A thread on politics- have some balls and post

Remove this Banner Ad

I've always voted below the line and place numbers in the most unlikely candidates to get up going from unknown independants to the major parties till I run out of boxes....

Edit: House of Rep...it's a safe seat...so always the Donkey
 
Last edited:
notliondown said:
The new senate voting requirements are dangerous if you ask me and I can see a whole heap of people/parties installed when it was actually the last thing people wanted.

The mismatch between how you vote for the house of reps and the new requirement of having to vote for 6 parties in the senate will confuse a huge number of people.

There will be thousands, tens of thousands - honestly I'd bet hundreds of thousands thinking that if they put a person 6th in the senate they would be voting to keep them out not put them in. We will end up with a senate comprised of people who most wanted least.

Fraser Anning will be hoping the confusion plays into his hands. I truly fear he will be elected with a decent number of votes - most accidentally.

Speak to people you know, ask them if they understand the changes. You'll be horrifically surprised.

Moreover I'm bloody sure I would find 6 parties I'd actually want...



How to complete the ballot paper

On the white Senate ballot paper, you need to either:

  • number at least six boxes above the line for the parties or groups of your choice, or
  • number at least 12 boxes below the line for individual candidates of your choice.
Above the line

If you vote above the line, you need to number at least six boxes from 1 to 6.

Place a 1 in the box above the party or group that is your first choice, the number 2 in the box above the party or group that is your second choice and so on until you have numbered at least six boxes above the line. You can continue to place numbers in the order of your choice in as many boxes above the line as you like.

Your preferences will first be distributed to the candidates in the party or group of your first choice, then to candidates in the party or group of your second choice and so on, until all your preferences have been distributed.
Click to expand...

A bigger problem will be people just voting '1' above the line as per usual.

If you read number at least six in order of your choice out if a possible much larger number and interpret that as 1 through 5 are my fist five picks and number six is the one I want least then it sounds like you are presenting a data point for limiting the franchise ...
 

Log in to remove this ad.

These rule changes were in place for the 2016 election so people will be getting used to them. Much much better system than the group tickets which definitely resulted in people's vote preferences going to parties that they wouldn't support.

Anyway, this should help explain the changes:

 
ZoBlitz said:
These rule changes were in place for the 2016 election so people will be getting used to them. Much much better system than the group tickets which definitely resulted in people's vote preferences going to parties that they wouldn't support.

Anyway, this should help explain the changes:

Click to expand...


The senate informal vote increased to 3.94% (from 2.96%) but it does swing around a bit - 3.75% in 2010, 2.55% in 2007. I think reducing the number of candidates on the ballot will go a long way to reducing the senate informal vote - there's pretty clearly a correlation there, even if it's a weak one.
 
Caiphus said:
In my anecdotal experience as a scrutineer, the majority of informal votes are intentional anyway.
Click to expand...

Equally anecdotal but from the other side of the table (electoral official) …
- there are a lot of ones that are just plain blank (I have had people ask me if they will get fined if they just put in a blank one since they are only at the booth to avoid the fine and the blank ballot is them saying you can make my come to the booth but you can't make me vote)
- tried but got it wrong (eg two of the same number)
- just didn't get it right (eg when we moved from optional preferential to preferential for State and folks were still just putting '1' against labor or liberal etc)
- the ones Caiphus mentioned (eg Homer Simpson, Hitler, None of the Above etc … I imagine there will be some Trumps in this time around)

As, usually, OIC I love the scrutineers (well once it comes to counting … they can be a pain when trying to get the other guy's stuff moved for being 1mm too close to the entrance … but mostly they are good value to have around and normally know what they are doing)
 
Ahhhh, Keating.....still got the comebacks :D

From Twitter

Peter Dutton: Paul Keating almost destroyed my Dad’s small business with his heartless mismanagement of the economy & he inspired me to join the Liberal Party. It’s why I’m so passionate about not letting Bill Shorten repeat history & drive a stake through the hearts of small businesses around the country with his higher taxes.

Keating a few hours later: Well, it was probably a large business to start with, and I’m certain it was mismanagement that tipped it off the cliff but let’s not bring parents into this right? But did I steal your sense of humanity?
 
And yet state Labor just approved Olive Grove coal mine at Moranbah today.

The reality is the coal presents a far bigger challenge to Labor than it does to the LNP. The LNP's relationship is obvious.

But Labors candidates for Flynn and Capricornia have TV ad's directly targeting the support of coal miners and the industry itself while advocating for Adani. In fact in this area the entire election seems focused on both sides telling us they support the coal industry... it's like everything else has disappeared. Ad's on any other subject would represent 10% at best.

It must make Shorten shiver. If the people of Sydney and Melbourne saw the ad's - or bothered to look more to the point - there would be a bloodbath in Labors vote and the Greens would have 10 lower house seats - and the balance of power most likely.

Add in to that the State Governments utter dependence on royalties (of both persuasions) and this issue is bathed in lies, hypocrisy, ineptitude and stupidity.

Anyone who thinks Labor will be less beholden to the Coal industry should it take power is delusional. Add in union influence and you could argue it's in a worse position.

If you need a reason to vote Labor or to justify it, you best not use a fantasy based on coal.
 
notliondown said:
And yet state Labor just approved Olive Grove coal mine at Moranbah today.

The reality is the coal presents a far bigger challenge to Labor than it does to the LNP. The LNP's relationship is obvious.

But Labors candidates for Flynn and Capricornia have TV ad's directly targeting the support of coal miners and the industry itself while advocating for Adani. In fact in this area the entire election seems focused on both sides telling us they support the coal industry... it's like everything else has disappeared. Ad's on any other subject would represent 10% at best.

It must make Shorten shiver. If the people of Sydney and Melbourne saw the ad's - or bothered to look more to the point - there would be a bloodbath in Labors vote and the Greens would have 10 lower house seats - and the balance of power most likely.

Add in to that the State Governments utter dependence on royalties (of both persuasions) and this issue is bathed in lies, hypocrisy, ineptitude and stupidity.

Anyone who thinks Labor will be less beholden to the Coal industry should it take power is delusional. Add in union influence and you could argue it's in a worse position.

If you need a reason to vote Labor or to justify it, you best not use a fantasy based on coal.
Click to expand...
I think they'll at least feel vaguely guilty about it, and not just whingingly tear down every environmental protection immediately (a little more gradually). But yeah, they're not going to get my first preference.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Billy Puller said:
Is trump impeached yet? #keepthefaith #myinternetoutrage
Click to expand...

If the interest groups propping him up start losing big dollars on the stock market and as a result of the trade war with China, they'll be only too happy to march him to the gallows with the Dems, irrespective of anything else.
 
I'm not a follower of politics at all and only started watching this because I am an avid follower of the Joe Rogan Podcast so I started listening to it fully expecting to switch off 5 minutes in...... didn't happen, Tulsi Gabbard(I'd never heard of her) comes across as a highly impressive individual, loved everything she said re the Military Industrial Complex, US foreign policy/regime change policy and lobbyists influence. Well worth a listen for those interested in US politics IMO.

#tulsi2020
 
Over and out for Bob, he played a good innings. Goodbye, farewell and amen.
uploads%252Fcard%252Fimage%252F335478%252F4966b2e4-0d14-4df0-be92-0027579983b5.gif%252Ffit-in__1200x9600.gif
 
TheBrownDog said:
Bill Shorten lost the unlosable election. Queensland is a joke.

The far right minor parties are a cancer that will continue to fester.
Click to expand...

Yep. Pretty hopeless result across the country but certainly a shambles in QLD.
 
TheBrownDog said:
Bill Shorten lost the unlosable election. Queensland is a joke.

The far right minor parties are a cancer that will continue to fester.
Click to expand...
The irony appears to be that the most economically depressed parts of the country have decided to stick with neo-liberalism and trickle down economics. When Morrison and Frydenberg start implementing the cuts that are hidden in their budget numbers people are going to feel pretty sucked in. Australian’s will get the Government they deserve.
 
Going to be interesting to see how Labor handles the leadership from here - difficult to make a case for Bill to stay on following this result.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
The ADH... Look a Squirrel
Replies
15
Views
985
Grasshopper17
G

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top