Australian Federal Election thread - 2010 edition.

[Twoyboy]

Except that if a vote for Green is seen as being effectively a vote for Labor, people who don't want to vote either Labor or Liberal will not vote or preference the Greens either if they can avoid it. Especially now that a lot more people are savvy to how you can exhaust your preferences without being declared an invalid vote.

Don't be surprised if you see some Independents get in. There's even a decent chance for the Democrats to have a bit of a rebirth here if they can place canditates in enough seats and get their policy message out.

Got news for you, in >90% of electorates, every vote is eventually for Labor, Liberal or a donkey vote. So it kinda will come down to which one you want. And the only way to vote Green but donkey on the ALP/Lib bit is to do your own preferences. But if you do your own preferences, then you don't give a shit who the Greens gave their preferences to anyway.

The Greens don't do How to Vote Cards and if you vote Green you should vote beneath the line.

That pretty much sums it up.

One tip for voting below the line: if you think that seventy gazillion, or how ever many candidates there are for you to number is too much for you to reliably number correctly, if you vote both above and below the line, your below the line vote gets preference, but if it turns out to be invalid because you were being dyslexic or something, then you'll still be represented by your above the line vote.

Are you sure? Is there a ref for this, because I've always been told if you mark both above and below the line its informal immediately?

[Stofsk]

The ABC has a FAQ on voting and the election, and I read that bit about filling out the ballot paper for the Senate there.

[weemadando]

What happens if I vote both above and below the line?

A below the line takes precedence over an above the line vote. However, an advantage of voting above and below the line is that if your below the line vote works out to be informal, then your above the line vote will stand.

It seems this would be Senate only though... At least how I read it.

[xt828]

Well, how many candidates for the Lower House do you normally have, anyway? My seat has had 3-5 in the elections I've voted in, and if you struggle to preference them correctly I don't think you're cut out for preferencing. It's the Senate spots, with their eleeventy-bazillion candidates, which can cause trouble remembering what number you're up to. It's always funny hearing the first-timers unfolding the Senate paper and making noises of amazement at how big it is.

[Lusankya]

What happens if I vote both above and below the line?

A below the line takes precedence over an above the line vote. However, an advantage of voting above and below the line is that if your below the line vote works out to be informal, then your above the line vote will stand.

It seems this would be Senate only though... At least how I read it.

Well, obviously. I mean, since when does the Lower House have above the line voting?

[GuppyShark]

Well, how many candidates for the Lower House do you normally have, anyway? My seat has had 3-5 in the elections I've voted in, and if you struggle to preference them correctly I don't think you're cut out for preferencing.

Nice one.

[weemadando]

Well, how many candidates for the Lower House do you normally have, anyway? My seat has had 3-5 in the elections I've voted in, and if you struggle to preference them correctly I don't think you're cut out for preferencing. It's the Senate spots, with their eleeventy-bazillion candidates, which can cause trouble remembering what number you're up to. It's always funny hearing the first-timers unfolding the Senate paper and making noises of amazement at how big it is.

Yeah yeah yeah. It was before 7am...

Then again I've often had 8-11 on my Lower House sheets.

[mr friendly guy]

The Election campaign is starting up with some adds.

I find this one particularly amusing. The Abbott family.

[adam_grif]

I heard that the Greens wanted to shut down OPAL? Is that true? If so, why?

[tim31]

Oh god, were you born in a tent?? They're ideologically opposed to nuclear power generation in Australia for the two reasons: fear of weapons development, and mining in areas that are subject to National Park status or Native Title claim.

[adam_grif]

OPAL is a research reactor, and it isn't designed for commercial power production. Generating materials for nuclear medicine is one of it's primary functions, the others being experimentation and manufacture of certain materials needed for semiconductor devices.

If the greens want to shut down OPAL simply because it's nuclear, they're fucking idiots.

[tim31]

I'm not disagreeing with you on that, but christ, it should have been obvious.

[adam_grif]

I'm not disagreeing with you on that, but christ, it should have been obvious.

My inquiry is aimed at why they want to shut down something providing vital medical supplies, or more specifically, how they are justifying it. At this stage it's like they aren't against commercial nuclear power, they're against fission.

[Twoyboy]

The Election campaign is starting up with some adds.

Actually, the best one so far is Abbott's real ad. The reason why is because in the background they have a signed contract with his bullet points on it. Why? Because he admitted everything he says which isn't a signed official policy can't be believed. So they put the signed policy in the fucking ad! Hilarious!

If the greens want to shut down OPAL simply because it's nuclear, they're fucking idiots.

You sound surprised, maybe even shocked... the Greens opposition to all things nuclear has never been based on science, only on public hysteria.

[tim31]

Of course they're opposed to fission Adam... To these people, the civil research does not justify the risk of it being perverted into a weapon. This is a core issue for Greens, and always has been.

[Stofsk]

Unfortunately, opposition to nuclear power is pretty much entrenched in the Green and Labor parties, for different reasons. I don't see it changing anytime soon.

[Uraniun235]

If the Greens see it as a safety risk, what's the Labor rationale for opposing nuclear?

[Stofsk]

If the Greens see it as a safety risk, what's the Labor rationale for opposing nuclear?

Coal industry unions don't want competitors because then coal workers will be out of the job.

[adam_grif]

If the Greens see it as a safety risk, what's the Labor rationale for opposing nuclear?

Coal industry unions don't want competitors because then coal workers will be out of the job.

Nono, what is the reason they give to the public?

[Stark]

All they have to do is pay for giant ads saying ECONOMY DESTROYED OHNOEZ and get the big-business editors online and its case closed.

[JointStrikeFighter]

[weemadando]

Stay classy Australia First...

[pj1351]

Stay classy Australia First...

If anyone's stupid enough to vote for Family First, they're probably stupid enough for fall for this again, too.

[Lusankya]

So I just found out three things today:

Firstly, Hey, Hey it's Saturday is now back on the air. Except it's on Wednesday, and they didn't bother changing the name, so Australia sounds even stupider than it did before.

Secondly, Tony Abbott tried to, as part of his election campaign, copy Kevin Rudd's "Go on Rove and attract the youth vote" stunt and go on Hey, Hey so he can look all hip or something. Look, he even hugged Plucka:



I can only assume that this didn't work as well as Kevin Rudd's schtick, because while Rove is all hip and modern, Hey, Hey just brings back horrible memories of the '80s and happy pants and puppets with mullets.

Which, combined with the fact that I learnt that we are now well and truly suck at cricket again (all out for 88, yay!), makes me conclude that Australia has now officially returned to the 1980s. Yay?

[atg]

I can only assume that this didn't work as well as Kevin Rudd's schtick

Apparently Abbott was booed when he came out.