I'm not sure this argument is convincing, suzeonline.

>>Anyone who does an informal vote this weekend should not then complain about who does come into power. You will get what you deserve.<<

I've heard it trotted out every time someone suggests we end compulsory voting.

On this logic, it would appear that my only reward for being forced to enter a vote for someone whose policies I actively reject, is permission to complain?

Seems a pretty poor return on investment to me.

Surely, even if I choose not to vote, I am allowed to complain, first and foremost, that the system as it stands actively discourages political parties in Australia from articulating actual policies. Witness the fact that the ALP only "launched their campaign" yesterday... how arrogant is that?

Then I should be allowed to complain that even if I vote for a Party that has "policies", there is nothing to prevent that Party from changing its mind, after it has been elected... having used my vote in order to do so.

In business, that would be fraudulent. Directors would face jail sentences. Careers would be curtailed... and quite rightly too.

So, telling me "I get what I deserve" by withholding my vote seems just a teensy bit harsh. Especially when I "get what I don't deserve", when forced to mark the ballot paper in the first place.

I would be happy for my non-vote should be understood as any of the following:

"you haven't convinced me that you are honest"

"I don't believe you, when you say you will do this."

"I don't believe that the leader of your Party has the intellect, intestinal fortitude or necessary statesmanship to represent this country abroad"

"I don't want to vote for a "faction"; I want to vote for a Party"

etc. etc.

I certainly believe that anyone who would want to see Rudd back should vote informal.

That would get rid of some of the idiot vote.

Now, all we have to do is get those who think a that anyone who could walk the street with hair died that ridiculous colour of red, is suitable material to lead any country to do the same.

For those who don't like UMs & AHs, I have to agree, but I like even less that shovel scraping the bottom of the gravel pit voice, of little Julie.

Have you noticed how Julie is talking more & more about the big "I", & "MY". "My government", "when I'm reelected", but we hear quite a bit about "we" & "our" from Abbott.

It would be nice if someone would tell her it is our government, not hers.

When did physical appearance or the way someone speaks become so important in this election. It is policies and belief in follow-up that are important. To think otherwise implies this Ad-style campaign of an election circus is exactly what we deserve.

Suze,

I think Bob Hawke was a decent PM. He patented the ums and aaahhhhs.

I prefer it to Kevin's 'let me just say', and Julia's slow talk. It's all about thinking time. It's hard to think tactically and talk at the same time.

It's better for politicians to stall in this way than have the media (let alone the other parties) pounce on every turn of phrase and distort the whole meaning of what they are trying to say.

People like to pretend Abbott is stupid just because they don't like his policies and the way he presents himself. He's no dill, and it's lazy thinking and one-eyed bias to assert this.

BTW: I find it hard to vote for such a patronising person such as Jooolia. Apart form her slow talking (which as I said is her thinking time, but it comes off as patronising) did anyone see her 'hands up' speech to the pikeys the other day. She showed them no respect, putting herself up as the teacher and them the school kids.

In the end they're both pretty average speakers. Turnbull and Tanner run rings around them.

A silly idea just as silly as Boazy asking us to vote for the dead beast that was family first.
Broke in big debt and dead it will never rise again.
Its only winner won on ALP preferences and proved unstable.
After the election we will know more about Rudd.
And How did Christians get involved with FF?
Most voters know how to use a vote Labor will be returned.

Suzi,
I agree in principal with you.
I think you'll find it's the evangelical churches that are behind FF.
Locally the Catholics are all supporting the LNP
The DLP is also traditionally supported by the Catholics.

Pericles,
What we have here is a philosophical difference between those who believe in SEP (its Somebody Else's Problem) i.e. You.....and those who believe in personal responsibility.

While I clearly don't believe in the dysfunctional party system of government. And therefore don't vote for parties but for policies as expressed by my "representative".

I will be voting against the Local sitting egotist (lib) then again I'd vote against him if he was Labor. This election will be for me voting for a representative I don't know hoping they will be better that a known quality, a political drone.

So you can see there is a point to vote even if just to oust the a pitiful representative (sic).