Australian Politics Forum - optional preferential voting harms the coalition

skippy. Gold Member Offline Posts: 20882 Gender:	Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition Reply #30 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:14pm it has a huge leadership struggle going on and has the polls of a pedophile party. it might last 23 months but it could fall next week. FREEDIVER HOW GOOD A LOOK IS IT FOR YOU TO HAVE A MOD THAT CONTINUALLY CALLS A MAJOR PARTY IN THIS COUNTRY A PEDOPHILE PARTY??????
Back to top	freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL Click onWWW below IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #31 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:18pm

skippy. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:11pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:02pm:

skippy. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:59pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:53pm:

skippy. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:23pm:

In fact, after checking, without a coalition the Libs would never have formed gov ever in this country, Labor would have been in power since 1943. Grin

you laborites/greenies are funny. your votes are so poor you start casting about for artificial arguments to make you feel better.

get used to it losers. you are getting HAMMERED around the country.

Its hard to deal with the truth for you isn't it longwhine???

the TRUTH is a 59/41 lead for the coalition. thats called the BIGGEST MAJORITY IN HISTORY.

suck it up now.

How is an opinion poll taken what 23 months before an election anything like a majority?
Your in

OPPOSITION

, suck it up.

Imagine the tanty if Labor get back in. Grin

I wonder who will throw the biggest tanty when labor is ejected form office. You or Buzz? bit of a tossup although we can be assure Greens_lose will come on and tell us how the massive majority is a repudiation of the coalition. Nemesis wlll come on and dispute the figures.

we are already p[lanning our election night party since it could be any day!

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

Dsmithy70

Gold Member

Offline

ire futuis vobismetipsis

Posts: 13147
Newy
Gender: male

Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #32 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:19pm

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:11pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:02pm:

skippy. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:59pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:53pm:

skippy. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:23pm:

In fact, after checking, without a coalition the Libs would never have formed gov ever in this country, Labor would have been in power since 1943. Grin

you laborites/greenies are funny. your votes are so poor you start casting about for artificial arguments to make you feel better.

get used to it losers. you are getting HAMMERED around the country.

Its hard to deal with the truth for you isn't it longwhine???

the TRUTH is a 59/41 lead for the coalition. thats called the BIGGEST MAJORITY IN HISTORY.

suck it up now.

How is an opinion poll taken what 23 months before an election anything like a majority?
Your in

OPPOSITION

, suck it up.

the ASSUMPTION that it is 23 months away is a big if. the govt isnt stable. it has a huge leadership struggle going on and has the polls of a pedophile party. it might last 23 months but it could fall next week.

and given that the polls have only gone one way in the past 2 years, why would you expect that to change with the same people in place?

That sort of smacking CRAP does not enhance debate on any level and is unbecoming of someone who took on a moderator roll to try and re install civil political debate.

But back to the reasonable assumptions in your post.
Even if Rudd comes back which I don't think is likely as I believe Labor has taken the advice that if they are going down they will do it standing up, backing their ideas to the death, the independents will still support Labor WHY, because Tony Abbott is the alternative he remains the biggest hurdle to power both with the independents and the Australian public(I don't think your majority will be anything like the polls)

Back to top

REBELLION is not what most people think it is.
REBELLION is when you turn off the TV & start educating & thinking for yourself.
Gavin Nascimento

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #33 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:19pm

skippy. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:14pm:

it has a huge leadership struggle going on and has the polls of a pedophile party. it might last 23 months but it could fall next week.

FREEDIVER HOW GOOD A LOOK IS IT FOR YOU TO HAVE A MOD THAT CONTINUALLY CALLS A MAJOR PARTY IN THIS COUNTRY A PEDOPHILE PARTY??????

Is there anything about English Comprehension that you actually comprehend? I dont have high expectations for most labor supporters but even you shoudl be able to understand some things - like basic comprehension.

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: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #34 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:22pm

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:19pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:11pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:02pm:

skippy. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:59pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:53pm:

skippy. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:23pm:

In fact, after checking, without a coalition the Libs would never have formed gov ever in this country, Labor would have been in power since 1943. Grin

you laborites/greenies are funny. your votes are so poor you start casting about for artificial arguments to make you feel better.

get used to it losers. you are getting HAMMERED around the country.

Its hard to deal with the truth for you isn't it longwhine???

the TRUTH is a 59/41 lead for the coalition. thats called the BIGGEST MAJORITY IN HISTORY.

suck it up now.

How is an opinion poll taken what 23 months before an election anything like a majority?
Your in

OPPOSITION

, suck it up.

the ASSUMPTION that it is 23 months away is a big if. the govt isnt stable. it has a huge leadership struggle going on and has the polls of a pedophile party. it might last 23 months but it could fall next week.

and given that the polls have only gone one way in the past 2 years, why would you expect that to change with the same people in place?

That sort of smacking CRAP does not enhance debate on any level and is unbecoming of someone who took on a moderator roll to try and re install civil political debate.

But back to the reasonable assumptions in your post.
Even if Rudd comes back which I don't think is likely as I believe Labor has taken the advice that if they are going down they will do it standing up, backing their ideas to the death, the independents will still support Labor WHY, because Tony Abbott is the alternative he remains the biggest hurdle to power both with the independents and the Australian public(I don't think your majority will be anything like the polls)

Your complaint is either that you didnt understand that the comment WASNT a direct reference to the ALP but rather by way of using an extreme example to make a point - a literary device seemingly beyond a few... OR you found the reference uncomfortable because of the ALPs problem with such criminal behaviour.

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: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #35 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:24pm

Quote:

Even if Rudd comes back which I don't think is likely as I believe Labor has taken the advice that if they are going down they will do it standing up, backing their ideas to the death, the independents will still support Labor WHY, because Tony Abbott is the alternative he remains the biggest hurdle to power both with the independents and the Australian public(I don't think your majority will be anything like the polls)

while the polls might be uncomfortable, tell me why you think they arent accurate since they have bene unerringly accurate for the past 40 years and picked NSW election spot on? Isnt that just wishful thinking of the most desperate kind?

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

buzzanddidj

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

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

Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #36 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:26pm

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:19pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 12:41pm:

You can practice non-preferential voting in ANY election in Australia

It's better known as
INFORMAL

Most of the electorate are IGNORANT to the fact that ( ... in most cases) if you DON"T go with Labor or Coalition,
your vote is BINNED
in the first count

informal voting is NOT voting at all which is hardly the same thing. and the reality is that no-ones vote is binned unless youi consider that voting for a losing candidate is the same thing as your vote being 'binned'.

You are SO wrong, on this one, for such a NO-ALL
Given that well over 95% of Labor or Coalition members - EVERY vote that fails to preference one of these is HISTORY on the first count

Where ELSE can it go, in a 2PP ?

Only a voter with the mentality of a Honsonite would think otherwise

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: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #37 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:30pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:26pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:19pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 12:41pm:

You can practice non-preferential voting in ANY election in Australia

It's better known as
INFORMAL

Most of the electorate are IGNORANT to the fact that ( ... in most cases) if you DON"T go with Labor or Coalition,
your vote is BINNED
in the first count

informal voting is NOT voting at all which is hardly the same thing. and the reality is that no-ones vote is binned unless youi consider that voting for a losing candidate is the same thing as your vote being 'binned'.

You are SO wrong, on this one, for such a NO-ALL
Given that well over 95% of Labor or Coalition members - EVERY vote that fails to preference one of these is HISTORY on the first count

Where ELSE can it go, in a 2PP ?

Only a voter with the mentality of a Honsonite would think otherwise

And herein is revealed the primary fallacy of elections which so few are able to understand. and it is this.

the TWO PARTY PREFERRED figure is an artificial measure not mentioned or used in the electoral act. it is a simple statistical methodology to REFLECT the voting - not an offical determination.

also preferences dont even enter into the equation if one candidate gets over 50% of primary votes which over half do.

the 2PP which you love to quote is also clearly something you KNOW next to nothing about or the way you spell it, 'NO'

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

buzzanddidj

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

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

Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #38 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:41pm

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:30pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:26pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:19pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 12:41pm:

You can practice non-preferential voting in ANY election in Australia

It's better known as
INFORMAL

Most of the electorate are IGNORANT to the fact that ( ... in most cases) if you DON"T go with Labor or Coalition,
your vote is BINNED
in the first count

informal voting is NOT voting at all which is hardly the same thing. and the reality is that no-ones vote is binned unless youi consider that voting for a losing candidate is the same thing as your vote being 'binned'.

You are SO wrong, on this one, for such a NO-ALL
Given that well over 95% of Labor or Coalition members - EVERY vote that fails to preference one of these is HISTORY on the first count

Where ELSE can it go, in a 2PP ?

Only a voter with the mentality of a Honsonite would think otherwise

And herein is revealed the primary fallacy of elections which so few are able to understand. and it is this.

the TWO PARTY PREFERRED figure is an artificial measure not mentioned or used in the electoral act. it is a simple statistical methodology to REFLECT the voting - not an offical determination.

also preferences dont even enter into the equation if one candidate gets over 50% of primary votes which over half do.

the 2PP which you love to quote is also clearly something you KNOW next to nothing about or the way you spell it, 'NO'

My ERROR, acknowledged
The REST of your "bitches" I spell ...

R.E.A.L.I.T.Y.

"SUCK IT UP"

, as you would put it

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

buzzanddidj

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

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

Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #39 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:55pm

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:19pm:

Even if Rudd comes back which I don't think is likely as I believe Labor has taken the advice that if they are going down they will do it standing up, backing their ideas to the death, the independents will still support Labor WHY, because Tony Abbott is the alternative he remains the biggest hurdle to power both with the independents and the Australian public(I don't think your majority will be anything like the polls)

I'm guessing he will be back, post election announcement, on the disolution of the current parliament - a la Bob Hawke - which saw the Labor vote sky-rocket

And BY then, Abbott's GREAT BIG TAX scare campaign on carbon permits will be exposed

This is WHY his assured victory rests on an that early election he keeps calling for

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

Dnarever

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 61829
Here
Gender: male

Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #40 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 3:40pm

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:51pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:11pm:

Yesterday you said that coalitions reduce voter choice. now you are saying that MERGING reduces choice. you cant have it both ways. which is it?

He is obviously right.

In degree you can have two stand alone groups acting differently and you get the most choice.

You can have two groups acting in coalition with two separate processes which is much less choice but still scope for disagreement and a change of position.

Not the best option in terms of choice but defiantly better then an amalgamation where you turn two into one and have no choice at all.

libs and nats dont stand against each other except in rare cirucmstances. that manes the 'choice' you now think has gone was never there in the first place.

.

If preferential voting harms them that is the only way I can see it happening - three corner battles with the conservatives effectively not cross preferencing. I think this is the actual core event behind the title.

I agree its rare but has occurred.

There is more choice by electing different party's in coalition as you may be putting differing points of opinion in the same parliament in a manner in which they can be expressed in those terms.

An example would be the sale of Telstra the Nationals were against it - under a merger they would have been for it.

Though they are mostly too gutless to act on their principals or in some cases have any to act on the potential is still there to a greater extent.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 9^th, 2011 at 3:58pm by Dnarever »

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #41 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 3:55pm

Dnarever wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 3:40pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:51pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:11pm:

Yesterday you said that coalitions reduce voter choice. now you are saying that MERGING reduces choice. you cant have it both ways. which is it?

He is obviously right.

In degree you can have two stand alone groups acting differently and you get the most choice.

You can have two groups acting in coalition with two separate processes which is much less choice but still scope for disagreement and a change of position.

Not the best option in terms of choice but defiantly better then an amalgamation where you turn two into one and have no choice at all.

libs and nats dont stand against each other except in rare cirucmstances. that manes the 'choice' you now think has gone was never there in the first place.

.

If preferential voting harms them that is the only way I can see it happening - three corner battles with the conservatives effectively not cross referencing. I think this is the actual core event behind the title.

I agree its rare but has occurred.

There is more choice by electing different party's in coalition as you may be putting differing points of opinion in the same parliament in a manner in which they can be expressed in those terms.

An example would be the sale of Telstra the Nationals were against it - under a merger they would have been for it.

Though they are mostly too gutless to act on their principals or in some cases have any to act on the potential is still there to a greater extent.

any party system either single or coalition requires compromise. nothing new here.

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

Dnarever Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 61829 Here Gender:	Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition Reply #42 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 4:05pm So LW your saying that preferential voting doesn't hurt the coalition? or just being pedantic about a coalition being the same as one merged party? I think there are substantial differences and the potential for a lot more, imagine if the Nationals got some votes or developed a spine.
Back to top	IP Logged

Dsmithy70

Gold Member

Offline

ire futuis vobismetipsis

Posts: 13147
Newy
Gender: male

Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #43 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 4:05pm

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:22pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:19pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:11pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 2:02pm:

skippy. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:59pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:53pm:

skippy. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 1:23pm:

In fact, after checking, without a coalition the Libs would never have formed gov ever in this country, Labor would have been in power since 1943. Grin

you laborites/greenies are funny. your votes are so poor you start casting about for artificial arguments to make you feel better.

get used to it losers. you are getting HAMMERED around the country.

Its hard to deal with the truth for you isn't it longwhine???

the TRUTH is a 59/41 lead for the coalition. thats called the BIGGEST MAJORITY IN HISTORY.

suck it up now.

How is an opinion poll taken what 23 months before an election anything like a majority?
Your in

OPPOSITION

, suck it up.

the ASSUMPTION that it is 23 months away is a big if. the govt isnt stable. it has a huge leadership struggle going on and has the polls of a pedophile party. it might last 23 months but it could fall next week.

and given that the polls have only gone one way in the past 2 years, why would you expect that to change with the same people in place?

That sort of smacking CRAP does not enhance debate on any level and is unbecoming of someone who took on a moderator roll to try and re install civil political debate.

But back to the reasonable assumptions in your post.
Even if Rudd comes back which I don't think is likely as I believe Labor has taken the advice that if they are going down they will do it standing up, backing their ideas to the death, the independents will still support Labor WHY, because Tony Abbott is the alternative he remains the biggest hurdle to power both with the independents and the Australian public(I don't think your majority will be anything like the polls)

Your complaint is either that you didnt understand that the comment WASNT a direct reference to the ALP but rather by way of using an extreme example to make a point - a literary device seemingly beyond a few... OR you found the reference uncomfortable because of the ALPs problem with such criminal behaviour.

Your own answer contridicts itself, you have allso previously refered to the ALP as the peado party on numerous occasions, but if you wish to undermine yourself and your stated aims as moderator in this silly partisian way, who am I to stop you.

Back to top

REBELLION is not what most people think it is.
REBELLION is when you turn off the TV & start educating & thinking for yourself.
Gavin Nascimento

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #44 - Oct 9^th, 2011 at 4:07pm

Dnarever wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 4:05pm:

So LW your saying that preferential voting doesn't hurt the coalition?

or just being pedantic about a coalition being the same as one merged party?

I think there are substantial differences and the potential for a lot more, imagine if the Nationals got some votes or developed a spine.

preferential voting advantages the ALP in the current environment by getitng green preferences. preferential voting neither harms nor helps Coalition success. How can it when it is rare for coalition candidates to stand against each other?

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