Australians, who are you voting for?

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-10-04 08:30am

The election is in a few days. Many people have already decided.

I personally am most probably voting Labour or the Greens. My local seat has very few decent people, and these guys looked the best.

For those of you who don't know who is running in your local seat, look here.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-10-04 08:37am

Mark Latham. A vote for Howard is a vote for George W Bush. And who the fuck would want to vote for a guy who follows and still supports a proven liar, clown, and war mongering unilateralist shithead?

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2004-10-04 08:39am

I would sooner vote for Hanson over the Greens frankly. One only has to read their policies on Nuclear Fusion and Fission to want to throw up.

I'm voting for Lathem. I can't stand having the Liberals back in power for another term.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-10-04 08:47am

I honestly don't know. I might just give it to the Democrats, because they seem desperate to get some votes. Probably put Libs as 2nd, or put them 1st and the Democrats 2nd. Greens at the very bottom. Or... Family First at the very bottom.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-10-04 09:44am

What would you say if I told you the Commonwealth is under the influence of a Dark Lord of the Sith?

"Impossible. The Mediawatch would have been aware of it."

The Dark Side of the Force has clouded their vision, my friend.

Many Bothan spies were drugged to give us this information. Join with us, and together we can destroy the Sith!

Sorry for those I PMed with this joke.

Archaic` · Post by **Archaic`** » 2004-10-04 12:02pm

Overseas, thus able to get away without voting if I so choose. Yay!

If I had to vote.....sadly, it'd have to be Howard. Hate the man, hate the social conservatism, but I can't stand any of the minor parties (The Dems are as bad as the Greens when it comes to nuclear power), and Latham just inspires no confidence in me whatsoever. It's true that Howard sucks up to Bush like Monica to Clinton, but I'd hardly be surprised if he'd do that regardless of who held Bush's position.

Mr Flibble · Post by **Mr Flibble** » 2004-10-04 06:32pm

As i can't stand either of the major parties or most of the minor parties, i am voting simply on the fact that I want Howard gone, which means I will be voting for Kate Ellis in my electorate Lbor getting my primary vote, I am taking no chances on this, Howard has to go, family first will be last, unless there are more loony parties in my elctorate. For the senate however I am voting Progressive Alliance, that is mostly because I know Meg, I doubt she will keep her seat though.

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-10-04 10:02pm

Kate Ellis is the hot one, right? Though, you can't live that far from me, Mr Flibble. I'm in Boothby, but I'm right near the boundary with Adelaide.

I'm voting liberal. I don't mind Howard and Mike Rann destroyed any hope I ever had of voting Labor. Man I hate that guy! Any time I hear him talk it's like he's talking to a bunch of preschoolers. And he only got in because of Motorola. Besides, the Liberals are the only ones who've made an attempt to contact me. I haven't recieved any junk mail from any of the other parties.

On a more serious note, I believe that a free trade agreement with China (which I approve of very much) is much more likely under a Liberal Government than under a Labor Government.

And yes, I'm putting family first and the greens down the bottom... possibl FF above the greens.

pellaeons_scion · Post by **pellaeons_scion** » 2004-10-04 10:57pm

For me it will have to be the labor candidate..whatever his name is. I cannot stand the thought of voting liberal, especially in regards to Howard. That and the other candidates in my area looked about as open-minded and progressive as luddites. Because Im in a rural location the choices are even lamer!

Id generally vote democrats, except they now have almost zero credibility.

And Family First can go suck a dog turd.

Meh, they all suck. Nothing is outstanding about any of them, and we are still stuck mainly with a two-party preferential system...bleh.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-10-05 01:59am

Has anyone seen the Christian Democrat ads in the paper?

"One woman one man. A child could tell you what marriage is. But the Greens need help."

Fuck, I hope they crash and burn.

I'd rather vote One Nation.

Demandred · Post by **Demandred** » 2004-10-05 03:10am

Howard needs to go, giving Greens a few seats wouldn't be bad but I wouldn't want them running this place. Then again I might give it to Labor because I think Australia needs a change and needs to stop being American arse kissers, could wind up giving a good lot of trouble.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-10-05 03:23am

Woah... And here I thought Canadian politics were fucked up.

Xon · Post by **Xon** » 2004-10-05 06:38am

Ma Deuce wrote:Woah... And here I thought Canadian politics were fucked up.

In general, Australians are fairly apathetic, its only in the last week or so before the polls that it really changes. Expect a smattering more australian oriented posts before it drops back down to its normal once in a blue moon occurance.

Also the last 5 days before the elections proper are the hottest campainging days for any party.

Only 4 more days to Australian's flip the coin for which party they want froming government! (9th october is the election date)

Post by **weemadando** » 2004-10-05 08:10am

OK. Lets start with who I'm NOT voting for:

Citizens Electoral Council - Right wing whack-jobs who make even the most deranged conspiracy nuts appear well and truly grounded.

Family First - Right wing Christian whack-jobs who make the Spanish Inquisition appear soft on sexual relations out of wedlock.

Resistance/Socialist Alliance - Wannabe revolutionaries born from parents on six figure salaries. They'll grow out of it pretty fast when they run out of money for drugs and need to get a job.

Legalise Marijuana - I can get dope if I really want it, the cops don't really bother much and the Greens are stealing their thunder with a much more generalist approach to drug legalisation

One Nation - Won't they just fucking shut up and die already?

Tasmania First - Its like One Nation, but someone seems to have forgotten to tell these morons that they are about 150 years late for the Eureka Stockade. And in the wrong state too.

The Greens - Live in Tassie and you'll have one of two opinions on them: a) You love them (in this case you must be a happy middle-class person in a white collar job or from a white-collar family who is utterly insulated from the realities of life) b) You hate them because they royally fuck up every economic possibility with their inane drivel and protests and action groups and fucking tree-hugging, tree-spiking, tree-sitting antics, then 5 years later go on and on endlessly about how we are doing exactly what they wanted in the first place and are now opposed to it.

The Democrats - If they even SURVIVE this election they are still playing "stab everyone in the back and try and be party leader at the expense of all morals and values". Oh, yeah and they decided that in Tassie at least they are giving preferences to *drum roll* FAMILY FIRST. Which of course makes sense, the very-liberal, left-wing sympathising, voice of independant thought in the parliament is giving their preferences to Right Wing Fundamentalists. MmmHmmmm.

Liberal - Ah yes, the not-too conservative, not-too christian, not-too right-wing. Since when have these reactionaries been moderating their policies? Medicare comeback, bulk-billing incentives, tough stance on terror and refugees? I smell someone gunning for the under-educated, under-informed and over-stocked in the flannelette shirt department vote. Its no secret that Little John is trying to pull voters away from Labor, because its about the only party that they can pull them away from, the Democrats lost most of their votes to the Liberals last election and every other parties power-base is too bug-fuck crazy to vote for anyone else. Sure everyone says that a vote for Little John is a vote for Bush, so everyone knows that, everyone says he's too old for the job, but when compared to the average age for national leaders he's pretty much on target. The main problem is that he just loves the US too much for Australias good. Oh well.

Labor - Too much talk. Too much fluff. Too much Mark bloody Latham. Stop parading him about, he's a dickhead. I'd probably be happier to have a war-mongering dyslexic redneck running the show than him. But thankfully I don't have to make that choice, the Labour caucaus already did. There's far too much pandering going on with the Labor parties policies. Pandering to all sides and with the net result of our economy going to be stonkingly shafted by a bunch of promises that they are going to be guilted into keeping. The local labour House of Reps person down here is atleast a respectable fellow, so its quite possible that he'll get my vote, except I saw one of his TV ads before and quite frankly felt that mentioning Mark bloody Latham and his Ladder of motherfucking Opportunity 15 fucking times in one commercial was just pissing me off. So sorry Duncan, but you really need to redeem yourself in my books.

Various independants - If I had a clue of any of their policies other than "we disagree with x/y/z" then I'd tell you...

So who the fuck am I going to vote for? Probably Labour merely because Duncan Kerr is actually a fucking smart politician even if his advertising is lowest common denominator material. For the Senate? NOT THE MOTHERFUCKING GREENS AND MOST DEFINATELY NOT CHRISTINE FUCKING MILNE. Possibly see what independants are in with a run for the Senate, especially with Brian Harradine retiring.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-10-05 08:13am

weemadando wrote:Possibly see what independants are in with a run for the Senate, especially with Brian Harradine retiring.

Brian Harradine's retiring?

Finally. Fundy wackjob...

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2004-10-05 08:16am

Gandalf wrote:
weemadando wrote:Possibly see what independants are in with a run for the Senate, especially with Brian Harradine retiring.
Brian Harradine's retiring?

Finally. Fundy wackjob...

Indeed. Though you have to admire him. He positioned himself in a place to get an amazing amount of resources for Tas, despite its isolation and relativly tiny size in the way of things.

Post by **weemadando** » 2004-10-05 08:21am

Chris OFarrell wrote:
Gandalf wrote:
Finally. Fundy wackjob...
Indeed. Though you have to admire him. He positioned himself in a place to get an amazing amount of resources for Tas, despite its isolation and relativly tiny size in the way of things.

Hear hear. Though he was a Conservative Christian Git, he shall be missed by those of us to whom he brought a degree of economic and political stability.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-10-05 09:13am

weemadando wrote:The Democrats - If they even SURVIVE this election they are still playing "stab everyone in the back and try and be party leader at the expense of all morals and values". Oh, yeah and they decided that in Tassie at least they are giving preferences to *drum roll* FAMILY FIRST. Which of course makes sense, the very-liberal, left-wing sympathising, voice of independant thought in the parliament is giving their preferences to Right Wing Fundamentalists. MmmHmmmm.

Andrew Bartlett has made the deal with Family First, and I believe it's national. Of course, I think his hand was forced thanks to the FUCKING GREENS STABBING HIM IN THE BACK. The Greens decided to give their preferences to Labor, motherfuckers. So what does the brilliant Bartlett do? Not much, it seems.

Lord of the Farce · Post by **Lord of the Farce** » 2004-10-05 09:53am

Fellow Australians, give me a nice little 21st birthday present (10th October, 2004) by helping me kick Family First (and Democrats as well, apparently) asses.

... And while you're at it, giving the Greens a proverbial kick in the nuts wouldn't hurt (me, at least

).

Frankly, as long as the fucknut groups are stomped down like ant hills, I don't care that much whether it's ALP or the Libs who gets elected, as long as neither party win by a big enough margin that they can flout their victory at the expense of the people.[/rant]

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-10-05 11:14am

Am I the only one voting liberal here? I've actually developed a list of reasons that I'm voting for them rather than just putting them at the top because I've eliminated everyone else.

This is what I figure:

John Howard plans to change youth allowance, making it more accessable. This includes making it available to apprentices, which will encourage people to seek work in technical fields. To quote him, "I am looking forward to the day when a skilled technical background is as highly looked upon in Australia as a university degree." This is fantastic because at the moment we have heaps of people wasting the government's resources going to university and doing arts degrees or the like with no thought for what they're going into career-wise. Most of the time people either drop out because they realise that university wasn't meant for them and they only entered in the first place because of societal pressures or they spend 3 years at uni and at the end of it they have nothing to show other than a piece of paper to stick on the wall and a few letters after their name.

Trade. We currently have a free trade deal with the US sitting on the table, which guaranteed won't go through parliament if Labor gets into power. There are several parts of the deal that are looked upon disfavourably by the opponents of this bill, namely beef being included in incremental stages and sugar being excluded full stop. I have no problem with beef being included in incremental stages: It'll get there eventually, and 18 years isn't so long in the scheme of things. And sugar, well I see no reason that America's propped-up sugar industry shoud suffer just because our unsustainable, propped up sugar industry wants a taste of the sugar market. For one thing, we shouldn't be growing high water-volume crops along the Murray when we could be using it for more important things like making sure that the water actually reaches the sea and allowing the people of Adelaide to have drinkable water more than 4 days in every 5. In any case, the sugar industry is no worse off under the free trade agreement than any other industry in Australia. Besides, the US has every right to protect those industries that it believes to be important (or those it believes gives the establishment more votes, I guess. After all, the free trade agreement contains clauses that protect Australia's media, telecommunications, transport and defence industries. The Liberals are also looking to secure more free trade deals, including one with the People's Republic of China, and there's no way that a Labor government would try to make that, because "Aaah! It will cost Australian jobs!" Well, sure it may cost us in some areas in the short term, but jobs will be reallocated and we'll be back to where we were and in the meantime we'll be selling more produce to the world's fastest-growing economy and recieving cheaper goods from them in return.

Continuing on with Asia and the Pacific. SInce Howard came into power, Australia has been a much more proactive force in the Asiapacific region. Thanks to Howard, an Australian is now the chairman of the Pacific forum - a move that was resented at the time and opposed by opposition leaders, but is now well accepted by the pacific nations and has reinforced our role as a leading nation in the pacific. One thing that I admire about Howard is that he is unapologetic about his culture. While he's content to be polite to our neighbours, he doesn't attempt to be Asian. I think they respect the fact that he doesn't pretend to be what he's not. It's all very well to try to be a part of asia, but with out colonial history we're really not much more than a british skin graft on a hot, dry island that just happens to be stuck a very short distance south of Asia. Certainly with current demographic trends this will probably change in the next century, but it's not the next century and historically and culturally we still have much more in common with the western world than with asia. This does not mean that we can't be on good terms with Asian nations, but it also means that any attempt to try and actually be Asian at the present point in time is two-faced and demeaning to the people who live there. John Howard understands that, and as I said, I respect it.

Ah. I almost forgot Iraq. First of all, I want to make my point clear. I did not support the invasion of Iraq. I did not support Australia's initial involvement in the invasion of Iraq. I thought from the beginning that WMD was a load of claptrap and that even if Saddam had WMD, it would not be much of a threat to us unless we invaded Iraq. I am of the belief that you don't become a successful ruthless dictator without being smart, and since Saddam is obviously not stupid, he would not be such an imbecile as to get involved with a direct attack on America using WMD. An attack occured that didn't even involve him and look what happened. Anyway, despite my views on the initial involvement in the war, I believe that now we've committed our troops then it is our responsibility to do whatever we can to clean up the shit there until it's over. Latham's policy is to withdraw our troops at the earliest possible convenience, wheras Howard isa pretty sure to stick in there until our troops are no longer needed. One thing we might want to remember now, though is that no Australians have died as a consequence of our involvement in the war in Iraq. Australians have died as a consequence of the war in Iraq, but they are people such as journalists who arguably would have been in exactly the same place had Australia not taken an active role.

And then there's the GST. "But didn't Howard introduce the GST?" I hear you wailing. Yes, he did, but thanks to our [ironic tone]friends[/ironic tone] the Democrats, the GST can only be changed when one party controls all the states and federal parliament... guess what will happen if Labor gets voted in! Do you trust them not to dick around with the tax system? The only reason it's so screwed up now is becuase of the fucking Democrats. They bitched and moaned and made it more complex than it had to be and tried to make out that it was some big increase in taxation when in reality it was replacing existing sales taxes, so some items actually ended up cheaper under the GST. Anyway, enough Democrats ranting. I don't particularly feel like having Labor or anyone for that matter dick around with the GST. Do you?

Anyway, that's my stance on why I'm voting Liberal, not because I don't want someone else getting into power, but because I want the Liberals to stay in power. It actually feels quite liberating to be voting for positive, rather than negative reasons. I kinda wish I was in a margnial seat so I could feel that my vote is more than just a formality.

I am kinda glad my sister can't vote yet. She's a member of the Socialist Alliance. *shudder*

Post by **weemadando** » 2004-10-05 09:28pm

Well Liberal certainly gets my "party" vote, but locally their candidates are complete fucking morons. Thus my vote will be going to Duncan Kerr, the Labor candidate for reasons of mental ineptitude on the part of the opposition.

Lord of the Farce · Post by **Lord of the Farce** » 2004-10-06 12:23am

Just got the "How to Vote Liberal in Melbourne Ports" sheet. Referencing the resource linked in the opening post (thanks Gandalf), it looks like I'd have to make my own "LotF's How to Vote" card.

Now I just have to decide who's worst: Family First Party or Citizens Electoral Council...

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-10-06 04:18am

Lusankya wrote:Am I the only one voting liberal here?

No, I will be as well. I was merely toying with the idea of voting Democrat. Their preference deal with Family First is the proverbial nail in the coffin for me.

Mr Flibble · Post by **Mr Flibble** » 2004-10-06 04:46am

I am voting labor for one simple reason, I am sick of Howard's constant copying of Bush, anyone who steals policy ideas (I am thinking the tightening laws against gay marriage and Iraq war) from Bush is not the sort of person I want as leader. Family first of course will go down the bottom, as will the greens and democrats, dems for their shafting of Meg Lees, who incidently gets my senate vote.

Lusankya, yeah Kate Ellis is the hot one.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2004-10-06 04:59pm

Howard must lose. Beyond that I'm not fussed; I'd vote for the Family First National Nazi party before I'd vote for Howard. Ironically, I finally met a liberal voter, and he based his choice entirely on those little 'keep interest rates down' plaques Howards always got up on his press conferences and shit. I particularly liked where he backed that statement up with evidence...