Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5
Send Topic Print
optional preferential voting harms the coalition (Read 4882 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 25290
I like fish
optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:31am
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_%28Australia%29

Quote:
By contrast, a variation of the preferential system known as Optional Preferential Voting has proven a significant handicap to coalition co-operation in Queensland and New South Wales, because significant numbers of voters don't express all useful preferences.


Is this the ultimate reason behind the merger in QLD? That is, optional preferential voting is leading to a reduction in voter choice, as political parties seek to limit the options given to the public so they are commensurate with the ability of the voting system to handle those options fairly.
Back to top
 

Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger - Franklin P. Jones
WWW  
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16353
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #1 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:36am
 
freediver wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:31am:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_%28Australia%29

Quote:
By contrast, a variation of the preferential system known as Optional Preferential Voting has proven a significant handicap to coalition co-operation in Queensland and New South Wales, because significant numbers of voters don't express all useful preferences.


Is this the ultimate reason behind the merger in QLD? That is, optional preferential voting is leading to a reduction in voter choice, as political parties seek to limit the options given to the public so they are commensurate with the ability of the voting system to handle those options fairly.

The greens would just love that there be the opposite of optional. Cant have people having options.

There shouldn't even be preferential voting, but at worst, it should only remain an option. First past the post should be the only way to vote.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BigOl64
Gold Member
*****
Online



Posts: 6018
Townsville Nth QLD
Gender: male
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #2 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:42am
 


Australia should embrace democratic human rights and have optional voting.

Mind you the AEC are pretty useless at tracking down the 1 mil of optional non-voters, myself included when we don't bother to show up.

Make those bastards really work for their $2 and a pension.

Back to top
 

You have obviously mistaken me for someone who gives a rat's rectum!
 
IP Logged
 
skippy.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17256
Gender: male
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #3 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:44am
 
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:36am:
freediver wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:31am:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_%28Australia%29

Quote:
By contrast, a variation of the preferential system known as Optional Preferential Voting has proven a significant handicap to coalition co-operation in Queensland and New South Wales, because significant numbers of voters don't express all useful preferences.


Is this the ultimate reason behind the merger in QLD? That is, optional preferential voting is leading to a reduction in voter choice, as political parties seek to limit the options given to the public so they are commensurate with the ability of the voting system to handle those options fairly.

The greens would just love that there be the opposite of optional. Cant have people having options.

There shouldn't even be preferential voting, but at worst, it should only remain an option. First past the post should be the only way to vote.

I agree, that way the conservatives would have only won power twice in the last 70 years. While we're at it, ban coalitions,that is for losers that cant win in their own right,anyway. With a first past the post system only the single winning party should/could form government,majority rules,hey bro???
Back to top
 

Abbott :As far as I am concerned,  we want to end the uncertainty by guaranteeing that no school will be worse off . So we will honour the agreements that Labor has entered into.
He lied.
 
IP Logged
 
Dnarever
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 15460
Here
Gender: male
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #4 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:51am
 
freediver wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:31am:
Is this the ultimate reason behind the merger in QLD? That is, optional preferential voting is leading to a reduction in voter choice, as political parties seek to limit the options given to the public so they are commensurate with the ability of the voting system to handle those options fairly.



A smooth way of saying that if we get your primary vote we then expect full control of your preferential voting.

Looks to me to be saying that people are not voting the way we expect them to vote.

I tend to make up my own mind on where my preferences go and I know the major party's hate this.
Back to top
 

"Operation secret boarders" Some good old red neck Totalitarian policy.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 25290
I like fish
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #5 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:57am
 
Quote:
A smooth way of saying that if we get your primary vote we then expect full control of your preferential voting.


That is not what I said. You are thinking of the senate.

Quote:
Looks to me to be saying that people are not voting the way we expect them to vote.


No. It is saying they are not voting. The outcome was entirely predictable. In the end the voter loses due to reduced choice at the polls.
Back to top
 

Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger - Franklin P. Jones
WWW  
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16353
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #6 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 12:08pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:57am:
Quote:
A smooth way of saying that if we get your primary vote we then expect full control of your preferential voting.


That is not what I said. You are thinking of the senate.

Quote:
Looks to me to be saying that people are not voting the way we expect them to vote.


No. It is saying they are not voting. The outcome was entirely predictable. In the end the voter loses due to reduced choice at the polls.

They must be voting because they signed off. They just are not voting the way the greens want them to vote. The greens are that lame, they can only survive on preferential votes. So forcing like the dictators they are, to do preferential instead of it being optional, will help them.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 25290
I like fish
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #7 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 12:17pm
 
You are not getting it eaither. It was actually a conservative party that introduced the current preferential system still used in most states because it unfairly harmed their election prospects. It was labor who got rid of it, because they have the most to gain from the reduced choice that will inevitably result.

Quote:
They must be voting because they signed off. They just are not voting the way the greens want them to vote.


I am sure the Greens are quite happy with the outcome. For starters it destroyed the National party.

Preferential systems are actually a series of elections. They do vote in the first election. It is the failure to vote in subsequent election rounds that causes the problems. People are still forced to turn up and vote, but not to rank all candidates. Hence people chose Nationals, but did not distribute preferences to Labor or Liberal, which meant that Labor ended up winning those seats even though the majority would have preferred Liberal.

So the Nats did what they had too. They cut their own throat. Labor forced them into an impossible position, all the while being cheared on by idiot conservatives who did not understand what they were doing.
Back to top
 

Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger - Franklin P. Jones
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Dnarever
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 15460
Here
Gender: male
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #8 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 12:20pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:57am:
That is not what I said. You are thinking of the senate.


Queensland's voting system - optional preferential voting

Queensland State elections have used Optional Preferential Voting since the 1992 State election. OPV is also used in Queensland local government elections (in those councils divided into single member wards or divisions) and in the New South Wales Lower House.


freediver wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:57am:
No. It is saying they are not voting. The outcome was entirely predictable. In the end the voter loses due to reduced choice at the polls.


The voter has the same choice just that some elect to not utilise that choice. I would think this only comes into play in a three way contest.

Combining like in QLD is only a work around to formalise removing that possibility, obviously because they are either too stupid or selfish to avoid this type of conflict.

I can honestly say that I just don't care either way with a slight preference to allow people to vote how they like.

I can see every possibility that there would be Liberal voters unwilling to preference the Nationals and vica versa.



Back to top
 

"Operation secret boarders" Some good old red neck Totalitarian policy.
 
IP Logged
 
buzzanddidj
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 9851
Eganstown, via Daylesford, VIC
Gender: male
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #9 - Oct 9th, 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






Back to top
 

The home of
 
NapthineAlert
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 32426
Gender: male
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #10 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 1:11pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:31am:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_%28Australia%29

Quote:
By contrast, a variation of the preferential system known as Optional Preferential Voting has proven a significant handicap to coalition co-operation in Queensland and New South Wales, because significant numbers of voters don't express all useful preferences.


Is this the ultimate reason behind the merger in QLD? That is, optional preferential voting is leading to a reduction in voter choice, as political parties seek to limit the options given to the public so they are commensurate with the ability of the voting system to handle those options fairly.


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?
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: 32426
Gender: male
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #11 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 1:14pm
 
skippy. wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:44am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:36am:
freediver wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:31am:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_%28Australia%29

Quote:
By contrast, a variation of the preferential system known as Optional Preferential Voting has proven a significant handicap to coalition co-operation in Queensland and New South Wales, because significant numbers of voters don't express all useful preferences.


Is this the ultimate reason behind the merger in QLD? That is, optional preferential voting is leading to a reduction in voter choice, as political parties seek to limit the options given to the public so they are commensurate with the ability of the voting system to handle those options fairly.

The greens would just love that there be the opposite of optional. Cant have people having options.

There shouldn't even be preferential voting, but at worst, it should only remain an option. First past the post should be the only way to vote.

I agree, that way the conservatives would have only won power twice in the last 70 years. While we're at it, ban coalitions,that is for losers that cant win in their own right,anyway. With a first past the post system only the single winning party should/could form government,majority rules,hey bro???


and now for the truth... under your idiotic system you would allow a government to be formed with a MINORITY of the seats thus ensuring that they could never get their legislation passed, would lose every no-confidence motion and have an election every 3 months. Of course what they could do is negotiate with other minor parties to establish a de-facto coalition to ensure govt can function.
in other words, EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE NOW.
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: 32426
Gender: male
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #12 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 1:17pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 12:17pm:
You are not getting it eaither. It was actually a conservative party that introduced the current preferential system still used in most states because it unfairly harmed their election prospects. It was labor who got rid of it, because they have the most to gain from the reduced choice that will inevitably result.

Quote:
They must be voting because they signed off. They just are not voting the way the greens want them to vote.


I am sure the Greens are quite happy with the outcome. For starters it destroyed the National party.

Preferential systems are actually a series of elections. They do vote in the first election. It is the failure to vote in subsequent election rounds that causes the problems. People are still forced to turn up and vote, but not to rank all candidates. Hence people chose Nationals, but did not distribute preferences to Labor or Liberal, which meant that Labor ended up winning those seats even though the majority would have preferred Liberal.

So the Nats did what they had too. They cut their own throat. Labor forced them into an impossible position, all the while being cheared on by idiot conservatives who did not understand what they were doing.


quite the silliest interpretation of the LNP merger Ive heard yet. And if to prove my point, the polls are currently showing the LNP winning all but one seat in QLD and only Rudd's personal standing stands in the way of a clean sweep. Sounds to me like it wasnt merely a good decision but an incredible good one.
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: 32426
Gender: male
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #13 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 1:19pm
 
buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 9th, 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'.
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


Australian Politics

Posts: 17256
Gender: male
Re: optional preferential voting harms the coalition
Reply #14 - Oct 9th, 2011 at 1:20pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 1:14pm:
skippy. wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:44am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:36am:
freediver wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 11:31am:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_%28Australia%29

Quote:
By contrast, a variation of the preferential system known as Optional Preferential Voting has proven a significant handicap to coalition co-operation in Queensland and New South Wales, because significant numbers of voters don't express all useful preferences.


Is this the ultimate reason behind the merger in QLD? That is, optional preferential voting is leading to a reduction in voter choice, as political parties seek to limit the options given to the public so they are commensurate with the ability of the voting system to handle those options fairly.

The greens would just love that there be the opposite of optional. Cant have people having options.

There shouldn't even be preferential voting, but at worst, it should only remain an option. First past the post should be the only way to vote.

I agree, that way the conservatives would have only won power twice in the last 70 years. While we're at it, ban coalitions,that is for losers that cant win in their own right,anyway. With a first past the post system only the single winning party should/could form government,majority rules,hey bro???


and now for the truth... under your idiotic system you would allow a government to be formed with a MINORITY of the seats thus ensuring that they could never get their legislation passed, would lose every no-confidence motion and have an election every 3 months. Of course what they could do is negotiate with other minor parties to establish a de-facto coalition to ensure govt can function.
in other words, EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE NOW.

So you dont agree with your rightard chum, progresives lol? longwhine???
I thought the Lib congo line would have a meltdown when they realised first past the post meant they only get to govern once every 35 years or so, Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 

Abbott :As far as I am concerned,  we want to end the uncertainty by guaranteeing that no school will be worse off . So we will honour the agreements that Labor has entered into.
He lied.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5
Send Topic Print