Australian Politics Forum - mandates in representative democracy

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #30 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:41pm

Quote:

In trying to get a beginning discussion on a mandate I provided you with an example of a single issue uncluttered by other policies to see how you reacted and you did exactly what I expected - deflect.

Longy, in the opening post I gave you a link to a lengthy discussion between you and me where I promoted an idea that would achieve the same thing as your plebiscite idea, without the absurd burden your idea imposes. You argued vehemently against it, even claiming that it is the moral thing to do for politicians to act against the will of the majority.

you appear to have this somewhat childish notion that disagreeing with your methodology equals disagreeing with your goals. Grow up. I thought your plan was overly complex and full of holes. Your goals were never in question, but your plan was. it was dumb and nobody else thought muchg of it either...

Now I await your response to the simple scenario I laid out.

two plebiscites...

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

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 51806
At my desk.

Re: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #31 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:46pm

Quote:

you appear to have this somewhat childish notion that disagreeing with your methodology equals disagreeing with your goals.

You disagreed with both Longy. You completely misunderstood the method. You argued against the will of the majority several times in different ways. You clearly oppose the idea of the will of the majority when it suits you, and support it when it suits you. You are a hypocrite.

Quote:

Your goals were never in question

Yes they were Longy, by you, and the opening posts are full of examples that you seem blissfully ignorant of. You even tried to claim that everyone in that thread disagreed with me.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #32 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:51pm

freediver wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:46pm:

Quote:

you appear to have this somewhat childish notion that disagreeing with your methodology equals disagreeing with your goals.

You disagreed with both Longy. You completely misunderstood the method. You argued against the will of the majority several times in different ways. You clearly oppose the idea of the will of the majority when it suits you, and support it when it suits you. You are a hypocrite.

Quote:

Your goals were never in question

Yes they were Longy, by you, and the opening posts are full of examples that you seem blissfully ignorant of. You even tried to claim that everyone in that thread disagreed with me.

so no comment on the two plebiscite scenario??? it really is a simple matter. you either support a mandate for parliament to support them or not. You lack of a response and your continued deflections are curious - if unsurprising.

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: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #33 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:53pm

And why am I taking this approach? Well I hope it is obvious that the concept of a mandate is essentially a MORAL question. A PRINCIPLED question.

the two plebiscite example was deliberately chosen because you strongly support gay marriage and strongly oppose a CT repeal. But the public supports both? Do you support neither or support both? Supporting only the one torpedoes your entire position.

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

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 51806 At my desk.	Re: mandates in representative democracy Reply #34 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:54pm Of course I would support the outcome Longy. This should be obvious. I have no idea why you harped on about it, as if you are onto something. You are the only one here arguing against the will of the majority. Yet you are also the one carrying on the loudest about mandates. Hypocrite.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #35 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:56pm

freediver wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:54pm:

Of course I would support the outcome Longy. This should be obvious. I have no idea why you harped on about it, as if you are onto something.

You are the only one here arguing against the will of the majority. Yet you are also the one carrying on the loudest about mandates. Hypocrite.

so to be clear. in the two plebiscite scenario you believe that the senate SHOULD repeal the CT and the lower house should support gay marriage?

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: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #36 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 5:13pm

Quote:

Longy is perhaps the member who carries on about this the most, yet it is also his position that a political party should be able to win government and pass legislation (with a mandate) with less than 50% support and theoretically as low as 11%, and reject the wishes of the other 89%. He appears to think that the whole point of an election is to fulfill his strange notions of fairness to political parties rather than to enact the will of the majority. His concept of a mandate appears to rest on his own personal gut feeling about what the public wants and about how an election outcome should be interpreted. It is a naive view that rejects the reality of representative democracy.

i particularly loved this quote FD. it was so lastnail-like. I particularly like your concepts of 'majority' and 'mandate' which seem to be interpreted with a view to minority opinion. if you had even half the claimed love for majority rule then you would have opposed the carbon tax with as much vigor as your support gay marriage.

and yet when the people express a desire to have the CT repealed you seem reluctant to expressly say that labor and the greens are morally obligated to repeal it.

ah the irony of the 11% comment... the greens on 11% imposed a carbon tax on the 89% who voted for parties that said NO to a carbon tax. I look forward to your next 'suicide by hypocrisy' posting.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Apr 4^th, 2013 at 5:22pm by longweekend58 »

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

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 78289
Gender: male

Re: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #37 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 5:27pm

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:11pm:

A mandate is something that is a moral obligation on opponents of a party or policy to support it in the face of voter support.

if that were true you wouldn't need the opponents support now would you!

yeah... because no popular policy has even been denied by parliament...

move along, ernie.

do you even think about what you have written or does it just run out like diarreha?

that would be your problem as evidenced by your inability to argue the point and instead just post your typical abuse. If you disagree with me then show me why and how. Assuming of course that you are capable of such a feat.

your claim that Howard had a mandate to introduce the GST despite the majority of Australians voting against it is a clear indication that you have no idea what you are on about. Do you need some toilet paper to wipe your mouth?

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #38 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 5:31pm

John Smith wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 5:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:11pm:

A mandate is something that is a moral obligation on opponents of a party or policy to support it in the face of voter support.

if that were true you wouldn't need the opponents support now would you!

yeah... because no popular policy has even been denied by parliament...

move along, ernie.

do you even think about what you have written or does it just run out like diarreha?

that would be your problem as evidenced by your inability to argue the point and instead just post your typical abuse. If you disagree with me then show me why and how. Assuming of course that you are capable of such a feat.

your claim that Howard had a mandate to introduce the GST despite the majority of Australians voting against it is a clear indication that you have no idea what you are on about. Do you need some toilet paper to wipe your mouth?

take a look at the two-plebiscite example given earlier and tell me what you think should happen. My guess is you will defect and abuse or do a FD and just leave the thread.

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

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 78289
Gender: male

Re: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #39 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 5:34pm

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 5:31pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 5:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 4:11pm:

A mandate is something that is a moral obligation on opponents of a party or policy to support it in the face of voter support.

if that were true you wouldn't need the opponents support now would you!

yeah... because no popular policy has even been denied by parliament...

move along, ernie.

do you even think about what you have written or does it just run out like diarreha?

that would be your problem as evidenced by your inability to argue the point and instead just post your typical abuse. If you disagree with me then show me why and how. Assuming of course that you are capable of such a feat.

your claim that Howard had a mandate to introduce the GST despite the majority of Australians voting against it is a clear indication that you have no idea what you are on about. Do you need some toilet paper to wipe your mouth?

take a look at the two-plebiscite example given earlier and tell me what you think should happen. My guess is you will defect and abuse or do a FD and just leave the thread.

I've given you my example ... stick to that ...

Back to top

« Last Edit: Apr 4^th, 2013 at 6:51pm by John Smith »

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Life_goes_on Gold Member Offline Posts: 4772 400kms south of Yobsville, Qld Gender:	Re: mandates in representative democracy Reply #40 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 5:47pm It's just a word bandied about by politicians in an attempt to justify a decision they think will be unpopular with a large section of the electorate and to make the opposition seem unreasonable in objecting to it. Control both houses and you can be said to have a mandate - that's pretty much it.
Back to top	"You're just one lucky motherf-cker" - Someone, 5th February 2013 Num num num num. IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 51806
At my desk.

Re: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #41 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 6:42pm

Quote:

so to be clear. in the two plebiscite scenario you believe that the senate SHOULD repeal the CT and the lower house should support gay marriage?

No Longy. I said I would support the outcome. I did not say what the outcome would be.

Quote:

I particularly like your concepts of 'majority'

A majority is greater than 50% Longy. I am not sure why this concept seems so odd to you.

Quote:

the greens on 11% imposed a carbon tax on the 89% who voted for parties that said NO to a carbon tax.

Longy this is where your concept of mandate falls apart. It always comes back to you pretending to know what everyone else voted for.

Quote:

I look forward to your next 'suicide by hypocrisy' posting.

You are the one who harps on about mandates while opposing majority rule and insisting the government has every right to impose unpopular changes on the majority. Hypocrite.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #42 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 6:46pm

Quote:

so to be clear. in the two plebiscite scenario you believe that the senate SHOULD repeal the CT and the lower house should support gay marriage?

No Longy. I said I would support the outcome. I did not say what the outcome would be.

???? you support 'the outcome' as long as you dont have the balls to articulate an actual opinion about it.

it is quite clear FD that you dont really believe in mandates or majority rule despite what you say repeatedly. in the two plebiscite example given the only possibly response from a person who believes in direct democracy and rule of the majority would be to say that the parliament should pass both. But you equivocate because YOU believe in one and not the other.

so the real reason you dont beleive in moral arguments and mandates is that they sorta require you to support IN PRINCIPLE policies you personally oppose.

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: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #43 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 6:48pm

freediver wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 6:42pm:

Quote:

so to be clear. in the two plebiscite scenario you believe that the senate SHOULD repeal the CT and the lower house should support gay marriage?

No Longy. I said I would support the outcome. I did not say what the outcome would be.

Quote:

I particularly like your concepts of 'majority'

A majority is greater than 50% Longy. I am not sure why this concept seems so odd to you.

Quote:

the greens on 11% imposed a carbon tax on the 89% who voted for parties that said NO to a carbon tax.

Longy this is where your concept of mandate falls apart. It always comes back to you pretending to know what everyone else voted for.

Quote:

I look forward to your next 'suicide by hypocrisy' posting.

[highlight]You are the one who harps on about mandates while opposing majority rule and insisting the government has every right to impose unpopular changes on the majority. Hypocrite[/highlight].

so says the supposed believer in majority rule but who believes it is morally right for the Greens on 11% to impose a carbon tax which is opposed by 2/3 of the people.

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: mandates in representative democracy
Reply #44 - Apr 4^th, 2013 at 6:50pm

freediver wrote on Apr 4^th, 2013 at 6:42pm:

Quote:

so to be clear. in the two plebiscite scenario you believe that the senate SHOULD repeal the CT and the lower house should support gay marriage?

No Longy. I said I would support the outcome. I did not say what the outcome would be.

Quote:

I particularly like your concepts of 'majority'

A majority is greater than 50% Longy. I am not sure why this concept seems so odd to you.

Quote:

the greens on 11% imposed a carbon tax on the 89% who voted for parties that said NO to a carbon tax.

Longy this is where your concept of mandate falls apart. It always comes back to you pretending to know what everyone else voted for.

Quote:

I look forward to your next 'suicide by hypocrisy' posting.

You are the one who harps on about mandates while opposing majority rule and insisting the government has every right to impose unpopular changes on the majority. Hypocrite.

support the outcome which means what? you support the right of people to vote in a plebiscite but not the right of people to have their view acted on? except on gay marriage of course.

you are a joke and you have just been hoisted by your petard. Big time.

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