The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Vacuous Election?

Vacuous Election?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. All
Dear Dan,

«I don’t vote.
I will not support State sanctioned criminal enterprise.
It’s time for revolt.»

Very well, but if you want your revolution to succeed, then the first rule is to camouflage and lose yourself in the crowd, so nobody suspects. That includes voting (informal if you rather).
Posted by Yuyutsu, Monday, 20 June 2022 11:38:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The trojan Horse has limped in !
Posted by Indyvidual, Tuesday, 21 June 2022 1:55:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ttbn,

"about a quarter (25%) of the votes were informal in some electorates"

Your right wing cry baby simply made that up, the electorate with the highest informal vote was Fowler with 10.52%. A simple check would have established that, relying on a lie to strengthen his argument, shows Collits lacks credibility. However its more than likely he didn't make that simple mistake, but it was YOU who put in the erroneous "quarter informal" lie.

I asked you for evidence, and you avoided the question, says something about YOU. I doubt you have any political experience what so ever, I have some, doing authorised scrutineering at many federal elections. After sorting the challengers, the informal's, few are completely blank or have some message written on them. The number one problem is people try to number the boxes but get it wrong, numbering one or only a few squares, double numbering, or indecipherable numbering. Just by the way,if there were three candidates and you numbered them 63, 75 and 99 that is a legal vote, you don't have to number them 1,2,3, so can A,B and C be legal, but not pictorially smiley face, neutral face and sad face. Then there is the question of numbers not in the square, is that legal. a "gollywog" vote where you golly in the ballot paper is definitely illegal, as is drawing gallows on the paper as well, it shows your intention, but not an ordered intention.
Posted by Paul1405, Tuesday, 21 June 2022 5:21:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Paul,
Pauline Hanson still retained her seat in the senate.
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/jun/17/pauline-hanson-retains-queensland-senate-seat-as-amanda-stoker-misses-out

When they indoctrinate they young to think a certain way instead of teaching them to think for themselves;
When cancel culture censors opinions it doesn't like;
When forced immigration creates 2 camps of immigrants v's nationalists;
When preferential voting means its a 2 horse race between the majors
(passing the baton and forever shifting the goalposts);
When the younger generation aren't taught how to vote properly;
When both parties are bi-partisan on major issues and leave on scraps for everyone else;
And when everything is divisive and there's no foundation that unites us;

Then it means the systems rigged and not really much of a democracy at all.
- And its no wonder people don't take it seriously, both major parties are essentially the same.
Forever blaming each other, and consistently failing to deliver good policies that matter.
Posted by Armchair Critic, Tuesday, 21 June 2022 5:29:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Also, the more that the left opposes sensible initiatives from the right and keeps things hamstrung;
The more they can run the country into the ground and force people to move further to the left,
- towards bigger government and a welfare state.

This leaves no choice other than the right having to move further towards the left.
- I'm not whether the same works the opposite way.

Either way, it means the system can be weaponised in a way that is a 'race to the bottom'.
- This could be why with each successive election the bar is continually set lower.
Posted by Armchair Critic, Tuesday, 21 June 2022 5:47:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi AC,

I may not agree with the politics of "Horrible" Hanson, but she won her seat fair and square under the rules, just as did the Green's candidate and the others. BTW Hanson was fighting for 6th position, but the quirky voting system seen he finish 5th. I was pleased the intelligent extremist "Hard Boiled" Newman didn't get a look in, he would be far more dangerous than Hanson can ever be.

Yes, our Constitutional Fathers (they were all men), framed the voting system so the two major parties, actually it was framed later, of which they were all members, would come out on top. Although at the first federal election three states, NSW, Victoria and WA opted for a first past the post system, Queensland and SA used the preferential voting system and Tasmania used the Hare-Clark system. The first Federal election was held over two days 29th and 30th march 1901. It was based on the voting rules that applied in each state at the time, there certainly was no uniformity. The Commonwealth Electoral Act, the one we used today, didn't come into force until 1924, and was used for the first time at the 1925 general election. Before then the States were running their own federal elections.

I say bring back the Protectionist and Free Trade parties so we can once again have good if not stable government! Sir Edmund Barton and Sir Alfred Deakin were both Protectionist PM's and Sir George Reid; PM was a Free Trader. BTW they both called themselves liberal parties, and they were both gone by 1909.
Posted by Paul1405, Tuesday, 21 June 2022 6:07:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy