This is what the latest polls suggest

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-19/xenophons-sa-best-leading-newspolls-popula...

The latest poll, published in the Australian newspaper, shows 32 per cent of SA voters intend to direct their first preference votes to SA Best during the March election, compared to the Liberal Party on 29 per cent and Labor on 27 per cent.

I guess this will come down to preferences if these numbers are right.

lee wrote on Feb 18^th, 2018 at 8:27pm:


How many have been redrawn ? From what I can see badly timed sneezing could see any party govern even SA Best.

What is clear to me is voter dissatisfaction with both ALP / LNP.

lee wrote on Feb 19^th, 2018 at 10:23am:


From memory (correct me if I am wrong) the last election the LNP got more votes ..... if that is correct an electoral redraw will for change the result if the vote is replicated.

To be honest SA is in such a mess I would not want to be in power It might be interesting to see Nick the pommy Cyprian () govern.

lee wrote on Feb 19^th, 2018 at 1:22pm:


I think you mean in each electorate yes it does but if the LNP gets more votes and just lost a redistribution is more likely to favour the LNP.

Lets see if the Pommy Cyprian can win

Auggie wrote on Feb 20^th, 2018 at 1:42pm:


Federally the ALP have sold off more public assets then the LNP so politically it a non argument unless the Pommy Cyprian wants to buy it back.

Nick has always been very popular in SA... however has he ever been put to the test????>....

as far as I know if he wins big time and a few party members they will all be new boys.....

as someone has pointed out SA is a mess....

will new team members be able to fix it?

cods wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 4:55pm:


Yes the Pommy Cyprian seems to be a barking dog on the sideline but SA government does set a very low bar that any muppet could match. Good luck to him and hopefully for the people of SA they get a good government .... the ALP has let that state down big time and should be booted out !

Smoke/fire, cods, so on that basis, this must be true.

Link.

Quote:

Aussie wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 3:59pm:

Earlier today, Mr Marshall told ABC Radio Adelaide the party had not received the cheque, but there had been previous donations.

"All of that has been disclosed, she's made past donations, last year and the year before in the lead-up to the federal election and other donations," he said.

"All of those donations have been reported as per the legislation.

"The Liberal Party has absolutely nothing to hide here."


Mr Marshall blamed the repeated questions regarding Ms Zou on a Labor "smear" campaign.

He said the Labor Party received $1.5 million from the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDA) and the union did that to influence the Government's position on shop trading hours.

"Cue the smear, two weeks from the election you knew it was always going to happen," Mr Marshall said.


I do admit  taking money from people with ???????


and that goes for UNIONS as well....

is not a good look...

but how do you stop it????.....

cods wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 4:55pm:


No I am in NSW, I take interest in SA as its a state that is in need of a good government the ALP has really screwed up that state. From the polling and articles I have read the election could go 3 ways.

cods wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 5:55pm:

Yes we had 17 years hard labor with corruption and incompetence at every level, started with nifty nev and ended with Obied Inc running the joint !

Its a democracy so any party can step up and govern for the people but on form the ALP has been terrible in the past, the LNP are no clean skins either. In SA it looks more incompetence than corruption .....  prefer a small amount of corruption over incompetence, incompetence is harder to fix.

Maybe Nick the Pommy Cyprian is the man

cods wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 9:45pm:


They tried the ALP and there proven crap not sure how it could be worse a state that can not produce its own electricity ? that is a big joke !

Is this guy still the Premier?

I haven't been to SA for awhile.

RightSaidFred wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 7:32am:

It's a dumb argument by the right wing brain that privatising for private profit always produces better results for the public. The massive hikes in energy prices since privatisation is ample proof to the contrary.

We need a Royal Commission into privatisation because some of it was done corruptly!

Bam wrote on Mar 17^th, 2018 at 5:44pm:


Maybe that is why the WA State Government has recently sold electricity assets. And that after promising not to.

Three independents who look likely to win seats are:

Frances Bedford (Florey) former ALP contesting as independent.
Troy Bell (Mount Gambier) former Lib contesting as independent.
Geoff Brock (Frome) independent who is currently a Minister.

Current count looks like Libs could end up with a bare majority of 1. They should have the support of one ex-Lib independent. Antony Green has called a Liberal government.

Basically the Libs have gained government by redistribution because very few seats changed hands from the notional holders. This isn't necessarily a problem though because the previous boundaries favoured Labor somewhat.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 17^th, 2018 at 10:00pm:

The more general term "malapportionment" is better here. A Gerrymander is a distinct kind of malapportionment that strictly speaking doesn't apply here.

A defining characteristic of a Gerrymander is electoral boundaries that are drawn by a partisan committee to maximise the number of seats for one party. Such seats often have quite bizarre shapes to achieve this.

Here is the original Gerrymander from 1812.


Here are some more recent examples. Note the shapes.


A comparison between the old Gerrymandered Pennsylvanian Congressional districts and the new fairer map imposed by the Supreme Court.


The South Australian constitution requires electorate boundaries to be as fair as possible. You are correct to claim that the SAEC messed it up last time. Just don't call it a "Gerrymander", it technically isn't one.

It also helps to remember why the SA Constitution has this requirement. The Playmander malapportionment (again, NOT a Gerrymander) had a massive bias towards conservative rural seats, where rural seats outnumbered urban seats by about 2 to 1 even though urban voters outnumbered rural voters 2 to 1. No doubt you'll admit that the Playmander's 32-year bias towards conservatives isn't fair either.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 18^th, 2018 at 12:44pm:


Gooday Longy

I thought the AEC set up the boundaries independant of the government of the day!

How does gerrymandering occur if this is the case?

Just asking as I have no idea how it works!

Redmond Neck wrote on Mar 18^th, 2018 at 12:57pm:


Ditto. I would like that answered too.
Your previous response implied the AEC is corrupt.
Do you have any reason other than right wing sour grapes to cast that slur?
I hated Gerrymanders when that foul human Bjelke Peterson ran QLD like his private kingdom, and have no love for them no matter which side of politics they may benefit.

I'm very glad to see Labor ousted in SA, 16 years is too long for almost any government to stay in power.

It is about time we introduce five year fixed terms.
Stop wasting time on politicking, and make the baskets actually do the job and govern.
Ferk it up and get dumped at the next election.

That HAS to be better than what we are doing now.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 18^th, 2018 at 1:29pm:


You're an IDIOT 

Redmond Neck wrote on Mar 18^th, 2018 at 12:57pm:



Probably more like the Electoral Commission of South Australia.

https://www.ecsa.sa.gov.au/

Mistress Nicole wrote on Mar 17^th, 2018 at 2:48pm:


Great Idea..

First step..

Cut Victorian Power lines that supply SA their power because their idiotic government shut their down... 

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 18^th, 2018 at 12:44pm:

Seems you're not able to understand the difference between a gerrymander and malapportionment despite the explanation.

It was malapportionment. It was NOT a gerrymander. If you disagree, you must produce evidence that it meets the criteria.

As for the Libs not winning the 2PP, I've never seen you complain about elections where the Libs win elections with a minority of the 2PP vote. It happened to Labor in SA in 1947, 1950, 1953, 1956, 1959. In 1962 and 1968 Labor still couldn't win a majority despite having a majority on primary votes alone.

Federally, the Libs are well ahead 4 to 1 on election wins from a 2PP minority, the most recent in 1998.

You may notice that I'm not complaining particularly about the election result in SA because I consider it a fair result.

SA should consider whether it needs to take steps to improve proportionality. If nothing else works, the state may even need to consider radical reforms like introducing some form of proportional representation in the lower house. The downside is that it would advantage minor parties like SA Best and the Greens, whose proportion of votes to seats won makes Labor's share of the vote during the Playford years look positively balanced by comparison.

The new guy will put SA on the map.
There is a new Marshall in town.
Bloody clowns the lot of them.

Bam wrote on Mar 18^th, 2018 at 5:14pm:



I can happily exclude elections before my birth and the rest were before I could vote so... why should I have to care about that?

But what a remarkable example to us of 1998 when the libs won on 49.98%.  You do get the difference between a one-off like that of the tiniest of proportions and that of 4 elections in a row with a 1-3% difference as it was in SA? In any extremely close election the 2PP may be just under 50% for a winning party. Thats not a breach of the guiding principle as a simple local issue can tip one seat. The principle is about ensuring that the 2PP and the number of seats align 'as closely as possible', not precisely - given that that is impossible anyhow.

We dont need to change our electoral system in SA. We do however need to ensure that the AEC actually does its job and ensures that re-distributions are done properly and regularly.

I don't usually look at how-to-vote cards, but I see that Marshall was promoting a donkey vote.

https://strongplan.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Dunstan.pdf

I thought the senate is % based.  And in order for laws to pass, both house had to agree.