Chat Forum
It is currently Wed Jul 15, 2020 12:54 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25219 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 631  Next

Whos Going to Lead the Labor Rabble
Albo 36%  36%  [ 5 ]
Plibbers 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
Bowen 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
Chalmers 29%  29%  [ 4 ]
Uncle Tony 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
Clive Palmer 14%  14%  [ 2 ]
George Smith 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 14
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 27606
Location: Queensland
grievous wrote:
Abbott threatening the Greens, nay the nation with a double dissolution if scrapping the carbon tax is blocked by them.
Dangerous man.


This talk about a mandate is absolute crap. Rudd had a resounding "mandate" to implement an ETS after the 2007 election, and the Coalition blocked it no less than three times in the Senate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9504
Location: Gangly Beehive
Ali's Choice wrote:
grievous wrote:
Abbott threatening the Greens, nay the nation with a double dissolution if scrapping the carbon tax is blocked by them.
Dangerous man.


This talk about a mandate is absolute crap. Rudd had a resounding "mandate" to implement an ETS after the 2007 election, and the Coalition blocked it no less than three times in the Senate.


There'd be a swing against Abbott in the event of a double dissolution on an ETS. A ridiculous risk that he won't take.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 27606
Location: Queensland
6roucho wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
grievous wrote:
Abbott threatening the Greens, nay the nation with a double dissolution if scrapping the carbon tax is blocked by them.
Dangerous man.


This talk about a mandate is absolute crap. Rudd had a resounding "mandate" to implement an ETS after the 2007 election, and the Coalition blocked it no less than three times in the Senate.


There'd be a swing against Abbott in the event of a double dissolution on an ETS. A ridiculous risk that he won't take.


I agree. Especially given that I think Abbott's honeymoon will be relatively short, measured in months not years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19422
Yep. It takes a while to set up, by which time the electorate has usually refocused their demands. Pulling the trigger on a double dissolution won't come without a cost.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 2:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9504
Location: Gangly Beehive
Ali's Choice wrote:
6roucho wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
grievous wrote:
Abbott threatening the Greens, nay the nation with a double dissolution if scrapping the carbon tax is blocked by them.
Dangerous man.


This talk about a mandate is absolute crap. Rudd had a resounding "mandate" to implement an ETS after the 2007 election, and the Coalition blocked it no less than three times in the Senate.


There'd be a swing against Abbott in the event of a double dissolution on an ETS. A ridiculous risk that he won't take.


I agree. Especially given that I think Abbott's honeymoon will be relatively short, measured in months not years.


It depends on how much he gets his budgie out. Different parts of the electorate are voting for him for party political reasons and are relying on him to renege on his promises. A mining tax removing, carbon price rescinding, NBN wrecker is going to alienate virtually all of the business community in one way or another.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 2:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11170
Location: Tahstown
Another shocking stat today I read, 600,000 young eligible voters havent registered.
Dumb lazy f**king Facebook generation dont know how good they got it, people in parts of the world fight with their lives to get to a polling station.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 2:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19422
grievous wrote:
Another shocking stat today I read, 600,000 young eligible voters havent registered.
Dumb lazy f**king Facebook generation dont know how good they got it, people in parts of the world fight with their lives to get to a polling station.

Who is enrolled?

    91.2pc of Australians (1.39m not enrolled)
    74.2pc of 18 to 24-year-olds (493,000 not enrolled)
    48.3 per cent of 18-year-olds
    65.8 per cent of 19-year-olds
    75.2 per cent of 20-year-olds


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 2:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9504
Location: Gangly Beehive
It's better that people who don't care don't vote. It's a randomiser, like forcing people to pick an answer in a multiple choice test whose purpose is to provide a meaningful answer.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 2:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11170
Location: Tahstown
6roucho wrote:
It's better that people who don't care don't vote. It's a randomiser, like forcing people to pick an answer in a multiple choice test whose purpose is to provide a meaningful answer.

Apathy is not healthy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 2:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9504
Location: Gangly Beehive
grievous wrote:
6roucho wrote:
It's better that people who don't care don't vote. It's a randomiser, like forcing people to pick an answer in a multiple choice test whose purpose is to provide a meaningful answer.

Apathy is not healthy.


It's certainly not healthy to factor it into election results.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 2:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19422
After one 3-year cycle, n00bs are pretty much all enrolled. Near enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11473
Location: STRAYA CUNT
grievous wrote:
Another shocking stat today I read, 600,000 young eligible voters havent registered.
Dumb lazy f**king Facebook generation dont know how good they got it, people in parts of the world fight with their lives to get to a polling station.

:roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1826
I reckon oz is just about the least religious place I lived in

surely the aussies wouldn't elect a fundie ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19422
clifton cowboy wrote:
I reckon oz is just about the least religious place I lived in

surely the aussies wouldn't elect a fundie ?

Do you mean Abbott?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11170
Location: Tahstown
Dumbledore wrote:
grievous wrote:
Another shocking stat today I read, 600,000 young eligible voters havent registered.
Dumb lazy f**king Facebook generation dont know how good they got it, people in parts of the world fight with their lives to get to a polling station.

:roll:

Expected comment there from gen Y


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11170
Location: Tahstown
6roucho wrote:
grievous wrote:
6roucho wrote:
It's better that people who don't care don't vote. It's a randomiser, like forcing people to pick an answer in a multiple choice test whose purpose is to provide a meaningful answer.

Apathy is not healthy.


It's certainly not healthy to factor it into election results.

Don't understand that comment everyone is entitled to a vote


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 32791
Location: in transit
grievous wrote:
6roucho wrote:
grievous wrote:
6roucho wrote:
It's better that people who don't care don't vote. It's a randomiser, like forcing people to pick an answer in a multiple choice test whose purpose is to provide a meaningful answer.

Apathy is not healthy.


It's certainly not healthy to factor it into election results.

Don't understand that comment everyone is entitled to a vote



No, everyone is required to vote. For many, disillusioned with politics, that is an onerous burden which they resent, so they either fail to enroll or they place informal votes.

What is more sinister is the implication Groucho is making, I think... that parties could rely to some extent on apathy and try to attract that vote.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11170
Location: Tahstown
guy smiley wrote:
grievous wrote:
6roucho wrote:
grievous wrote:
6roucho wrote:
It's better that people who don't care don't vote. It's a randomiser, like forcing people to pick an answer in a multiple choice test whose purpose is to provide a meaningful answer.

Apathy is not healthy.


It's certainly not healthy to factor it into election results.

Don't understand that comment everyone is entitled to a vote



No, everyone is required to vote. For many, disillusioned with politics, that is an onerous burden which they resent, so they either fail to enroll or they place informal votes.

What is more sinister is the implication Groucho is making, I think... that parties could rely to some extent on apathy and try to attract that vote.

Agreed, the politics won't change unless the voters give them something to think about.
The parties are apathetic about making politics appealing if they don't have to.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17237
Location: Adelaide via Sydney and Patea
mate of mine is moving to Longreach in the heart of Maranoa, the most Right-wing electorate in Australia!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-04/v ... es/4929064


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5768
I do wonder who would do better from voluntary voting

Quote:
Who benefits?
There have been no policy initiatives on the subject from the Labor government at that time or since.

It is widely believed that the Liberal party would have the most to gain if a voluntary voting system were adopted here but James Campbell, state politics editor of the Herald Sun newspaper, explains that the issue is not black and white.

"Both parties have toyed with the idea of abolishing mandatory voting, but the reason it never happened is no-one has been entirely certain about who would benefit from getting rid of it."

Rohan Wenn, spokesperson for the non-partisan political advocacy group Get Up!, says the system protects the rights of marginalised groups.

"If you look at the international experience, in non-compulsory voting systems, the people who don't vote are the poor and disenfranchised and those are exactly the people we think should be voting."

Regardless of partisanship, the current electoral system is largely supported across the country. Dr Chen explains that despite the ongoing debate, there is no sign of any serious measures to end compulsory voting in sight.

"Most Australians are quite comfortable with the electoral process and would be quite suspicious of efforts to change it. We trust the electoral system more than we trust our politicians.

"It's an irony, but we really like our democracy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23810381


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1349
Location: Bondi Centrelink
Ali's Choice wrote:
6roucho wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
grievous wrote:
Abbott threatening the Greens, nay the nation with a double dissolution if scrapping the carbon tax is blocked by them.
Dangerous man.


This talk about a mandate is absolute crap. Rudd had a resounding "mandate" to implement an ETS after the 2007 election, and the Coalition blocked it no less than three times in the Senate.


There'd be a swing against Abbott in the event of a double dissolution on an ETS. A ridiculous risk that he won't take.


I agree. Especially given that I think Abbott's honeymoon will be relatively short, measured in months not years.


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 32791
Location: in transit
Dubya Howard wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
6roucho wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
grievous wrote:
Abbott threatening the Greens, nay the nation with a double dissolution if scrapping the carbon tax is blocked by them.
Dangerous man.


This talk about a mandate is absolute crap. Rudd had a resounding "mandate" to implement an ETS after the 2007 election, and the Coalition blocked it no less than three times in the Senate.


There'd be a swing against Abbott in the event of a double dissolution on an ETS. A ridiculous risk that he won't take.


I agree. Especially given that I think Abbott's honeymoon will be relatively short, measured in months not years.


Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16995
Location: Perth
now we're wishing for failure?

how pathetic. How Republican of you all.


:?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 32791
Location: in transit
Oh look, it's Bob Katter's bastard love child popping in for some ten gallon hilarity.

This, on the other hand, is intriguing...

http://theaimn.com/2013/09/03/your-vote ... after-all/

Quote:
News.com have published an excellent and timely article Federal Election promises, cuts and what they mean for you by Sarah Michael which briefly examines Kevin Rudd’s and Tony Abbott’s election promises and how they would affect the average voter. The article deserves exposure. It doesn’t appear to be receiving a great deal by the looks of the Most Read Stories section of news.com where it hasn’t even entered the Top Ten even though it was published some seven hours ago. It is doubtful too, that hundreds of thousands of social media users will know the article exists because of the huge (and justified) anti-Murdoch sentiment: people – again justifiably – are deserting his tabloids in their droves.

Subsequently, for those thousands of readers of this site I have reproduced the bulk of the article below. Here is what you will get with your vote:

read the link if you really want the detailed list of just how much better of you and the ountry will be under Labor...

If you’re anything like me, after reading that you’re probably picking yourself up from the floor! A Murdoch article that actually makes Labor look good! Now we just have to get the message across.

Your vote might just be worth something after all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5768
grievous wrote:
Abbott threatening the Greens, nay the nation with a double dissolution if scrapping the carbon tax is blocked by them.
Dangerous man.


Will the Greens still hold the balance in the senate?

That piece I posted earlier had a set of fringe right wing loons getting in as well

another piece from Antony Green, a good summary for the senate

http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/201 ... power.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:47 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16629
Location: STRAYA PLUM
There may well be a bunch of fringe loons getting in as well.
How is Clive polling? And Katter?

I am assuming Queensland are doing the normal thing of voting for the right wing loons.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4461
I guess we'll see how the Greens fare.

Towny - I dare you to listen to people like Adam Bandt talk policy and then compare them to a Liberal's quotes.

Lightyears different


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 27606
Location: Queensland
Taranaki Snapper wrote:
mate of mine is moving to Longreach in the heart of Maranoa, the most Right-wing electorate in Australia!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-04/v ... es/4929064


Longreach isn't too bad. The people may be conservative, but they're generally good, honest country folk. In saying that most people from there I have met were state govt employees and public servants who would be left leaning if anything, but probably haven't bothered to update their electoral roll information.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:57 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16629
Location: STRAYA PLUM
Towny still sees the Greens as a left wing fringe group running off a single policy platform of save the trees, without consideration for the economy.
They have matured in the last 3 election cycles and are starting to be a genuine multi-policy party. They really need to lose their name though as it is still associated with radicalism.

I think they will do quite well this election. There are a lot of disenfranchised ALP voters who dont want to vote ALP this time round, but wont go near the Coalition or the right wing fringe parties who will vote Green as a protest vote.
Preferences might screw them over, especially if there is a big backlash against the ALP though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16995
Location: Perth
Farva wrote:
Towny still sees the Greens as a left wing fringe group running off a single policy platform of save the trees, without consideration for the economy.
They have matured in the last 3 election cycles and are starting to be a genuine multi-policy party. They really need to lose their name though as it is still associated with radicalism.

I think they will do quite well this election. There are a lot of disenfranchised ALP voters who dont want to vote ALP this time round, but wont go near the Coalition or the right wing fringe parties who will vote Green as a protest vote.
Preferences might screw them over, especially if there is a big backlash against the ALP though.



I think the Greens are actually a socialist party. In Australia, that makes them a fringe group imo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4461
towny wrote:
Farva wrote:
Towny still sees the Greens as a left wing fringe group running off a single policy platform of save the trees, without consideration for the economy.
They have matured in the last 3 election cycles and are starting to be a genuine multi-policy party. They really need to lose their name though as it is still associated with radicalism.

I think they will do quite well this election. There are a lot of disenfranchised ALP voters who dont want to vote ALP this time round, but wont go near the Coalition or the right wing fringe parties who will vote Green as a protest vote.
Preferences might screw them over, especially if there is a big backlash against the ALP though.



I think the Greens are actually a socialist party. In Australia, that makes them a fringe group imo.


You're changing your tune, normally you "know"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16995
Location: Perth
Ali's Choice wrote:
Taranaki Snapper wrote:
mate of mine is moving to Longreach in the heart of Maranoa, the most Right-wing electorate in Australia!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-04/v ... es/4929064


Longreach isn't too bad. The people may be conservative, but they're generally good, honest country folk. In saying that most people from there I have met were state govt employees and public servants who would be left leaning if anything, but probably haven't bothered to update their electoral roll information.



Longreach is a shit tip; however it's in Queensland which means high quality, talented people live there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5768
Another nice piece of analysis

http://inside.org.au/tony-abbott-and-th ... ed-senate/

The Greens have nine seats, only three are up at this election. It will depend on how Labor holds on in the senate and where the preferences go

Quote:
At present, the Coalition holds thirty-four seats against thirty-one for Labor, nine Greens, one DLP and one independent. In 2013, both the Coalition and Labor will be defending eighteen seats apiece; but the Greens will be defending only three, with their six other senators not facing re-election until 2016 (or at an earlier double dissolution, as the case may be). The Greens, therefore, are unlikely to have their net numbers reduced next year and may in fact gain seats.
The Coalition will be hoping its vote holds up sufficiently to win control of the Senate. In a chamber of seventy-six, this would require thirty-nine seats, which is likely to be beyond its reach. The best-case scenario for the Coalition is taking three of the six seats in each state and one in each territory, giving it a total of thirty-six.
The strongest state by far for the Coalition is Queensland, but this is also the home ground for the Katterites, who will take more votes from the Coalition than from Labor. Labor’s dismal polling in the Sunshine State suggests it may win only one of the six seats, but two seems more likely. Labor, on aggregated poll data, does not look like picking up three seats in any state.
The performance of the Greens will depend to some extent on what Labor decides to do with its preferences, and this could be vital, especially in the final seat in Western Australia, and possibly also in South Australia and Queensland. On current poll figures, the Greens will comfortably hold their seat in Tasmania (and even have an outside chance of picking up a second seat there at the expense of the Coalition), and stand a good chance of picking up the sixth seat in Victoria and just possibly in New South Wales.
- See more at: http://inside.org.au/tony-abbott-and-th ... hrVCI.dpuf


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:19 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16629
Location: STRAYA PLUM
towny wrote:
Farva wrote:
Towny still sees the Greens as a left wing fringe group running off a single policy platform of save the trees, without consideration for the economy.
They have matured in the last 3 election cycles and are starting to be a genuine multi-policy party. They really need to lose their name though as it is still associated with radicalism.

I think they will do quite well this election. There are a lot of disenfranchised ALP voters who dont want to vote ALP this time round, but wont go near the Coalition or the right wing fringe parties who will vote Green as a protest vote.
Preferences might screw them over, especially if there is a big backlash against the ALP though.



I think the Greens are actually a socialist party. In Australia, that makes them a fringe group imo.


What do you mean by socialist?
They are more socialist than the ALP or the Coalition. But less so than say the Greens of 10 years ago.
They still believe in a market economy, but just with a greater level of government intervention, and a greater emphasis on socialist values than the two major parties.
A bit like me really.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5768
The Greens will have the same problem as the Aus Democrats.

Solid while there figure head was there, but more power they gain, the more "deals" will need to be done to govern, the fewer ideologues will stay with them as they compromise.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16995
Location: Perth
Farva wrote:
towny wrote:
Farva wrote:
Towny still sees the Greens as a left wing fringe group running off a single policy platform of save the trees, without consideration for the economy.
They have matured in the last 3 election cycles and are starting to be a genuine multi-policy party. They really need to lose their name though as it is still associated with radicalism.

I think they will do quite well this election. There are a lot of disenfranchised ALP voters who dont want to vote ALP this time round, but wont go near the Coalition or the right wing fringe parties who will vote Green as a protest vote.
Preferences might screw them over, especially if there is a big backlash against the ALP though.



I think the Greens are actually a socialist party. In Australia, that makes them a fringe group imo.


What do you mean by socialist?
They are more socialist than the ALP or the Coalition. But less so than say the Greens of 10 years ago.
They still believe in a market economy, but just with a greater level of government intervention, and a greater emphasis on socialist values than the two major parties.
A bit like me really.



Good post. I can see why you'd vote for them.

I personally don't share your opinions about what a Govt should look like and act.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4229
_fatprop wrote:
The Greens will have the same problem as the Aus Democrats.

Solid while there figure head was there, but more power they gain, the more "deals" will need to be done to govern, the fewer ideologues will stay with them as they compromise.


And the less they will be used as a proxy ALP protest vote.

Gaining a measure of power presents all sorts of problems for these parties. At the top end, their leaders have to learn the sorts of compromises that are needed to implement a programme, and the limits of government, both to actually enforce change and to do so whilst remaining electorally credible. As you say, they either retain their purity and fudge off, criticising from the sidelines. Or they adapt to what's politically and electorally possible, but in the process become distanced from their own grass roots, who don't (and possibly never will) understand the challenges of government and become restive.

It will be very interesting to see what happens to the LibDems in the UK at the next election. Their leaders will doubtless have grown up quite a lot from the experience of being in power, but they're no longer a protest vote and much of their grassroots and ad hoc support will have difficulty forgiving them for entering a Coalition with the Conservatives, however politically mature a thing it may have been to do.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16233
Location: STRAYA!
Farva wrote:
There may well be a bunch of fringe loons getting in as well.
How is Clive polling? And Katter?

I am assuming Queensland are doing the normal thing of voting for the right wing loons.


You know it, man.

I can't wait for my own pet dinosaur when Clive gets in.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 2:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 692
grievous wrote:
Abbott threatening the Greens, nay the nation with a double dissolution if scrapping the carbon tax is blocked by them.
Dangerous man.



A double dissolution is not a threat, per se. Was it a threat when Gough used it?



We live in a parliamentary democracy, a double dissolution is part of our democratic infrastructure.



Personally, I think Abbott might go to water sooner rather than later. He has been in and around politics for a long, long while, and he will have one eye on his legacy, right from the start.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 2:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11170
Location: Tahstown
_fatprop wrote:
I do wonder who would do better from voluntary voting

Quote:
Who benefits?
There have been no policy initiatives on the subject from the Labor government at that time or since.

It is widely believed that the Liberal party would have the most to gain if a voluntary voting system were adopted here but James Campbell, state politics editor of the Herald Sun newspaper, explains that the issue is not black and white.

"Both parties have toyed with the idea of abolishing mandatory voting, but the reason it never happened is no-one has been entirely certain about who would benefit from getting rid of it."

Rohan Wenn, spokesperson for the non-partisan political advocacy group Get Up!, says the system protects the rights of marginalised groups.

"If you look at the international experience, in non-compulsory voting systems, the people who don't vote are the poor and disenfranchised and those are exactly the people we think should be voting."

Regardless of partisanship, the current electoral system is largely supported across the country. Dr Chen explains that despite the ongoing debate, there is no sign of any serious measures to end compulsory voting in sight.

"Most Australians are quite comfortable with the electoral process and would be quite suspicious of efforts to change it. We trust the electoral system more than we trust our politicians.

"It's an irony, but we really like our democracy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23810381

And there we have it, parties look at abolishing comp voting for their own benefit, not the countries'.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25219 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 631  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Biffer29, camroc1, Farva, Google Adsense [Bot], Luckycharmer, Mr Mike, rfurlong, Risteard, sewa, Tussock, ZappaMan and 91 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group