March Election

[Riggy1]

It's a really tough election for me
Labor > Liberals
Redmond > Rann

so, ill vote for Vini in the lower house
and ill vote for some independant/minor party in the upper house, so they can be the conscience

 

[Cap]

Dont confuse cant be arsed with 'dont like either option'.

there is always more than 2 options.

 

[Southerntakeover]

there is always more than 2 options.

Not in a preference system.

Always boils down to one of the majors.

 

[jo172]

Not in a preference system.

Always boils down to one of the majors.

I don't know, in Enfield if you put the two majors last there's a decent chance they'll get to 50%+1 before your vote ever registers.

I realise it's little consolation, but it's some.

 

[NTRabbit]

Not in a preference system.

Always boils down to one of the majors.

Unless you have a powerful and incumbent independent, or a third party candidate with an unusual source of popularity running in a seat that is ignored because it's blue ribbon every election.

Not often that either of those happens, though both have happened in this area in the last 15 years.

 

[jo172]

The real change Vote Liberal ad in the middle of the page amuses me

 

[Cap]

anyone see Ranns money to Modbury Hosptial? just days after bagging the libs for the same thing? amazing

I've got a project in mind but I need a savvy internet person. I want to start a website called election promises.com or something like that. I want to collate all the election promises that the winning party has given and then track them.

I'll want to get it into the media's space and the public eys eventually because I'm sick to death of unaccountable promises. I hope by next election we can then show what they have and haven't done what was promised.

 

[P.A.F.C]

To be fair, change is difficult. People bagged Obama for doing nothing in his first year or so, but what can you do when nothing gets through the senate?

 

[Blue Red and Gold]

The sooner the election is over the sooner we get rid of Michelle Chatolouis and Rick Phillips and that can only be a good thing. Wish they would think of their kids and just go away.

 

[Cap]

To be fair, change is difficult. People bagged Obama for doing nothing in his first year or so, but what can you do when nothing gets through the senate?

From memory Rann has been in a touch longer than 1 year . But I get your point

 

[jo172]

The sooner the election is over the sooner we get rid of Michelle Chatolouis and Rick Phillips and that can only be a good thing. Wish they would think of their kids and just go away.

I met their son actually, never felt more sorry for a bloke!

To be fair, change is difficult. People bagged Obama for doing nothing in his first year or so, but what can you do when nothing gets through the senate?

Due to the strong party discipline in Australian parliament's comparisons to the United States are of extremely limited value.

 

[P.A.F.C]

Due to the strong party discipline in Australian parliament's comparisons to the United States are of extremely limited value.

Perhaps. Rudd has had a lot of trouble passing quite a lot though. And it's not always parliament procedures that hinder change. Look at the Adelaide Oval situation. Has so many stakeholders involved in the issue and you can see why people are so sceptical about it.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Due to the strong party discipline in Australian parliament's comparisons to the United States are of extremely limited value.

It was spectacularly easy to draw the comparison he was making given the news of the day.

Hostile senate sounds familiar Jo?

 

[jo172]

It was spectacularly easy to draw the comparison he was making given the news of the day.

Hostile senate sounds familiar Jo?

Yep, but it's still not fully considered analysis.

There are 100 separate Senators more or less allied to the two parties. However, in lacking party discipline they can come with up to 100 different legislative agendas. Whilst it is no where near this complex but it's still more so than the 5 or 6 depending on how you regard the Coalition separate interests in the Australian Senate.

It's roughly the equivalent if the Liberals and ALP voted in factional blocs rather than as one collective unit.

All Rudd has to do with legislation is either compromise with the Liberals or with the Greens, Fielding and Xenophon and his legislation will pass. Obama has to secure the votes of 51 (and occasionally 60) separate Senators, whose interests don't necassarily coincide nor does he have as effective whip system as in Australia in order to pass legislation.

Whilst new legislation like America is by no means easy, it's no where near as complex, it requires significantly less negotiation and compromise.

Also, Mr. Bailey would disagree with your definition of a hostile senate. Arguably a Senate where the balance of power is held by minor parties and independents is not hostile.

 

[Southerntakeover]

See, its times like now that you dont actually need to write an essay in comparison. It was a pretty basic comparison, which was takeable at face value. Of course the systems arent the same. I think just as a basic point most reasonable people would have been able to accept the idea that forming Government in itself doesnt guarantee the passing of a governments legislative agenda, sometimes through no fault of their own.

As far as it goes, a Senate with independents who arent genuine in 'negotiations' can also be hostile i would have thought.

It doesnt even matter though. My point wasnt whether or not the senate was hostile, but merely that the news have gone out of their way to present it as one today, making the comparison topical.

P.s. Bailey can go eat his elephant elsewhere.

 

[brucetiki]

In tonight's junk mail was an interesting set of electoral advertising packaging - There was a Family First booklet, open it up and you got 1 Labor pamphlet, 2 Abort SA pamphlets, and 2 Dominoes pamphlets

 

[NTRabbit]

All Rudd has to do with legislation is either compromise with the Liberals or with the Greens, Fielding and Xenophon and his legislation will pass. Obama has to secure the votes of 51 (and occasionally 60) separate Senators, whose interests don't necassarily coincide nor does he have as effective whip system as in Australia in order to pass legislation.

You make it sound so easy.

The likelihood of that particular "balance" ever agreeing to the same set of compromises is practically nil, and for the most part the opposition portion of the Senate - no matter who the opposition and government are - will stall and grind anyway, regardless of any compromise you want that falls short of exactly what they want, purely for political points.

You seem to be labouring under the false impression that any government or opposition will do the right thing for the people, when given the binary choice of doing that or aiding in winning the next election.

 

[dbcrow]

In tonight's junk mail was an interesting set of electoral advertising packaging - There was a Family First booklet, open it up and you got 1 Labor pamphlet, 2 Abort SA pamphlets, and 2 Dominoes pamphlets

Vote Dominoes

 

[KUNG FU]

As much as an optional preferential system would be superior (ie having the option to give flow on preferences to one of the major parties, or simply choose to vote for one or two preference), don't discount the political value of your first preference. Whilst your vote might end up going to support a party that makes your skin crawl, both parties are increasingly interested & aware of who is supporting them and who is opposing them. Your values and interests are better represented with a vote than a non-vote. An informal protest vote might be initially exhilirating, it ultimately achieves nothing (unless I missed the memo about the revolution next week). In my experience, there is a strong correlation between political disengagement & political ineptitude in comparative political systems. So whilst voting for someone who doesn't necessarily reflect your beliefs or is essentially inept might seem distasteful, the alternative is far worse. You have a right to enjoy citizenship in a stable, liberal democracy and benefit from public utilities such as infrastructure, transport, education and health every day; with this comes a responsibility to engage in the democratic process in the basic fashion.

 

[King Elvis]

And truthfully, the way you carry on entirely sums up half of the problems with the legal system in this state. Theres an enclosed little sect in the legal profession, who run their own little fiefdoms, and cant stand to see anyone who doesnt belong to their club touching anything that could affect them.

Atkinson couldn't hack it as a lawyer or journo; he's like Ephialtes - can't do what others can, so he has an axe to grind.

He is rightly loathed by pretty much everybody in the legal profession. His nickname within the Labor Party is apparently 'The Fuhrer,' - and faction influence is the only thing keeping him there.

Even if Labor are re-elected, I think Atkinson will be shifted sideways; Weatherill would be on the cards for the AG Role; however, they prefer to keep him in low profile background jobs because he has political appeal amongst the community and could challenge Rann in the future.

 

[jo172]

Great call on Atko KE.

I disagree about him being shifted after a Labor win and definitely swapped with Weatherill regardless of the fairness of this on merit.

Atko has more power in the right faction than Rann and arguably Foley. He's a pet of Farell and the SDA and has whatever job he wants for life. Also the idea of Farrell allowing Rann to promote the left faction's most prominent and popular caucus member will never happen. It would be over Farell's dead body before he allows the left an opening to have a tilt at te leadership.

 

[King Elvis]

Yea, I know, that's why I said they prefer to keep Weatherill in the background

As for Atkinson; I really do think that Rann and the Labor Powerbrokers have realised his performance has become a massive liability, and while they wont technically demote him or do anything to discredit or embarrass him, they will shift him sideways into another role.

 

[jo172]

Yea, I know, that's why I said they prefer to keep Weatherill in the background

As for Atkinson; I really do think that Rann and the Labor Powerbrokers have realised his performance has become a massive liability, and while they wont technically demote him or do anything to discredit or embarrass him, they will shift him sideways into another role.

As long as he convenes Labor Unity he is the powerbroker.

It's another instance of the self-defeating concept that is the Australian Labor Party (Don't get me started on the self defeating concept of the Liberal Party of Australia).

Anyone expecting any fireworks for the last week of the campaign?

Perhaps a Redmond/Atkinson gaffe? A Chantelois smoking gun?

 

[NTRabbit]

Perhaps a Redmond/Atkinson gaffe?

A possibility. Atkinson can't go a week without demanding the Sudetenland and proclaiming the superiority of his people. Redmond, while not making a really major gaff, has made a few slips here and there that could go very wrong, very fast on a bigger day and a more important topic - most notable to date have been the botched launch of the Expressway Duplication policy, and bringing the loose cannon from the Adelaide Parklands Preservation Association to her Adelaide Oval press conference without actually finding out what she was going to say first.

I'm not sure anyone else would really be in a position to make a gaff, since almost the entire cabinet and shadow cabinet are apparently hiding inside parliament house until every ballot in the election has been cast. I heard MHS is bringing tents for everyone!

A Chantelois smoking gun?

I personally don't think there is a smoking gun - to me, at least up to this point, it has the appearance of a disturbed woman consciously or unconsciously fabricating a relationship out of a friendship, a partner who either doesn't know or doesn't want to know, and the "other man" figuring it out and backing away far, far too late.

Not that I'm dismissing the possibility it did happen, I just find it unlikely based on everything said and done to date.

 

[jo172]

Not that I'm dismissing the possibility it did happen, I just find it unlikely based on everything said and done to date.

The only thing that tips it for me is the initial assault. To me that puts for me it's more likely than not that it was more than just a friendship.

Having said that I don't really care, but I do enjoy seeing a politician, particularly one I don't like squirm.