Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear.

She should have registered a party then to get above the line.
The rules are the rules.

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:11pm:

Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear.

I'd buy it.

The political machine has resorted to dirty tricks before, no surprise they'd do it again.

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:11pm:

Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear.

LOL good luck with that. bitter party of one your table is ready. We are serving up just desserts, all you can eat. ;D

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:11pm:

Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear.

This is definitely mellie - repeating the same threads over and over.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:15pm:

matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:11pm: Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear. This is definitely mellie - repeating the same threads over and over.

YEP. Have a look at jenny ,too, its hard to hide your writing style.

skippy. wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:19pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:15pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:11pm: Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear. This is definitely mellie - repeating the same threads over and over. YEP. Have a look at jenny ,too, its hard to hide your writing style.

Look, I don't know who this mellie is. I joined a few days ago, and was accused of being her then. I know who jenny is, but I am not her. I am a man.

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:21pm:

skippy. wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:19pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:15pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:11pm: Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear. This is definitely mellie - repeating the same threads over and over. YEP. Have a look at jenny ,too, its hard to hide your writing style. Look, I don't know who this mellie is. I joined a few days ago, and was accused of being her then. I know who jenny is, but I am not her. I am a man.

unlike SKIPPY ROO-SHYTE  a man never ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

By the way, it actually doesn't surprise me that Pauline voters wouldn't understand how to vote anyway.

;D ;D ;D ;D

"Derrrrr if I put just 1 Under the Line than it's all fine....derrrr...right?"

FRED. wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:24pm:

matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:21pm: skippy. wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:19pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:15pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:11pm: Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear. This is definitely mellie - repeating the same threads over and over. YEP. Have a look at jenny ,too, its hard to hide your writing style. Look, I don't know who this mellie is. I joined a few days ago, and was accused of being her then. I know who jenny is, but I am not her. I am a man. unlike SKIPPY ROO-SHYTE  a man never ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Hi Fred!  Bingo over?  

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:21pm:

skippy. wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:19pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:15pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:11pm: Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear. This is definitely mellie - repeating the same threads over and over. YEP. Have a look at jenny ,too, its hard to hide your writing style. Look, I don't know who this mellie is. I joined a few days ago, and was accused of being her then. I know who jenny is, but I am not her. I am a man.

mellie = matty

That's what I know. Exact same writing style. Exactly the same thread creation style - Talked about Pauline yesterday now putting up a new thread about the same issue rather than going back to the original thread.  Nothing new. Welcome back mellie.

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:11pm:

Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear.

Here are some of my thoughts on the matter.



Going into what is referred to as “the pressing of the button”, when the NSW Electoral Commissioner authorises the commencement of the computer count and, preferences are distributed and transferred, Pauline Hanson was leading, for the 20th position, in the total number of First Preference votes where a first preference was marked above the line against the Group or, below the line against a candidate in the Group.  Her lead over Labor was 57,170 votes, Greens 15,466 votes and Liberal/Nationals 7,536 votes.



There were a total of 308 computer counts before the 21st position was determined.  Pauline had remained in contention, for the last two seats, right up until count 306.  Family First’s, Rev Gordon Moyes, was then excluded and on count 307 the transfer of the Rev Moyes’ 64,738 ballot papers were transferred to the next available preference.  This resulted in 569 votes transferring to Pauline, 3196 to the Greens and 3,158 votes to the Nationals and, at the following count, number 308, candidate Pauline Hanson was excluded.  As there remained only four candidates in the count and four positions were still to be filled all four remaining candidates were elected – position 18 with 166,112 votes, 19, with 134,804 votes, 20 with 105,472 votes & 21 with 104,341 votes – a quota was 185,274.  None of the last four candidates received a quota.   Pauline had finished with 103,035 votes just 1,306 votes behind the Nationals candidate for the final place and 2,437 behind the Greens – 20th position.



*Voters enrolled:       4,635,810

*Voted:                       4,306,285 or a 92.89% turnout

*Formal votes:           4,076,024

*Informal votes:             230,231

*Did not vote:    329,525 or 7.11% of enrolled voters.





The present electoral system in NSW is, I think, archaic.  I believe, it favours the major political parties and both disadvantages and discriminates against groups of candidates such as “GROUP J” – Pauline Hanson and, “GROUP C” – John Hatton.  Why shouldn’t these groups have been permitted to have their lead candidate’s name above the line?  Moreover, why shouldn’t these candidates have been allowed to print the word “Independent” alongside their name? The electoral system in New South Wales, I believe, is unfair and needs to be urgently reviewed and amended to reflect voter’s expectations of it being a fair and transparent system, which it is not. Don’t hold your breath however, that anything will change anytime soon.  Remember, “If nothing changes, nothing changes”. It is ridiculous that preferences should decide the outcome on which candidate/s are elected.  The fact is, Pauline Hanson outpolled every other candidate Below the Line First Preference votes and yet still she was not elected – why?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:30pm:

By the way, it actually doesn't surprise me that Pauline voters wouldn't understand how to vote anyway. ;D ;D ;D ;D "Derrrrr if I put just 1 Under the Line than it's all fine....derrrr...right?"

More like "How do you spell 1?"

http://paulinehanson.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/How-to-vote-Card.jpg

If her supporters are to stupid as to be able to follow a simple how to vote card...................
Well that just says it all.

Clearly people won't listen. I am not mellie, if you want to think that I am, then go ahead and think it. I don't even know who she is, but whatever.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:42pm:

http://paulinehanson.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/How-to-vote-Card.jpg If her supporters are to stupid as to be able to follow a simple how to vote card................... Well that just says it all.

There wasn't a lot of advertising done, only her supporters who went to her website would have seen that, and those who went on saw that. A lot of people don't have, or use very little of, the internet, or maybe didn't know about her webpage anyway. Also, people may have become flustered when voting, because of the size of the white paper.

All of which would affect all candidates equally.

I understand some you people don’t like Pauline, for personal reasons, and some of you don’t like her political policies and that’s fine, but why is so hard for you not to give credit where credit is due, and admit she achieved a fantastic victory in getting over 100,000 votes with a complete media ‘black-out”.  She even out polled every single candidate under the line.  

Please delete wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:40pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:30pm: By the way, it actually doesn't surprise me that Pauline voters wouldn't understand how to vote anyway. ;D ;D ;D ;D "Derrrrr if I put just 1 Under the Line than it's all fine....derrrr...right?" More like "How do you spell 1?"

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

culldav wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:53pm:

I understand some you people don’t like Pauline, for personal reasons, and some of you don’t like her political policies and that’s fine, but why is so hard for you not to give credit where credit is due, and admit she achieved a fantastic victory in getting over 100,000 votes with a complete media ‘black-out”.  She even out polled every single candidate under the line.

Well she didn't actually achieve a victory, now did she?

Maybe we could give her a parliamentary pension for effort.

That's the only thing she wanted, after all.

Please delete wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:53pm:

All of which would affect all candidates equally.

No, because they were allowed to have their name above the line.

Please delete wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:56pm:

Maybe we could give her a parliamentary pension for effort. That's the only thing she wanted, after all.

Then why is she fighting this, and forming a new party?

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:50pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:42pm: http://paulinehanson.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/How-to-vote-Card.jpg If her supporters are to stupid as to be able to follow a simple how to vote card................... Well that just says it all. There wasn't a lot of advertising done, only her supporters who went to her website would have seen that, and those who went on saw that. A lot of people don't have, or use very little of, the internet, or maybe didn't know about her webpage anyway. Also, people may have become flustered when voting, because of the size of the white paper.

Exactly, at every polling booth there was how to vote pamphlets for all the major parties; Pauline didn’t have that luxury, by managed to get over 100,000 votes with media black-out.

culldav wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:53pm:

I understand some you people don’t like Pauline, for personal reasons, and some of you don’t like her political policies and that’s fine, but why is so hard for you not to give credit where credit is due, and admit she achieved a fantastic victory in getting over 100,000 votes with a complete media ‘black-out”.  She even out polled every single candidate under the line.

Exactly. People said that she had no chance, and would get hardly any votes. Considering the lack of attention, it's a great achievement. Btw, did you receive my PM?

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:57pm:

Please delete wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:56pm: Maybe we could give her a parliamentary pension for effort. That's the only thing she wanted, after all. Then why is she fighting this, and forming a new party?

Because she still wants the parliamentary pension, perhaps?

I'll send her my maracas as a consolation prize; the same ones I used to celebrate her loss!

http://api.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/3454899/2/istockphoto_3454899-fiesta-mexican-maracas.jpg

;D ;D ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:59pm:

matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:57pm: Please delete wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:56pm: Maybe we could give her a parliamentary pension for effort. That's the only thing she wanted, after all. Then why is she fighting this, and forming a new party? Before she still wants the parliamentary pension, perhaps?

No. She was visibly upset about this. You're just throwing around unsubstantiated, baseless accusations.

Matty,

I can email you link to Paulines new party if you want, she emailed me the link toady.  

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:57pm:

Please delete wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:53pm: All of which would affect all candidates equally. No, because they were allowed to have their name above the line.

And whose problem is that? She knows how the system works - she's made a living out of rorting the system

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:59pm:

culldav wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:53pm: I understand some you people don’t like Pauline, for personal reasons, and some of you don’t like her political policies and that’s fine, but why is so hard for you not to give credit where credit is due, and admit she achieved a fantastic victory in getting over 100,000 votes with a complete media ‘black-out”.  She even out polled every single candidate under the line.   Exactly. People said that she had no chance, and would get hardly any votes. Considering the lack of attention, it's a great achievement. Btw, did you receive my PM?

Who said she had no chance? Was this another dark conspiracy in the neverending "Perils of Pauline"?

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 5:01pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:59pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:57pm: Please delete wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:56pm: Maybe we could give her a parliamentary pension for effort. That's the only thing she wanted, after all. Then why is she fighting this, and forming a new party? Before she still wants the parliamentary pension, perhaps? No. She was visibly upset about this. You're just throwing around unsubstantiated, baseless accusations.

Alevine (fart in the wind) and some of the others on here are not interested in hearing or seeing the truth, all they want to do in make immature jib remarks and have you waste your time responding to their nonsense. This is the game they play; like accusing new member like yourself of being other members aliases. I thought you would have figured that out by now and started to ignore these certain cretins.  

culldav wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 5:01pm:

Matty, I can email you link to Paulines new party if you want, she emailed me the link toady.

So... how can anyone expect this party to do well when it will remain secret?  Like a cult.  

OMG.... is it a cult?  Pauline's Cult?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:59pm:

matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:57pm: Please delete wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:56pm: Maybe we could give her a parliamentary pension for effort. That's the only thing she wanted, after all. Then why is she fighting this, and forming a new party? No. Look, could you please lend me them first? I want to use them to celebrate the fact that Labor and The Greens are redundant in the LC, because the CDS always side with the Libs. Because she still wants the parliamentary pension, perhaps? I'll send her my maracas as a consolation prize; the same ones I used to celebrate her loss! http://api.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/3454899/2/istockphoto_3454899-fiesta-mexican-maracas.jpg ;D ;D ;D

culldav wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 5:06pm:

matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 5:01pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:59pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:57pm: Please delete wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:56pm: Maybe we could give her a parliamentary pension for effort. That's the only thing she wanted, after all. Then why is she fighting this, and forming a new party? Before she still wants the parliamentary pension, perhaps? No. She was visibly upset about this. You're just throwing around unsubstantiated, baseless accusations. Alevine (fart in the wind) and some of the others on here are not interested in hearing or seeing the truth, all they want to do in make immature jib remarks and have you waste your time responding to their nonsense. This is the game they play; like accusing new member like yourself of being other members aliases. I thought you would have figured that out by now and started to ignore these certain cretins.

I've only ever accused matty of being mellie because matty is mellie.   Just to get the record straight there, cullnuff - the protector of new members.

Get off your high horse you bitter loon.  

Hey, when does the cult meet? I'd like to join, and fight those pesky asylum seekers! Rarrgh!

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 5:07pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:59pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:57pm: Please delete wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:56pm: Maybe we could give her a parliamentary pension for effort. That's the only thing she wanted, after all. Then why is she fighting this, and forming a new party? No. Look, could you please lend me them first? I want to use them to celebrate the fact that Labor and The Greens are redundant in the LC, because the CDS always side with the Libs. Because she still wants the parliamentary pension, perhaps? I'll send her my maracas as a consolation prize; the same ones I used to celebrate her loss! http://api.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/3454899/2/istockphoto_3454899-fiesta-mexican-maracas.jpg ;D ;D ;D

And yet they still have representation.   Looks like you have none, mellie, because Pauline's gone :(

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 5:07pm:

culldav wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 5:01pm: Matty, I can email you link to Paulines new party if you want, she emailed me the link toady.   So... how can anyone expect this party to do well when it will remain secret?  Like a cult.   OMG.... is it a cult?  Pauline's Cult?

Pauline's WHAT?




Oh...   c u L t  



My mistake .

I must get new glasses.

You are all saying things about Pauline, and then have the audacity of accusing her of saying.  

Hypocrites like you lot make me sick; in fact if it came down to feeding my dog over some of you, you lot would starve.  

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:57pm:

Please delete wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:56pm: Maybe we could give her a parliamentary pension for effort. That's the only thing she wanted, after all. Then why is she fighting this, and forming a new party?

She' already TRIED that ...      TWICE !



Pauline's United Australia Party was an Australian political party launched by former One Nation founder Pauline Hanson on 24 May 2007 and registered by the Australian Electoral Commission on 20 September 2007.

The party draws on the name but is unrelated to the historic United Australia Party which existed from 1931 to 1945. Hanson formed the party in order to ensure that her name appeared above the line (as per the voting method in Australian federal elections) rather than simply below the line amongst a list of independent candidates.

Hanson stood for the Australian Senate in the state of Queensland during the 2007 federal election, in which she received 101,461 first preference votes, representing 4.2% of the statewide vote

Hanson voluntarily deregistered the party in March 2010 after announcing her plans to move to the United Kingdom.

http://paulinehanson.com.au/paulines-united/

FRED. wrote on Apr 14^th, 2011 at 4:24pm:

matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:21pm: skippy. wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:19pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:15pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2011 at 4:11pm: Due to her not being allowed to have her name above the line. Thousands of people put a "1" next her name, instead of above the line, and therefore, their votes were considered invalid. So don't say that she didn't get enough votes to get into parliament. She didn't get enough formal votes, not not enough votes per se. She's inquiring into this, because their intention was clear. This is definitely mellie - repeating the same threads over and over. YEP. Have a look at jenny ,too, its hard to hide your writing style. Look, I don't know who this mellie is. I joined a few days ago, and was accused of being her then. I know who jenny is, but I am not her. I am a man. unlike SKIPPY ROO-SHYTE  a man never ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

dont you mean boobys b!tch.. ha.ha..

matty they will call you anything its all they have, everything we say about labor is true and they cant stand it.. so have to turn it back onto the messenger.. ignore them with luck they will go away.. trust me!

give Pauline her due we are all talking about her... more than can be said for that other woman..


whats her name again?????something about a LIAR...it will come to me,.

So we've descended to the bottom of the pit where you can place a "1" next to a candidates name and it then doesn't count