This ABC News Daily episode is a commentary on the return of sexist political language in Australia, using the "ditch the witch" billboard targeting Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan as a springboard. Guest Amy Remeikis argues the campaign is not just crude politics but a deliberate dog whistle that normalizes misogyny, rewards grievance politics, and lowers standards of public discourse if not widely condemned.
Watch on YouTube ›Get the market thesis, key claims, assets, contradictions, and follow-up questions from any financial video — then unlock a version personalized to your portfolio, watchlist, and favorite speakers.
This episode is not a market or asset piece; it is a political analysis segment about the tone of Australian politics. The core thesis from Amy Remeikis is that the "ditch the witch" campaign aimed at Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan is part of a broader decline in civility and a renewed tolerance for sexist grievance politics. She frames the slogan as an obvious callback to the treatment of Julia Gillard, arguing that the point is not policy critique but the use of a derogatory, gendered attack to mobilize anger. Remeikis repeatedly ties the current billboard to the Gillard era: Tony Abbott standing beside a "ditch the witch" sign, Alan Jones’s extreme remarks, and the infamous campaign imagery around Gillard’s gender. Her point is that the present campaign taps the same emotional and cultural triggers. …
Near term, the issue is reputational and political: the billboard controversy will keep drawing attention as long as elites refuse to uniformly condemn it. The tactical risk is escalation through media amplification rather than any market-type catalyst.
Over the next few months, the likely path is continued polarization unless political actors reassert clear norms around gendered abuse. The view strengthens if grievance-based messaging keeps winning attention; it weakens if the backlash becomes broad and durable.
Structurally, the episode argues that when grievance politics becomes normalized, public discourse deteriorates and makes democratic competition more abusive. The long-run regime implication is a politics that rewards anger and identity attack over policy persuasion.
The original "ditch the witch" episode was a major flash point because it was so outrageous and sexist toward Julia Gillard.
The speaker frames the Abbott-era sign as an especially shocking and sexist moment in Australian politics.
The current Jacinta Allan billboard campaign is an obvious callback to the Gillard treatment and amounts to a sexist attack.
Remeikis says the slogan and imagery deliberately echo the earlier campaign and are derogatory toward a female politician.
The billboard is a dog whistle that normalizes sexist politics by giving angry people permission to target a woman in public life.
She argues the campaign's power comes from public normalization, not from any policy content.
Why did the 'ditch the witch' campaign against Julia Gillard become a flashpoint in Australian politics?
Amy says it was a flashpoint because it was so outrageous — seeing someone as senior as Tony Abbott visually endorsing sexist attacks against Australia's first female prime minister was a shock. She details other attacks including Alan Jones saying Gillard should be shoved in a chaff bag, and an LNP fundraiser menu featuring a crude 'Julia Gillard quail' item, arguing it showed how insane and personal the commentary was, mostly because she was a woman.
Who does the 'ditch the witch' campaign actually appeal to?
Amy says it appeals to angry people, regardless of gender. She explains that those who feel aggrieved and see their target being demeaned get a sense that 'they deserve it,' which is dangerous political territory. The politics of grievance gives people permission to be angry without offering solutions, speaking to those who feel ignored and have legitimate anger at the government.
What does a campaign featuring the slogan 'ditch the witch' say about the political discourse in Australia?
Amy Remeikis says political discourse is not great at the moment — it's increasingly volatile, people feel freer to attack others across political divides, and it's creating an angry electorate. She links this to the rise of One Nation, noting that Pauline Hanson never has to own political policy so she can tell people they have a right to be angry, and across Western democracies economic peril drives people toward disruptors like Nigel Farage, Donald Trump, and Pauline Hanson.
Unlock the full claims, asset map, scores, related transcripts, follow-up questions, and AI chat — shaped around your portfolio, watchlist, favorite speakers, and risks.
