Australian Politics Forum - How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??

laborfornever

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 345

How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:24pm

The other week Gillard said a vote for the greens is NOT a vote for labor, so she says.

Now she says that labor rcvd the larger number of votes based on 2PP which includes the green preferences. But if a vote for the greens isn't a vote for labor as she said, then libs got 500K more votes.

So is she now saying that a vote for the greens is now a vote for labor?? what a contradiction.

Seems she'll say anything to get ahead, lyine coniving deceptive woman she is showing herself to be.

I wish the media would pick up on these annomolies.

Like Gillard saying she is open to a carbon tax this election cycle yet Swann said there is no intention of a carbon tax till 2013, outside of this term??

Either way the way this Oakshot fool is carrying on we're going back to the polls within weeks, just wait and see. Then these independants will be voted out as will the green queens.

the sooner we have a first past the post system the better.

coalition won 82 seats on primary vote well ahead of labor.

Back to top

IP Logged

Vanessa Senior Member Offline Ranga Rock Chick Posts: 301 Somewhere In The Real World Gender:	Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now?? Reply #1 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:26pm There have been lies from both sides. That's what they do in order to get elected. They don't tell the truth, they don't admit to their mistakes, they lie and try to make the other party look bad. It's called politics.
Back to top	I don't care if I'm fat, or if you think my clothes are bad. I can go to sleep at night I'm a good person and I'll get by... IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Reply #2 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:29pm

laborfornever wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:24pm:

The other week Gillard said a vote for the greens is NOT a vote for labor, so she says.

Now she says that labor rcvd the larger number of votes based on 2PP which includes the green preferences. But if a vote for the greens isn't a vote for labor as she said, then libs got 500K more votes.

So is she now saying that a vote for the greens is now a vote for labor?? what a contradiction.

Seems she'll say anything to get ahead, lyine coniving deceptive woman she is showing herself to be.

I wish the media would pick up on these annomolies.

Like Gillard saying she is open to a carbon tax this election cycle yet Swann said there is no intention of a carbon tax till 2013, outside of this term??

Either way the way this Oakshot fool is carrying on we're going back to the polls within weeks, just wait and see. Then these independants will be voted out as will the green queens.

the sooner we have a first past the post system the better.

coalition won 82 seats on primary vote well ahead of labor.

Fair enough, you want first past the post, but you cant have your cake and eat it too, if we do that it needs to be the single party with the most votes, not a coalition, as if its a coalition we have numb nuts screaming like banshees that IT NOT FAIR.
what do you expect GREENS voters to do? not preference Labor because its not fair,child.

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

laborfornever

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 345

Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Reply #3 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:36pm

First past the post should also provide the ruling party with the right to implement their agenda without opposition regardless of how bad a policy might be.

If it means labor wants a carbon tax they can do it, if they want 40% mining tax they can do it.

It shitz me no end that oppositions can stop a governments agenda.

let them implement it and if we don't like it then the next incoming party can dismantle it.

Just like the GST you lot whine about, labor could get rid of it but they wont.

If we get a carbon tax through Gillard then next election Abbott or who ever is running can say vote for us we'll get rid of it and it can then come down to keep what we have or change???

Back to top

IP Logged

vegitamite

Ex Member

Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Reply #4 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:43pm

First past the post should also provide the ruling party with the right to implement their agenda without opposition regardless of how bad a policy might be.

If it means labor wants a carbon tax they can do it, if they want 40% mining tax they can do it.

It shitz me no end that oppositions can stop a governments agenda.

let them implement it and if we don't like it then the next incoming party can dismantle it.

Just like the GST you lot whine about, labor could get rid of it but they wont.

======================

I sort off agree with you .

The biggest problem is tho when some policies 9 especially larger financial ones) are implemented into our system it is then harder to take it away once we have a system working around it....

Back to top

IP Logged

mozzaok Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 6741 Melbourne Gender:	Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now?? Reply #5 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:53pm I wonder when the coalition, became just the liberal party, because on the figures I have seen, Labor got the most votes of any single party. Keep going Libs, keep telling the Nats that they are an insignificant sideshow, it will do wonders for the view of you the ex-Nat independents hold.
Back to top	OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma! IP Logged

mozzaok

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Reply #6 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:55pm

laborfornever wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:36pm:

First past the post should also provide the ruling party with the right to implement their agenda without opposition regardless of how bad a policy might be.

If it means labor wants a carbon tax they can do it, if they want 40% mining tax they can do it.

It shitz me no end that oppositions can stop a governments agenda.

let them implement it and if we don't like it then the next incoming party can dismantle it.

Just like the GST you lot whine about, labor could get rid of it but they wont.

If we get a carbon tax through Gillard then next election Abbott or who ever is running can say vote for us we'll get rid of it and it can then come down to keep what we have or change???

Is that the official unscrambling an omelette policy?

Life certainly can be simple when you do not let little reality problems interfere.

Back to top

OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma!

IP Logged

Darwin Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1037	Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now?? Reply #7 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 3:14pm Gee, a politician spinning, how unsual. Greens are a disaster for Australia.
Back to top	IP Logged

buzzanddidj

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 14248
Eganstown, via Daylesford, VIC
Gender: male

Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Reply #8 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 3:29pm

In MY electorate (Ballarat) the Greens did not allocate prefences - which I believe was the case in not just this electorate
The best solution I had was via a 'how to vote Liberal card' -numbered in REVERSE

When they ARE given it is a "serving suggestion" only - the decision on preferences is always the decision of the voter
Anyone that says a Green vote is an "automatic vote for Labor" is talking a LOAD of NONSENSE

Back to top

« Last Edit: Aug 24^th, 2010 at 3:35pm by buzzanddidj »

'I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.
Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.'

- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

IP Logged

Please delete

Gold Member

Offline

Please delete this smacking
PROFILE

Posts: 2936

Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Reply #9 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 3:47pm

"Greens Voters" are primarily disenchanted Labor and Democrats voters, so I see no problem in linking Labor and the Greens.

I dislike a lot of "non-positions" that the government has taken lately - ETS, republic, renewables - and find that, for me, a vote for the greens was a form of "wake up" vote for Labor.

And I expect my Greens vote to flow to Labor.

Back to top

IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Reply #10 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 4:14pm

Please delete wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 3:47pm:

"Greens Voters" are primarily disenchanted Labor and Democrats voters, so I see no problem in linking Labor and the Greens.

I dislike a lot of "non-positions" that the government has taken lately - ETS, republic, renewables - and find that, for me, a vote for the greens was a form of "wake up" vote for Labor.

And I expect my Greens vote to flow to Labor.

So do I expect my GREENS vote to flow to Labor.
The funny thing I'm finding is that its the coalition supporters whinging the loudest about GREENS voters preferencing Labor, it was always going to happen.
The fact is many GREENS voters are disenchanted Labor voters who would never preference the coalition.

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

pope urban 2 Senior Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 271 melbourne Gender:	Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now?? Reply #11 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 4:20pm I guess I missed the part when the Country Party and the Nationals gave preferance to the Liberals or is that an inconvenient truth. I dont like it either way, we should just have a primary vote, because with the current system a few hillbillies will be running the country.
Back to top	God takes care of old folks and fools, while the Devil makes up all the rules. IP Logged

locutius

Gold Member

Offline

You can't fight in here!
It's the War Room

Posts: 1817
Queensland
Gender: male

Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Reply #12 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 4:35pm

mozzaok wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:55pm:

laborfornever wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:36pm:

First past the post should also provide the ruling party with the right to implement their agenda without opposition regardless of how bad a policy might be.
If it means labor wants a carbon tax they can do it, if they want 40% mining tax they can do it.

It shitz me no end that oppositions can stop a governments agenda.

let them implement it and if we don't like it then the next incoming party can dismantle it.

Just like the GST you lot whine about, labor could get rid of it but they wont.

If we get a carbon tax through Gillard then next election Abbott or who ever is running can say vote for us we'll get rid of it and it can then come down to keep what we have or change???

Is that the official unscrambling an omelette policy?

Life certainly can be simple when you do not let little reality problems interfere.

Thus the mystery of how that political rash called the Liberal Party keeps coming back. Which only a balm of intelligence and applied education can remedy and alas only half the population have a clue. Sad

Back to top

I dream of a better tomorrow, where chickens can cross the road and not be questioned about their motives.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Reply #13 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 4:40pm

skippy. wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:29pm:

laborfornever wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 2:24pm:

The other week Gillard said a vote for the greens is NOT a vote for labor, so she says.

Now she says that labor rcvd the larger number of votes based on 2PP which includes the green preferences. But if a vote for the greens isn't a vote for labor as she said, then libs got 500K more votes.

So is she now saying that a vote for the greens is now a vote for labor?? what a contradiction.

Seems she'll say anything to get ahead, lyine coniving deceptive woman she is showing herself to be.

I wish the media would pick up on these annomolies.

Like Gillard saying she is open to a carbon tax this election cycle yet Swann said there is no intention of a carbon tax till 2013, outside of this term??

Either way the way this Oakshot fool is carrying on we're going back to the polls within weeks, just wait and see. Then these independants will be voted out as will the green queens.

the sooner we have a first past the post system the better.

coalition won 82 seats on primary vote well ahead of labor.

Fair enough, you want first past the post, but you cant have your cake and eat it too, if we do that it needs to be the single party with the most votes, not a coalition, as if its a coalition we have numb nuts screaming like banshees that IT NOT FAIR.
what do you expect GREENS voters to do? not preference Labor because its not fair,child.

First past the post is not based on a PARTY but on a particulcar CANDIDATE in the seat. on that basis the coalition would have won 82 seats. Of course if we had such a system people would vote different anyhow so the calculation is pretty meaningless. disaffected labor supporters would be less likely to vote Green if they knew their second preference for Labor was meaningless. and the same for the few setas where libs and nats run competing candidates. It woudl also mean that labor woudl retain Melbourne EASILY and Brandt would be just a failed candidate.

Interesting idea tho.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: How can it be, she said it wasn't but it is now??
Reply #14 - Aug 24^th, 2010 at 4:42pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 24^th, 2010 at 3:29pm:

In MY electorate (Ballarat) the Greens did not allocate prefences - which I believe was the case in not just this electorate
The best solution I had was via a 'how to vote Liberal card' -numbered in REVERSE

When they ARE given it is a "serving suggestion" only - the decision on preferences is always the decision of the voter
Anyone that says a Green vote is an "automatic vote for Labor" is talking a LOAD of NONSENSE

But if you take out the word 'automatic' it DOES become true. With 80-90% of green preferences flowing to labor your protestations ring a little hollow!

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged