Australian Politics Forum - Sack The Union Jack

skippy. Gold Member Offline Posts: 20882 Gender:	Re: Sack The Union Jack Reply #60 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 1:48pm Quote: Well if it's not binding, what's the point of holding it??? Pretty dumb question. OPINION. Quote: The Government could still just ignore it, and use any republic model they like No they couldn't, you either haven't read or don't understand the definition.
Back to top	freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL Click onWWW below IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #61 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 1:53pm

skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 1:48pm:

Quote:

Well if it's not binding, what's the point of holding it???

Pretty dumb question.
OPINION.

Quote:

The Government could still just ignore it, and use any republic model they like

No they couldn't, you either haven't read or don't understand the definition.

I have read the definition, and understood it...

As you and buzz both say...it's NOT binding....so the result CAN be ignored by the government....
If they can't ignore the choice then it IS binding...

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

buzzanddidj Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 14000 Eganstown, via Daylesford, VIC Gender:	Re: Sack The Union Jack Reply #62 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 1:54pm I like THIS one ... It's a SUBTLE change It's IDENTIFIABLE It's DISTINCTIVE It's SIMPLE A country's flag shouldn't look like an ADVERTISING BANNER
Back to top	« Last Edit: Jan 27^th, 2011 at 6:27pm by buzzanddidj » 'I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.' - Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #63 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:28pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 1:54pm:

I like THIS one ...

http://www.peterballard.org/ozflag/oz2.gif

It's a SUBTLE change

It's IDENTIFIABLE

It's DISTINCTIVE

It's SIMPLE

A country's flag shouldn't look like an ADVERTISING BANNER

I'd like to see that in a green background with gold stars.But I could live with it as is.

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

skippy. Gold Member Offline Posts: 20882 Gender:	Re: Sack The Union Jack Reply #64 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:31pm Quote: I have read the definition, and understood it... As you and buzz both say...it's NOT binding....so the result CAN be ignored by the government.... So we put it to the people in a plebiscite to see if a republic is the preferred option, if it is, we then put it to the public in a referendum to decide the model.
Back to top	freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL Click onWWW below IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #65 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:40pm

Dnarever wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 10:43am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 10:19am:

People didn't like the model presented to them by Howard, he manipulated it well as was the shrewd asshole he is.

Howard had nothing to do with the model selection.

This was typical Turnbull making his decision and trying to railroad it through.

He did succeed in bullying his option past the convention but left half of the republicans in opposition to his model.

You are right. The republicans destroyed themsevels by divisinv infighting. It was typical turnball to push his own preferred model rather than seeking consensus. Sounds pretty familiar actually!

With 70% opposed to a new flag there is simply no push for a new one. It simply ISNT going to happen for decades - if ever. There is no push, there is no need and there is no value in it.

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: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #66 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:45pm

skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:31pm:

Quote:

I have read the definition, and understood it...

As you and buzz both say...it's NOT binding....so the result CAN be ignored by the government....

So we put it to the people in a plebiscite to see if a republic is the preferred option, if it is, we then put it to the public in a referendum to decide the model.

There is no demand for a republic. a few people mention it occasionally, a few jump up and down and say 'yes' and then no one does anything about it for lack of a genuine community push for it. Suck it up. No one actually cares enough to push for it all because they se it as I do - a waster of time and money all to acheive absolutuely nothing!

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

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #67 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:50pm

Quote:

With 70% opposed to a new flag there is simply no push for a new one.

Those polls change every time they're taken.
Its interesting you're taking them so serious now, more than 70% were against the illegal invasion of Iraq, but that made no difference.
Of course the only soldiers who fought under the current flag are the ones who have gone to war after 1954 when Menzies changed the flag, without a referendum. The official Australian flag prior to that was red.Of Course it was changed in 1908 as well.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:56pm by skippy. »

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #68 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:59pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:45pm:

skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:31pm:

Quote:

I have read the definition, and understood it...

As you and buzz both say...it's NOT binding....so the result CAN be ignored by the government....

So we put it to the people in a plebiscite to see if a republic is the preferred option, if it is, we then put it to the public in a referendum to decide the model.

There is no demand for a republic. a few people mention it occasionally, a few jump up and down and say 'yes' and then no one does anything about it for lack of a genuine community push for it. Suck it up. No one actually cares enough to push for it all because they se it as I do - a waster of time and money all to acheive absolutuely nothing!

I tend to agree with you.
Most people care about the republic about as much as the opinion of a sad old man, like you.

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

buzzanddidj

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 14000
Eganstown, via Daylesford, VIC
Gender: male

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #69 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 3:01pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:40pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 10:43am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 10:19am:

People didn't like the model presented to them by Howard, he manipulated it well as was the shrewd asshole he is.

Howard had nothing to do with the model selection.

This was typical Turnbull making his decision and trying to railroad it through.

He did succeed in bullying his option past the convention but left half of the republicans in opposition to his model.

You are right. The republicans destroyed themsevels by divisinv infighting. It was typical turnball to push his own preferred model rather than seeking consensus. Sounds pretty familiar actually!

With 70% opposed to a new flag there is simply no push for a new one

Are you talking tabloid newspaper, internet, or legitimate scientific ?

Frequent Morgan polls showed the percentage of Australians wanting a new flag increasing from 27% in 1979 to 42% in 1992, to a majority of 52% in 1998.

In response, the Coalition government under John Howard discouraged discussion about changing the flag and in 1996 established Australian National Flag Day, in 2002 supplied ANFA’s promotional video free to all primary schools and in 2004 required all schools receiving federal funds to fly the Australian flag

Back to top

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

- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

IP Logged

FRED.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3698

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #70 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 3:05pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 3:01pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:40pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 10:43am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 10:19am:

People didn't like the model presented to them by Howard, he manipulated it well as was the shrewd asshole he is.

Howard had nothing to do with the model selection.

This was typical Turnbull making his decision and trying to railroad it through.

He did succeed in bullying his option past the convention but left half of the republicans in opposition to his model.

You are right. The republicans destroyed themsevels by divisinv infighting. It was typical turnball to push his own preferred model rather than seeking consensus. Sounds pretty familiar actually!

With 70% opposed to a new flag there is simply no push for a new one

Are you talking tabloid newspaper, internet, or legitimate scientific ?

Frequent Morgan polls showed the percentage of Australians wanting a new flag increasing from 27% in 1979 to 42% in 1992, to a majority of 52% in 1998.

In response, the Coalition government under John Howard discouraged discussion about changing the flag and in 1996 established Australian National Flag Day, in 2002 supplied ANFA’s promotional video free to all primary schools and in 2004 required all schools receiving federal funds to fly the Australian flag

And why not It is Australia Not some other joint
Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #71 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 4:19pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 3:01pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:40pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 10:43am:

skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 10:19am:

People didn't like the model presented to them by Howard, he manipulated it well as was the shrewd asshole he is.

Howard had nothing to do with the model selection.

This was typical Turnbull making his decision and trying to railroad it through.

He did succeed in bullying his option past the convention but left half of the republicans in opposition to his model.

You are right. The republicans destroyed themsevels by divisinv infighting. It was typical turnball to push his own preferred model rather than seeking consensus. Sounds pretty familiar actually!

With 70% opposed to a new flag there is simply no push for a new one

Are you talking tabloid newspaper, internet, or legitimate scientific ?

Frequent Morgan polls showed the percentage of Australians wanting a new flag increasing from 27% in 1979 to 42% in 1992, to a majority of 52% in 1998.

In response, the Coalition government under John Howard discouraged discussion about changing the flag and in 1996 established Australian National Flag Day, in 2002 supplied ANFA’s promotional video free to all primary schools and in 2004 required all schools receiving federal funds to fly the Australian flag

"

Frequent Morgan polls showed the percentage of Australians wanting a new flag increasing from 27% in 1979 to 42% in 1992, to a majority of 52% in 1998.

"

And dropped 29% in 2010.....so what does that say???

A 2010 Morgan Poll that asked: "Do you think Australia should have a new design for our National Flag?" was supported by 29% of respondents and opposed by 66%, with 5% uncommitted

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 57150
Here
Gender: male

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #72 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 4:24pm

skippy. wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 2:28pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 1:54pm:

I like THIS one ...

http://www.peterballard.org/ozflag/oz2.gif

It's a SUBTLE change

It's IDENTIFIABLE

It's DISTINCTIVE

It's SIMPLE

A country's flag shouldn't look like an ADVERTISING BANNER

I'd like to see that in a green background with gold stars.But I could live with it as is.

If you went that route why wouldn't you put both pointers in.

Back to top

IP Logged

buzzanddidj

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 14000
Eganstown, via Daylesford, VIC
Gender: male

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #73 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 4:30pm

Quote:

And dropped 29% in 2010.....so what does that say???

A 2010 Morgan Poll that asked: "Do you think Australia should have a new design for our National Flag?" was supported by 29% of respondents and opposed by 66%, with 5% uncommitted

That jingoism flourished over the post 911, Howard decade ?

LOL

(Seriously, I MISSED that later paragraph)

I'd like to see polls done on the flag and republic more often

Back to top

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

- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Sack The Union Jack
Reply #74 - Jan 27^th, 2011 at 4:48pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Jan 27^th, 2011 at 4:30pm:

Quote:

And dropped 29% in 2010.....so what does that say???

A 2010 Morgan Poll that asked: "Do you think Australia should have a new design for our National Flag?" was supported by 29% of respondents and opposed by 66%, with 5% uncommitted

That jingoism flourished over the post 911, Howard decade ?

LOL

(Seriously, I MISSED that later paragraph)

I'd like to see polls done on the flag and republic more often

Both are issues that dont capture the peoples imagination. There is nothing to be gained in a republic or changing the flag. Even the most ardent supporters of both find it hard to come up with any benefits. Australians are a pragmatic lot and becoming a republic or changing the flag will have trouble being passed because there is so little genuine pressure for it.

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