 percent.

Neither One Nation nor United Australia did as well as similar parties recently in countries like Italy, Hungary and Brazil. But for Australia, where compulsory voting encourages moderate election outcomes, the results defied expectations and made clear that the country remains deeply conservative and open to the far right on a variety of issues.

The question that now confronts the new government is how much sway to give the forces that led to victory. Climate change may be the first battle in the long war that is reshaping democracy all over the world.

Next thing you know they’ll start screeching about how racist the electoral vote is … oh wait.

Heh.

Ding ding ding.

When progressives lose an election it’s, ‘WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE,’ and of course, ‘THEY CHEATED.’

It’s beyond tiresome and typical.

They don’t have a clue about how real people feel and they don’t care.

Nailed it.

Related:

‘This was a political HIT!’ Svetlana Lokhova’s thread on ‘dirty-ops guy for the FBI Stefan Halper’ and the WSJ is crazy DAMNING

Wait, tornadoes in TORNADO ALLEY?! GTFO! ESPN talking head’s snarky tweet about climate change gets ALL the blowback

‘And there was MUCH rejoicing’: Both Ed and Brian Krassenstein’s Twitter accounts magically go POOF