What do you all think of the idea of not knowing who you are voting for at election time? All you would get is a formal policy statement from each candidate.

dunno about that FD.You cant trust most of them know when you can see them what hope if they are invisable.Sorry for the broad generalization.

freediver wrote on Mar 9^th, 2007 at 12:50pm:

What do you all think of the idea of not knowing who you are voting for at election time? All you would get is a formal policy statement from each candidate.

That won't work Freediver. When you say "formal policy statement" how in depth would that be. Obviously you need to read this..

http://ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1173182998

and

http://ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1173261822

I suppose, as you have previously written;

[url]The vast majority are not that interested.[/url]

It wouldn't really matter how in depth it was.
;)

I don't think many people care who represents their party in the electorate - as long as the party they prefer gets in - they're happy.

Besides how much do they do for you anyway - you only hear from them prior to an election - who knows what they do for the rest of the time?

Another point is we don't even know what the party's stand for as they change their stance everyday. It's like in business, everyone says they have great service, what a load of crap. :P


You're right Mantra because people don't care enough about politics and it's easier for them just to pick a party. Don't have to use brainpower that way. Most people wouldn't know what the policies are unless it was sensationalised by the press, like GST. They might turn the tv on and hear Rudd saying that all hospitals will be doubled and free and say "gee, that sounds good I'll vote for him", but they didn't turn the tv on the next night and didn't hear Rudd say "We will invade Iran as soon as I'm elected".

*Please not Rudds comments and the use of Rudds name is only as an example.

How embarresing it would be for the NLP to retain power by 90% Donkey Votes. ;D

Who was that masked man?

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/CreativeFavorableEsok-max-1mb.gif

freediver wrote on Mar 9^th, 2007 at 12:50pm:

What do you all think of the idea of not knowing who you are voting for at election time? All you would get is a formal policy statement from each candidate.

Are those core or non-core policy statements?  Are they signed in blood at a crossroads at midnight on All Hallows Eve under a full moon and with seven demons dancing??

It would be interesting to see the result though... a washout for the major parties, methinks... landslide of the small boulders....

Ahh so voting on policies not personalities… not a bad idea, would have to be binding as well, if the candidate doesn't implement the policies or actively support them then they get kicked out. ;)

Jasin wrote on May 7^th, 2019 at 12:24am:

How embarresing it would be for the NLP to retain power by 90% Donkey Votes. ;D

You've already started ... who's the NLP?

freediver wrote on Mar 9^th, 2007 at 12:50pm:

What do you all think of the idea of not knowing who you are voting for at election time? All you would get is a formal policy statement from each candidate.

I think only people with STEM degrees, own a business and/or own or are paying off property should be allowed to vote. My reason for this that people who've obtained at least one of these things have not only got their s#$t together but are more likely to make rational decisions based on the facts presented before them, rather than make decisions based on impulse and/or emotion.

minarchist wrote on May 7^th, 2019 at 11:15am:

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2007 at 12:50pm: What do you all think of the idea of not knowing who you are voting for at election time? All you would get is a formal policy statement from each candidate. I think only people with STEM degrees, own a business and/or own or are paying off property should be allowed to vote. My reason for this that people who've obtained at least one of these things have not only got their s#$t together but are more likely to make rational decisions based on the facts presented before them, rather than make decisions based on impulse and/or emotion.

Disenfranchise the already marginal and politicians and money will ignore them even more than they do now. let them eat cake.   

minarchist wrote on May 7^th, 2019 at 11:15am:

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2007 at 12:50pm: What do you all think of the idea of not knowing who you are voting for at election time? All you would get is a formal policy statement from each candidate. I think only people with STEM degrees, own a business and/or own or are paying off property should be allowed to vote. My reason for this that people who've obtained at least one of these things have not only got their s#$t together but are more likely to make rational decisions based on the facts presented before them, rather than make decisions based on impulse and/or emotion.

Laughable - you Fascist...

I think that anyone over a certain net worth should be excluded from voting and from holding office due to self-interest and conflict of interest.

Go back to the Dark Ages....

A little of that impulse and/or emotion might send you to the guillotine one day...

Gnads wrote on May 7^th, 2019 at 9:06am:

Jasin wrote on May 7th, 2019 at 12:24am: How embarresing it would be for the NLP to retain power by 90% Donkey Votes. ;D You've already started ... who's the NLP?

Nasty Leeches and Pr1cks...

;D apt description of todays crop.

why is jasin necroposting a bunch of FD's 12 year old threads?

polite_gandalf wrote on May 7^th, 2019 at 3:31pm:

why is jasin necroposting a bunch of FD's 12 year old threads?

Just because its 'old', doesn't mean its 'bad'.
Wouldn't you agree Gandalf? :-?

Sometimes, old Threads have an ironic connection to today.
Sometimes things change, sometimes we see - they have not.

You fear growing 'old' don't you Gandalf? :D