2022 Victorian State Election-November 26

Who will win the Victorian election

  • Labor

    Votes: 128 87.1%
  • Coalition

    Votes: 19 12.9%

  • Total voters
    147
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Dan is adamant he won't legalise it because "psychosis is a significant issue"
It's not even worth arguing the point with someone who'll cite that while ignoring the harm and enjoying the revenue alcohol, and gambling bring to the state coffers.
 
It started in 98 when Pauline Hanson showed the QLD LNP the road to domination in hicksville.
It got worse in 01 when Howard used the Afghan refugees on the Tampa to win Western Sydney.

Unfortunately they haven’t realised the nation has changed.

1996 - Hanson gets elected to Parliament, Australians of Asian descent comprise less than 5% of the population. Hanson gets popular by saying we’re being “swamped” by Asians.

2022 - Australians of Asian descent comprise about 20% of Australians, Liberals lose about 5 seats because of anti China rhetoric.

Then when Abbott rolled Turnbull the inmates took over the asylum and then they started drinking the Kool-Aid as Tony Barry puts it.

Again the nation is changing. Once upon a time boomers comprised the majority of the voting population, and would not allow any policy that put their home prices, investment properties at risk, or allow action on climate as they didn’t want to have taxes increased.

Now millenials and Gen Z are as big a voting block as boomers, and Liberals haemorrhaging seats to pro climate independents and Greens.
 
This was another post by ACL head Martin Iles on social media:

VICTORIA - here's a list of upper house candidates who are practising Christians.

EASTERN VICTORIA
Renee Heath (Liberal)
Milton Wilde (Family First)
Natasha Sawtell (Family First)
James Unkles (UAP)
Paul Wilson (UAP)

NORTH EASTERN METRO
Irene Ling (Liberal)
Kirsten Langford (Liberal)
Alister Cameron (Family First)
Nina van Strijp (Family First)

NORTHERN VICTORIA
Gaelle Broad (Nationals)
Michael White (Family First)
Carol Norton-Smith (Family First)
Geoff Shaw (UAP)

NORTHERN METRO
Evan Mulholland (Liberal)
Imad Hirmiz (Family First)
Denise Lowry (Family First)

SOUTHERN METRO
Vickie Janson (Family First)
Alex van der End (Family First)

SOUTH EASTERN METRO
Ann-Marie Hermans (Liberal)
Lee Jones (Family First)
Colleen Hayward (Family First)
Matt Babet (UAP)
Geraldine Gonsalvez (Health Australia)

WESTERN METRO
Bernie Finn MLC (Labour DLP)
Moira Deeming (Liberal)
Darren Buller (Family First)
Mary Filmer (Family First)

WESTERN VICTORIA
Dean Cronkwright (Family First)
Chioma Ikeh (Family First)
Terri Pryse-Smith (One Nation)
Natalie Failla (UAP)
Keith Raymond (UAP)

Disclaimer: I am not allowed to tell you who to vote for. I am only allowed to share information about candidates. I thought this info might be helpful. Of course, some will be stronger Christians than others.

If a few good candidates get elected to the upper house, they may be able to frustrate the progressive social agenda of an incumbent government.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I think there are questions of core competence that need to be addressed, but we held ourselves back by preselecting candidates who hold beliefs that do not reflect widely shared views in Victoria (I do not necessarily agree with those beliefs either) and also by changing leader to the one person who had the biggest questions on integrity when we had a real case against the current Premier on integrity. Do you think the ALP would have won in 1999 railing against Kennett and his criticism of the Auditor-General and other institutions if their leader had been Bill Landeryou? Me neither - they were able to make that case effectively because their leaders were cleanskins (Brumby and then Bracks).

I think it is clear "further to the right" is not where most Victorians are.

From the outside looking in, getting hung up on social issues is not where they are going to win. They need to focus on economics but that requires a full overhaul of their ideology, not just trying stuff neoliberal thinking down our throats. The problem is they are so beholden to their donors that they can't move away from 20th century thinking (specifically with climate change/renewables).

So if there is a future for the Libs it is somewhere along the lines of the Teals - progressive social policies (stop this anti-SSM, stop focusing on culture wars) and addressing climate change with sound economic governance/sustainability as a foundation (and sustainability doesn't mean never-ending growth).

I doubt they do this though, they probably push further to the right socially hoping it will help them win seats in the outer suburbs/regions by focusing on scapegoats people can blame for their economic situations instead of actually trying to fix anything.
 
If they are to win in Victoria again they need to be a Malcolm Turnbull style, ‘economically conservative, socially progressive’ type party. As much as I hate that term and the people that identify by it it’s the reality here. But the party being taken over by Pentecostals means that won’t happen.
What he said :tearsofjoy:
 
If a few good candidates get elected to the upper house, they may be able to frustrate the progressive social agenda of an incumbent government.
What a ******* gross comment
 
I'd hold on expecting the two legalize to get in for now.

the two regions only have 20% and 28% of the vote counted, AND the greens did not make the top 5 (despite having more than 50% of the vote needed for the quota).

changes in the first cut count are very likely with 72-80% of the vote remaining, and this will impact who gets eliminated in which order, and where the preferences go as a result

ABC is giving Legalise Cannabis Party 3 seats in the LC at the moment

 
Dan is adamant he won't legalise it because "psychosis is a significant issue"
I actually don't think it should be legalised. Decriminalise it as much as you want (which it pretty much already is decriminalised - no one is going to prison for weed).

But don't put it in shop fronts so kids can buy it. have a look at what is currently happening with vapes and multiply that by a thousand.

Australia is entirely incapable of regulating anything.
 
So more cannabis “cooked” than religious/ anti vac “cooked”?

Canny has been legalised in The Netherlands for decades, hardly seen Dutch society fall apart because of it.

For all intents and purposes it's legal here now anyway (you ain't going to jail if cops bust you for smoking some chop chop) b
 
I actually don't think it should be legalised. Decriminalise it as much as you want (which it pretty much already is decriminalised - no one is going to prison for weed).

But don't put it in shop fronts so kids can buy it. have a look at what is currently happening with vapes and multiply that by a thousand.

Australia is entirely incapable of regulating anything.

Given you can already buy bongs in retail stores (esp some displaying in their front window display) the ship has already sailed.

Not saying I agree with it mind you, but it's a fact, the more people try and make it illegal or criminal, the more glamorous it seems.

It's actually healthier (least physically than smoking cigarettes FWIW
 
They are not giving it to them. Thats a live count as the ballots keep coming it (it changes with the more votes coming in)
Yeah I know, that's why I said "at the moment" - still it's more than the two they had yesterday and there is some projection in the article below which indicates the other minor parties will be wiped out (Hinch, Transport Matters, Sustainable Aus & Lib-Dems)

 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I actually don't think it should be legalised. Decriminalise it as much as you want (which it pretty much already is decriminalised - no one is going to prison for weed).

But don't put it in shop fronts so kids can buy it. have a look at what is currently happening with vapes and multiply that by a thousand.

Australia is entirely incapable of regulating anything.

It’s just a herb, man.
 
It's not even worth arguing the point with someone who'll cite that while ignoring the harm and enjoying the revenue alcohol, and gambling bring to the state coffers.

Any recommended readings on this? I’ve never taken “illicit” substances and would like to understand more about the legalisation/health debate. On the surface seems a no brainer.
 
Given you can already buy bongs in retail stores (esp some displaying in their front window display) the ship has already sailed.

Not saying I agree with it mind you, but it's a fact, the more people try and make it illegal or criminal, the more glamorous it seems.

It's actually healthier (least physically than smoking cigarettes FWIW

You can buy vapes in retail stores too, but this is not a reason that we still should not regulate it. Like vapes, smoking marijuana does have significant negative mental and physical health effects even if it isn't as bad as cigarettes or cocaine.

Marijuana is practically legal as the police don't bother with enforcement of laws against marijuana possession, but I'd still want the government to place strong limits on its sale, distribution and access by minors.
 
Yeah I know, that's why I said "at the moment" - still it's more than the two they had yesterday and there is some projection in the article below which indicates the other minor parties will be wiped out (Hinch, Transport Matters, Sustainable Aus & Lib-Dems)


as I said before though, there is still a long way to go - most are between 40-60% counted

again, the alp/libs/greens is pretty predictable, and wont change too much (for the top 3-4 of the ticket)

the issue is the 4th and 5th spots. This is where the bottom of the table gets knocked off and preferencing starts. The order these guys are knocked off in is critical, as the preferencing will make or break these candidates. given the small number of votes, it doesnt take too many to result in radical changes in the order for this lower tier.

the other thing is it appears (im guessing off of abc language) that they are either counting only above the line, or treating all as above the line. I have no idea how many voted below the line, and how this will influence the results. JFYI the cookers are our booth were telling people to only vote below the line
 
Some of those people need to be committed.
They're that insane

I love it, they genuinely dont get the definition of "INDICATIVE", and keep treating the 2CP as the first and final count

I love cookers :D
 
Any recommended readings on this? I’ve never taken “illicit” substances and would like to understand more about the legalisation/health debate. On the surface seems a no brainer.

Lies, you barrack for Richmond. No way you did that in the 90's and 00's without being on something
 
Marijuana is practically legal as the police don't bother with enforcement of laws against marijuana possession, but I'd still want the government to place strong limits on its sale, distribution and access by minors.
Seems like a pretty good way for the Government to increase tax intake as well. Tax it like alcohol, charge businesses for the licensing to sell/cultivate and then charge for a RSM (Responsible Service of Marijuana). Creates more jobs as well, also allows for the creation of a hemp industry which is less water intensive than cotton.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I know, that's why I said "at the moment" - still it's more than the two they had yesterday and there is some projection in the article below which indicates the other minor parties will be wiped out (Hinch, Transport Matters, Sustainable Aus & Lib-Dems)

Is Patten deluded? Wants an end to GTV because she….might lose to a candidate with a higher primary vote than her. She’s only ever been elected on the back of leftover Labor and Greens prefs.
 
Back
Top