Australian Federal Election thread - 2010 edition.

[bobalot]

It's been a bad week for Labor, I doubt it will hold though. I'm hoping it's a bit like Mark Latham's run.

I would never forgive Australia if that fuckwit Tony Abbott got elected.

[weemadando]

Right now I am not sure that I have ever hated a politician as much as I hate Mark Latham. To throw every shred of any integrity you (and a once proud journalistic institution) had under a bus- and the get the bus to reverse over it was bad enough. But to encourage informal voting just because you disagree with how the two major parties are running their campaigns is a tragic mix or irresponsible, disrespectful and idiotic. Made all the worse by the fact that he had been interviewing minor party figures who were most certainly NOT guilty of the offenses that he has charged the major parties with.

[adam_grif]

Australian Sex Party add is fairly amusing. It's depressing when the porn industry has better social policy than the major parties.

[Archaic`]

But to encourage informal voting just because you disagree with how the two major parties are running their campaigns is a tragic mix or irresponsible, disrespectful and idiotic.

Encouraging informal voting is also illegal, even if the AEC does seem to have decided to not bother prosecuting him. I suppose they figure that the fact it's Latham encouraging people to donkey vote might make people less inclined to lodge informal votes.

[weemadando]

No, he's encouraging people to lodge a blank ballot, not donkey vote. And like I said, when he had a decent interview with Bob Brown hidden amongst all of his self-serving bullshit was a travesty, because the sole reason for encouraging the informal vote was his own personal bitterness for how Labor and Liberal have conducted their campaigns. So encourage people to vote for minor parties or candidates. Encourage people to vote below the line. Encourage people to research all the other options aside from the two majors and see if there is another party out there that better matches their own ideologies. Don't just tell people to do an informal vote because the two major parties are both full of wankers who are still bright enough to expel a turd such as yourself.

The best response I've read to this is:

An informal vote is not a protest Mr Latham, it's a dereliction of your responsibilities.

[Stark]

Damn straight. You're either a part of the process or you're not, and if you're not you can shut the fuck up. Idiots who vote for the Pirate party or the KGB party or whatever at least have a voice.

[weemadando]

Once I verify the accuracy of this, I'm considering trying to start a campaign to get people to vote below the line in the Senate and then neatly print: "Fuck Mark Latham" in a margin so that the vote can still be counted.

Informal vote

One of the consequences of compulsory voting, and also the use of complex preferential voting, is that Australia has a high incidence of 'spoiled' ballot papers. In Australia these are known as 'informal' votes, as opposed to 'formal' votes that meet all the formality requirements to be included in the count. At the 2001 election, 4.8% of all ballot papers were deemed to be informal. Of these, 33.6% had been marked with only a first preferences, 19.9% had other forms of defective numbering and 12.4% had incorrectly used ticks and cross. This roughly means two-thirds of informal votes were due to problems caused by the complexity of preferential voting. Of the rest, 21.4% were blank ballot papers, people who you suspect would in other circumstances not have voted, while 6.3% had no vote marked but slogans or derogatory comments were written on the ballot paper. Another 6.5% were informal or other reasons, such as the voter being identified or slogans obscuring the voters preferences. There is a long history in Australia of voters writing derogatory remarks on ballot papers. This is allowed as long as the remarks do not identify the voter or obscure the voting squares.

[Stark]

That's what I learned in highschool. Outside the voting information, nothing on the ballot paper affects the vote.

[weemadando]

I'm pretty certain that it is correct that as long as there are no identifiers or marks on the ballot that obstruct or interfere with the reading of the votes then it's all good.

[Archaic`]

I'm pretty certain that it is correct that as long as there are no identifiers or marks on the ballot that obstruct or interfere with the reading of the votes then it's all good.

It is, but be careful on your wording. A former returning officer once explained to me that the part about "potentially identifying the voter" is generally interpreted quite broadly. Writing "Mark Latham should go fuck a donkey" would be fine, but if you wrote "I think Mark Latham should go fuck a donkey" you run the risk of an overzealous person discarding the vote as invalid.

[adam_grif]

Not sure if anybody posted this yet, but for those who aren't aware, this is a policy comparison for the ALP, Coalition and Greens.

[Vympel]

I should say that if it wasn't for the Green's idiotic policies on nuclear power I'd vote for them in a heartbeat.

[bobalot]

I should say that if it wasn't for the Green's idiotic policies on nuclear power I'd vote for them in a heartbeat.

Coupled with their retarded utopian fantasies about renewable energy, it becomes a real deal breaker.

[adam_grif]

All the local politicians were stopping by last week at the UTAS cafeteria. Everybody stopped listening as soon as they started their speech with "we acknowledge the traditional owners of the land..." The only person who seemed like a nice guy was Doctor something-or-other, a senior professor and greens candidate. If he comes back, I'll see if I can discuss nuclear power with him, but it's not like anything he does could change the party stance on it.

[mr friendly guy]

Considering all the other big parties haven't given much of a pronuclear agenda prefering to focus in on other things, I wouldn't have thought the Greens anti nuclear stance would be a deal breaker.

Note Tony Abbott gave token support to nuclear at the same time voting against a carbon tax which would have made it more competitive.

[GuppyShark]

As a recreational target shooter I can't vote Green. Eliminating my sport is one of their policies.

[adam_grif]

Considering all the other big parties haven't given much of a pronuclear agenda prefering to focus in on other things, I wouldn't have thought the Greens anti nuclear stance would be a deal breaker.

Note Tony Abbott gave token support to nuclear at the same time voting against a carbon tax which would have made it more competitive.

Have you read some of this shit? I don't think this issue alone is a deal-breaker, but they're clearly insane.

there is a strong link between the mining and export of uranium and nuclear weapons proliferation.

Yes, in the sense that in order to build uranium fission weapons, you must first have mined the uranium from somewhere.

nuclear power is not a safe, clean, timely, economic or practical solution to reducing global greenhouse gas emissions.

Outright bullshit.

My favorite bit is:

Australia's reliance on the US nuclear weapons 'umbrella' lends our bases, ports and infrastructure to the US nuclear war fighting apparatus.

Yeah, we have to put a stop to all those goddamn nuclear wars America keeps fighting. Say no to the US nuclear war fighting apparatus!

17. close the OPAL nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights.

[Stofsk]

Greens being against nuclear power irritates me. But then, so is Labor, so if it's a deal breaker for the Greens shouldn't it also be a deal breaker for Labor?

[adam_grif]

Already said it's no dealbreaker for me, but Labor policy is less severe, simply being opposed to nuclear power generation, without wanting to shut down OPAL and/or stop uranium mining + ban all nuclear warships and weapons from existing within Aus territory.

[mr friendly guy]

Have you read some of this shit? I don't think this issue alone is a deal-breaker, but they're clearly insane.

No. And yes it does seem they are wrong in certain issues. However its nice to see that Stofsk pretty much grasps my point, that being the other parties also are anti-nuclear eg ALP or give at best token support (eg Tony "we should have more nuclear reactors to combat climate change but I just killed a carbon tax which makes it competitive" Abbott), thus its hard for me to see this issue by itself as a deal breaker. I was of course refering generally to the Green's policy with some emphasis on bobalot's statement that the nuclear issue is one of the two issues which make voting for the Greens a "deal breaker" for him.

At the end of the day the Greens have more in common with my views than either major party which is why I will be preferencing them higher up on the list. As to which party I will put first, can't you see on my sig.

[Stofsk]

Already said it's no dealbreaker for me,

I wasn't actually talking to you, but to the two guys who said that it was a deal breaker for them.

[pj1351]

Well, even in the unlikely event that Gillard loses the election, at least she can look forward to a career as a stage magician.

[Stark]

As a recreational target shooter I can't vote Green. Eliminating my sport is one of their policies.

Single issue (especially single USELESS issue) voting is fucking retarded.

[LionElJonson]

I, personally, will be voting for the Liberal Party. This should surprise no-one.

[Stark]

Is that because you're a racist, homophobic liar? Do you fear THE BOATS?

Labor might be dumb but at least they aren't malicious.