Remove this Banner Ad

March Election

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Have only seen a few of posters up in my seat of Elder so far; one each for Labor, Liberal and Family First. My other half is the Democrat candidate for Elder (but don't hold that against me ;) :p); but he hasn't gotten around to putting up any of his posters yet.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Thought i'd my 2 cents...

1. If you are keen for more independents, vote for Save the RAH member, (if they are running one in your area). The proposed location is the biggest problem.... one massive problem (amoungst numerous others)Re: Just in case you want to see what I do for a living it that it is a "toxic dump" It is going to cost twice as much to clean the area to get it ready for the building. The government hasn't told us how much it is going to cost to clean the area, becuase it will inflate the total cost of building the new hospital. http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=1Su3tsL-ZkY..if u haven't seen it, watch it, it so close to the truth...

2. Rann and his parties arrogance and complete disrespect of us (the public), has lost me. The labour thinks we are all stupid and can't think for ourselves....it annoys the shit out of me.

3. The amount of money spent on extended tramlines, south road etc, when the money NEEDED to be spent on education, mental health, hospitals, water..

4. Lack of forward thinking in regards to water...desal plant should be a last resort, we get water falling into our laps (rain) and yet we harvest SFA of it..at least the libs are willing to go out and talk about recycling storm-water. Most european countries have been doing it for years and years..shit, in Rome they used to purify there sewage water though there fountains...used to smell like wee a bit, but it was purified H2O..
 
Slappery said:
Thought i'd my 2 cents...
1. If you are keen for more independents, vote for Save the RAH member, (if they are running one in your area). The proposed location is the biggest problem.... one massive problem (amoungst numerous others)Re: Just in case you want to see what I do for a living it that it is a "toxic dump" It is going to cost twice as much to clean the area to get it ready for the building. The government hasn't told us how much it is going to cost to clean the area, becuase it will inflate the total cost of building the new hospital. http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=1Su3tsL-ZkY..if u haven't seen it, watch it, it so close to the truth...
Click to expand...


Just quietly the Rann run EPA has shown an embarassing ability to try and clean up contaminated sites (one of the many problems with the St. Clair's swap.)

The media isn't reporting it but Rann/Foley co have almost run through a billion dollars trying to clean up the Islington Railyards site and the job's not halfway done.

Those costs will never be recouped.
 
jo172 said:
Just quietly the Rann run EPA has shown an embarassing ability to try and clean up contaminated sites (one of the many problems with the St. Clair's swap.)

The media isn't reporting it but Rann/Foley co have almost run through a billion dollars trying to clean up the Islington Railyards site and the job's not halfway done.

Those costs will never be recouped.
Click to expand...

how do you know this and how has this not been reported ??

That just seems crazy that this wouldn't be reported given an election is coming up.
 
SouthAustralia said:
Why would anyone honestly vote for the Greens is beyond me.



I reckon they only garner votes because people resent the two main parties, cause honestly, has anyone read some of the Greens policies?? I bet 90% of the people who vote Greens have no idea what they even stand for.....besides saving the whales.
Click to expand...

I always say there's more than one reason they're called The Greens :D

I am aware of some of The Greens policies - and it's the reason they go dead last on my voting slip
 
SouthAustralia said:
Why would anyone honestly vote for the Greens is beyond me.



I reckon they only garner votes because people resent the two main parties, cause honestly, has anyone read some of the Greens policies?? I bet 90% of the people who vote Greens have no idea what they even stand for.....besides saving the whales.
Click to expand...

Agree, I'd put Family First in the same category.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

brucetiki said:
Not that many have appeared up in my area yet - I've seen about 3 for the Liberal candidate and Mike Rann hasn't done his yet.

Was up at Tea Tree Plaza today and was surprised to see the Liberals put Pat Trainor in as the Liberal candidate for Florey again. Yes, a few do recontest after missing out, but normally it's on the back of a decent swing towards them, not against them...

Family First have gone nuts wth their Robert Brokenshire posters though!
Click to expand...

Maybe there is nobody else.

But he's as public a figure as a snail so why bother.
 
Can history repeat and the result is decided by the Speaker ??

I think Randy is in a spot of bother.Where i live Tom K would have to lose his seat you would think
 
birdmanptr said:
Can history repeat and the result is decided by the Speaker ??

I think Randy is in a spot of bother.Where i live Tom K would have to lose his seat you would think
Click to expand...

Would require a swing of 18.4% for Turbo Tom to lose his seat.

One thing to consider is the possibility Labor will regain Mitchell (held by Kris Hanna by just 0.7%), meaning that's an extra seat the Libs have to gain somewhere else. Also, some of the seats the Liberals have their eye on require some decent swings (for example they reckon they can get Newland, which would require a 6.9% swing - possible but highly unlikely).

Using 6% as the mark between marginal and safe, even if all marginal Labor seats went to Liberal (Hartley, Light, Mawson, and Norwood), they would require significant swings in at least 5 other seats (6 if Labor regain Mitchell) to win government in their own right.

Some will go to Liberal, but not enough for them to win IMO.

For those that want to see the 2006 results, they're at http://www.ecsa.sa.gov.au/archive/2006/pdf/Results_and_Outcomes_Booklet3.pdf (lower house results on page 15)
 
SouthAustralia said:
Why would anyone honestly vote for the Greens is beyond me.



I reckon they only garner votes because people resent the two main parties, cause honestly, has anyone read some of the Greens policies?? I bet 90% of the people who vote Greens have no idea what they even stand for.....besides saving the whales.
Click to expand...

Care to give some examples?
Again, I'm voting Greens. I'd say I have a fair idea of their policies. As with any group I vote for, I'm not 100% happy with everything they stand for, but they're currently the closest thing we've got to a major party that's in any way socially progressive.
 
Dandy_GO said:
Care to give some examples?
Again, I'm voting Greens. I'd say I have a fair idea of their policies. As with any group I vote for, I'm not 100% happy with everything they stand for, but they're currently the closest thing we've got to a major party that's in any way socially progressive.
Click to expand...

That's nice you're voting Green's, but the real question is who have you got placed higher in your preferences, Labor or Liberal. That will decide where your vote is going.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

smoovy said:
I assume Labor then.

BTW you would be surprised how little of the voting public would have any idea how the preferential voting system works.
Click to expand...

and even fewer would know how it works in the upper house - I'm no expert on the proportional voting system but I know enough to vote below the line.
 
brucetiki said:
and even fewer would know how it works in the upper house - I'm no expert on the proportional voting system but I know enough to vote below the line.
Click to expand...

Basically the percentage of votes required for a seat is the percentage of seats in the upper house.

Lets say hypothetically there are 10 upper house seats.

That means each seat is allocated 10% of the vote.

On First Preference the Libs get 35%, the ALP gets 35%, the Greens get 15%, Family First get 10% and an Independent gets 5%.

The Libs and ALP will get their first 3 preferences in straight away and the Greens and Family First would get their first in. The remaining 5%'s would be distributed along the lines of preferences until they are distributed so that a candidate has the 'extra' 10% for a full seat.

The trick with the upper house is that through the optional preferential voting no one can be bothered to find out the exact preference deals that the parties have done so they may find for example a party like the Greens (hypothetically) and swapping preferences with their ideological enemies Family First in order to give them a greater chance of the seat.

FWIW I am putting all ALP parties dead last (including the ******ed abortion guy) due to Rannbo's desire to demolish the upper house.
 
smoovy said:
I]
BTW you would be surprised how little of the voting public would have any idea how the preferential voting system works.
Click to expand...

Exactly... I'm a first time voter and I'm really trying to take everything in and put my vote to good use except I don't really have a clue how it all works.

I don't know whether I missed something in the enrolment brochure but is there somewhere where the voting system is explained? :eek:
 
-CG- said:
Exactly... I'm a first time voter and I'm really trying to take everything in and put my vote to good use except I don't really have a clue how it all works.

I don't know whether I missed something in the enrolment brochure but is there somewhere where the voting system is explained? :eek:
Click to expand...

Lower house voting in a nutshell (Preferential voting)

To win, you need 50% + 1 of the vote.

Say there's 4 candidates in an electorate

Labor
Liberal
Greens
Family First

Once the booths are closed, there is a simple count of the first preference votes. Say there's 20000 votes and the result is:

Labor 10001
Liberal 8000
Greens 500
Family First 1499

Then Labor with 50% +1 of the vote wins the seat.

However, if the result at the end of the fist count is

Labor 8000
Liberal 9000
Greens 500
Family First 2500

No party has 50% + 1 of the vote. So the last placed candiate (the Greens in this example) are eliminated and their 2nd preference votes are distributed across the remaining parties. Say at the end of round 2

Labor 8300
Liberal 9200
Family First 2500

We still have no party with 50% + 1. Now the Family First 2nd preference votes are redistributed. At the end, if the result is:

Labor 10100
Liberal 9900

Then Labor would win the seat
 

Remove this Banner Ad

March Election

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top