Two weeks later, and the excuses are still flowing.

The left lost because: a/ their policies were stupidly ambitious and unfundable, or 2/ Tasmanian greens went too far north.

The ABC says “2”.

If only Bob Brown had got some Queenslanders to do the Adani protest instead, Bill Shorten would be PM:

Environment leaders reflect on their role in the ‘climate election’

 Michael Slezak, ABC Enviroment and Science Ad Writer:

Like many Australians, green groups were surprised by the federal election result.

Underlying much of their campaigning was the belief that the majority of voters wanted stronger climate action.

But the results did not seem to bear that out.

Did environmental groups fail to read public sentiment? And did they, in fact, help the Coalition to victory?

It’s all so easy in hindsight:

One of Australia’s leading social researchers, Rebecca Huntley, said the Stop Adani Convoy strategy was bound to fail.

“People from outside the area coming in — that just pisses people off,” said Dr Huntley, who heads up Vox Populi Research.

ABC Staff can always find someone to say what the journalists are thinking: in this case, that people might vote for a coal mine, but there’s no way they like coal:

Paul Williams is a senior lecturer in politics at Griffith University in Queensland and is one of the country’s foremost experts on elections in that state. He said the Stop Adani Convoy probably cost Labor at least “tens of thousands of votes” in Queensland, if not “hundreds of thousands”.

“That doesn’t mean the Queenslanders are in love with Adani — they’re not,” said Dr Williams.

Sure. Queenslanders couldn’t possibly like money or jobs.

“Adani became totemic — it was a totem for development and for blue-collar job creation.”

Stupid workers just like totems.

No Queenslanders, miners, or workers were interviewed. The ABC is one-billion-dollars of pop-psychology.

The answer is always “go left”

Labor lost because it wasn’t green enough says Greenpeace chief:

Chief of Greenpeace Australia David Ritter said if Labor had strengthened its environmental policies, the environmental movement would have been fully behind the party — a sentiment more-or-less echoed by all the environmental groups the ABC spoke to.

If only Greenpeace had endorsed Labor instead of putting them below One Nation in preferences… oh wait. Nevermind.

Trusting politicians to deliver

But the environmental movement does not accept its actions were a major reason for Labor’s loss.

 What does investigative reporting mean? Michael Slezak asked all his friends:

Most people the ABC spoke to pointed to the money spent by coal miner Clive Palmer, utter distrust of mainstream politics and what they described as scare campaigns run by the Coalition.

 If the ABC were the PR wing of the Greens party could they have written a better press release?  Hardly. A press release from the Greens would have the Greens logo on it. ABC “News” masquerades  as third party endorsement.

If you live in a nation with public broadcasting. Sell. It. Now.