Australian election thread

[mr friendly guy]

Because we have so many Australians on this board... yeah ok.

Any way I thought it would be a great way to show the wackiness going on in our politics to the other members, and since the election is in a bit more than 2 weeks the thread likely won't outstay its welcome. Ok, if someone wants to post serious policy things, I suppose that should be covered in the thread title as well.

Its been a strange ride.
We have One Nation our resident right wing bigoted party shocked by scandal. What a surprise. A party which slams others for "foreign influence" wanting to take money from the US NRA. Yes that NRA. They were exposed by undercover Al Jazeera operative. Along the way we see conspiracy theories that someone orchestrated the Port Arthur massacre in the 90s as a pretext to take guns off us.
linky

Why should anyone be surprised? One Nation said the same thing in the Queensland parliament in the late 90s.

It gets better. It turns out somehow channel 9 got a hold of unused footage from the Al Jazeera sting, footage which even Al Jazeera didn't want to use. Footage of One Nation's politician Steve Dickson at a strip club. Where he turns out to be a misogynist, and he is not a misogynist because he turned up to a strip club, he is a misogynist because of how he behaved and what he said after he entered. My god, totally didn't see right wing candidates turn out to be both racist and misogynist. How could I miss that?
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/one-nation- ... ub-footage

Our PM had a big confrontation after making a nice speech about the Christchurch killings, when a muslim television host confronted him over how he previously wanted to milk anti islam sentiment to help the Liberals win. You know, the party that milked anti refugee sentiment.
linky

But now I want to go and talk about snowflakes. Namely right wing ones.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal ... 51jbz.html

You see our former PM, Tony "mad dog" Abbott, you remember the guy who threatened to shirtfront Vladimir Putin (pro tip, if you're going to use an English word, you might want to use one not confine to Australia, since the Russians were trying to figure out what shirtfront means. Shirtfront is a term in certain sports where you legally bump the opposing player from the front, think some AFL matches). Yes, Abbott the guy who didn't hesitate to ally with misogynists against Julia Gillard now complaining because people put nasty pictures of him in his electorate. Pictures with him with the word PELL across the forehead. Yes I know right. How dare they put the name of a convicted child rapist on his forehead. Just because Abbott supports him even after the guilty verdict, yeah totally unfair right? My irony metre broke more times than listening to Alanis Morisette sing Ironic.

Oh, and the government promises us that holy grail. Tax cuts. What's the catch you ask? Why it kicks in in 2022 or something. Meaning they would not only have to win this election, but the next one as well. Hmm. Who to vote for. A bunch of backstabbers, vs a bunch of backstabbers who are also bigoted. Tough decision here.

[Elheru Aran]

A quick note of clarity for anybody not familiar with Aussie politics: paradoxically the Liberal Party there is politically right wing, in approximately the same position as the Republican Party in the USA. I’m not sure what their equivalent of the Democrats is, perhaps the Green Party. One Nation is pretty much the ultra racist Tea Party doing its own thing. If I got anything wrong do let me know...

[The Romulan Republic]

This is part of why I find it hard to get worked up over "conventional" political corruption or deceit any more. Because it usually IS a choice between sleazes, and sleazes who are also bigoted. And as shitty as that choice might be... well, one of them wants to create an authoritarian state to abuse women and kill minorities as their central raison d'etre. The other one doesn't. Which makes it pretty simple.

[mr friendly guy]

A quick note of clarity for anybody not familiar with Aussie politics: paradoxically the Liberal Party there is politically right wing, in approximately the same position as the Republican Party in the USA. I’m not sure what their equivalent of the Democrats is, perhaps the Green Party. One Nation is pretty much the ultra racist Tea Party doing its own thing. If I got anything wrong do let me know...

Liberals are socially conservative and economically liberal. So they tend to favour less welfare and more global trade and less protectionism. Their allies the nationals support the rural regions and are socially conservative and less economically liberal.

The other major party the labor party has a mix of left and right factions are are generally pro worker. As a general rule they tend to be more socially liberal and economic mic conservative, eg they are more likely to support welfare.

The Greens are leftist, pro environment, socially liberal.

One nation is a right wing party who now want to attack Muslims. In the 90s it was Asians, but since their fears about Asian immigration never materialised and our top trading partners are Asian nations, I guess it's more profitable metaphorically speaking to hold an anti Islam position.

There are other minor parties, but I am unsure how significant they are.

[GuppyShark]

This week has seen many candidates step down / be disavowed by their parties for their posts on social media:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-03/ ... s/11074730

They're still on ballets, and they are mostly underdog candidates, but it's revealing, hilarious, and massively damaging to the parties involved (mostly the right).

[mr friendly guy]

Yep. It's amusing and sad what shitstains we have as candidates. One who makes rape jokes, one who thinks women who aren't as anti Islam as her should be made to undergo FGM, throw in a pinch of homophobia and you have the joke this election has become.

[mr friendly guy]

More candidates bite the dust before the election.

Lets start with a liberal candidate who sounds kind of like a rape apologist.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-09/ ... s/11099164

The Liberal candidate for the Melbourne seat of Scullin, Gurpal Singh, has resigned over a social media post in which he criticised a Punjabi woman who accused her husband of rape and abuse.

A Victorian Liberal spokesman has told the ABC that the decision was based on new information that has come to light.

"Mr Gurpal Singh has been asked to resign as the candidate for Scullin," the spokesman said.

"Mr Singh sincerely apologises for his previous comments and has tendered his resignation."

In comments he made in response to an SBS Punjabi article published in May last year, Mr Singh reportedly dismissed a woman who detailed her experience of being raped by her husband.

Mr Singh commented that the husband was the "real victim".

And the United Palmer party had a candidate let go after he believed 9/11 was an inside job.

https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election ... 51lpa.html

United Australia Party leader Clive Palmer has been forced to sack a candidate who outed himself as a September 11 conspiracy theorist, claiming the terrorist attacks were the work of "globalist forces", which might include layers of the United States government.

Where do we get these dumbfucks from? I mean the election is literally 9 days away when they sacked these losers.

[Tribble]

Just read this thread... what is it with that election? To borrow from SFDebris, are the only other options a guy with a hump ringing a bell, and the other guy who keeps taking off his pants? I mean really, I thought our election last year was bad...

[Gandalf]

On the upside, Shorten is shaping up to be the best Labor leader since Gillard.

I guess should ScoMo lose, Dutton will be leading the LNP by year's end.

[mr friendly guy]

Well with the election coming Saturday, more sheenanigans.

https://www.news.com.au/national/federa ... 600f12d029

The PM Scott Morrison dodged a question whether he believes "gays go to hell." Afterwards he ahem clarified when he said no they don't. Obviously in his mind he was thinking gays, as in happy people, so of course they don't go to hell. I was being facetious with that last statement in case it wasn't clear.

What's your belief, do gay people go to hell?" one reporter asked the PM.

Mr Morrison didn't directly answer the question, instead saying: "I support the law of the country and I always don't mix my religion with politics and my faith with politics.”

But that claim is at odds with his record.

Mr Morrison abstained from voting in parliament to pass same-sex marriage legislation, even though his electorate voted in favour of it during the post plebiscite.

"It's always been something that's informed how I live my life, and how I seek to care for and support others," he said of his faith.

"I talked about my mum on the weekend. I always saw in my mum a woman of quiet, decent faith, who translated that into action in her love and care for others. And that's the faith that I've been taught."

Another candidate has to step down after claiming the Port Arthur massacre was a conspiracy. This time from a Greens candidate.

[Gandalf]

This is one of the weirdest elections I've seen in this country. Thankfully only a few days to go.

[Alkaloid]

Bob Hawke has just died.

I have no idea how this effects a labor campain based on the achievements of governments past but fuck, it shook me.

Vale. Any boss who fires anyone for not turning up to work tomorrow is a bum!

[Alkaloid]

Bob Hawke has just died.

I have no idea how this effects a labor campain based on the achievements of governments past but fuck, it shook me.

Vale. Any boss who fires anyone for not turning up to work tomorrow is a bum!

[Gandalf]

Watching Morrison try to eulogise Hawke without praising his politics is brilliant.

Any boss who fires anyone for not turning up to work tomorrow is a bum!

[mr friendly guy]

So researching the candidates in my electorate. One has a facebook page as website ( which beats some of the other my best friend had in his electorate who can't be bothered with even a website). One is from Clive Palmer's party, and here is their policy for the country.

https://www.unitedaustraliaparty.org.au ... al_policy/

United Australia Party stands for and is committed in its efforts and vision to carry out the following functions:
Party Officials should not be Lobbyists, thereby taking a strong position on Paid Political Lobbyists, saving tax payers dollars and introducing Fair Policies

Revising the current Australian Government’s Refugee Policy to ensure Australia is protected and refugees are given opportunities for a better future and lifestyle

Creating Mineral Wealth to continuously contribute to the welfare of the Australian community. This will be achieved by utilising mineral resources from Queensland and Western Australia, and incentives from the Commonwealth of Australia to establish downstream processing in the States of Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia; and exporting products at a higher dollar value, thereby creating more revenue, jobs, tax and more facilities.

Establishing a System where people create wealth in various parts of the country and for that wealth to flow back to the Community that generates the wealth. For example, if a particular region creates wealth, a significant percentage of that wealth should go back to the region.

Yeah, that's all of it. These aren't policies, they are platitudes. Its like saying, I am going to fix problem x, such that I have a fair outcome for all concern.

I swear, I should have a party where I have a policy page consisting of Gerard Butler playing Leonidas shouting "Freedom." And yes, I got idea from an old debate with that idiot Enerwendie or whatever his name is, whose economic policy consists of freedom, so its bound to appeal to some idiots.

[The Romulan Republic]

I had just a Facebook page for my campaign site when I ran for council. Granted, it was just a municipal election and my staff consisted of me and my mum (neither of whom are techie people), and I still got some flak for it from voters. For a national election... make the effort, guys.

As to that platform... again, I had a more detailed platform than that for a municipal election. But let's break that down.

1st. Point: Decent, doesn't really need more elaboration, except to clarify whether they're talking about a ban on current lobbyists serving, former lobbyists serving, or officials leaving office and becoming lobbyists, or all of the above.

2nd. Point: Sounds nice. Vague enough to mean little. Sounds like they're trying to have it both ways: "We'll help refugees, but we'll also keep you safe from the scary brown people!" This is not a point where I tolerate waffling, as a rule.

3rd. Point: The most detailed. Some actual policy here, even if its a bit thin. Heavy exploitation of mineral resources can cause environmental damage, and this should be addressed. Its also building an economy reliant on an ultimately non-renewable resource.

4th. Point: Starts out sounding socialist in principle with no explanation of the mechanisms it will use to achieve this, then does an about face into provincialist pandering.

Jack shit on foreign policy, education, health care, non-immigration law enforcement, non-immigration civil rights issues, or the environment.

I'm thinking "Sounds like isolationist/capitalist Right-wingers trying to pose as Leftists/unifiers".

[mr friendly guy]

I had just a Facebook page for my campaign site when I ran for council. Granted, it was just a municipal election and my staff consisted of me and my mum (neither of whom are techie people), and I still got some flak for it from voters. For a national election... make the effort, guys.

As to that platform... again, I had a more detailed platform than that for a municipal election. But let's break that down.

1st. Point: Decent, doesn't really need more elaboration, except to clarify whether they're talking about a ban on current lobbyists serving, former lobbyists serving, or officials leaving office and becoming lobbyists, or all of the above.

2nd. Point: Sounds nice. Vague enough to mean little. Sounds like they're trying to have it both ways: "We'll help refugees, but we'll also keep you safe from the scary brown people!" This is not a point where I tolerate waffling, as a rule.

3rd. Point: The most detailed. Some actual policy here, even if its a bit thin. Heavy exploitation of mineral resources can cause environmental damage, and this should be addressed. Its also building an economy reliant on an ultimately non-renewable resource.

4th. Point: Starts out sounding socialist in principle with no explanation of the mechanisms it will use to achieve this, then does an about face into provincialist pandering.

Jack shit on foreign policy, education, health care, non-immigration law enforcement, non-immigration civil rights issues, or the environment.

I'm thinking "Sounds like isolationist/capitalist Right-wingers trying to pose as Leftists/unifiers".

I got that impression for point 2 when I read it. Its like saying I will have a policy which both sides will love.

For point 3, we already pretty much do exploitation of mineral resources, and the states that really benefited from the mining boom are Queensland and Western Australia. Its not really saying anything we don't already do except to add except sounding nice about downstream processing services, although I question why logistically we need to go to another state considering how large Australian states are. For example Queensland is several times larger than Germany and more than twice the size of Texas. Look at a map of Australia. What is south of us is Antartica, and our major trading partners are China, US, Japan and South Korea. China loves our resources. Queensland is also like in the country's north. Why would we bring it down to New South Wales and South Australia just to export it north again. Why can't you process it in the same state given the distance between states? Similar logic applies to Western Australia, since we would have to bring it quite eastwards to South Australia, and then export it again. Queensland and WA aren't landlocked, so they have ports to send those mineral wealth goodness out. Logistically it seems to make more sense to me, but I am not an expert at processing.

Now when you realise that the party's leader is a mining magnate, and has a history of opposing taxes on mining companies, hmmm, you got to wonder. Also the leader is an idiot (any intelligence he might have had in his younger days evaporated with age), who when a deal with a Chinese company went south, accused the company of executing its people. That's right folks, its not the Chinese government which executes people, their own companies can apparently do that too.

Point 4 actually the opposite of socialist actually. Generally you will redistribute from the wealthy states to subsidise the poorer states, whereas he is advocating the opposite.

This is one of the arguments going around on how to share the Goods and services tax revenue. The GST is a consumption tax by the Federal government. The states gave up some of their taxation powers in exchange for the Federal government instituting a GST. There is a big shitstorm between Western Australia (the current state I reside in) and the eastern states (New South Wales, Victoria etc) about how to carve up the GST. Generally in countries richer regions subsidise poorer ones, like in the US California subsidies red states.

WA continuously alleges that it doesn't get its fair share, although part of the dispute lies in how its collection is calculated apparently. The eastern states also bitch that when WA wasn't so good economically, the eastern states had to subsidise us. Hey don't look at me, my home states is South Australia, even though I haven't lived there since 92.

Now if you don't realise you're a poorer state being subsidised by the richer states, and still vote for this party, you really deserve what you get. Just like those Trump supporters who are now regretting it after believing Trump's statement that trade wars are easy to win.

[mr friendly guy]

Good god, it looks like Tony Abbott will likely lose his seat. Although its only 1% counted, the AEC are are predicting he is going to lose to an independent.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal ... 51oq4.html

For those who aren't Australian, here is John Oliver's take on Tony Abbott



Lets see.
Tried to ban an abortion drug because religion.
Homophobic bigot.
Climate change denier.
Thinks he can shirtfront Putin.
Oh, and he supports a convicted child sex abuser (who is religious naturally) and then complains when people linked him to said abuser in election imagery. Have I missed anything.

[The Romulan Republic]

Good riddance. The fall of a bigot is always cause for celebration.

[Gandalf]

Looks like the LNP can form majority.

Ugh.

[mr friendly guy]

In my mind it was between the backstabbers and the backstabbers who were also bigots. I find it poetic that Shorten who backstabbed Rudd will likely never be prime minister (unless he does a John Howard "triple bypass"). Rudd at least almost served a term, and if we add the time he served the second time round, it would most probably be a term.

I don't think One Nation got anything, nor did the United Australia party, although their preferences certainly helped the LNP.

Just for posterity, I voted third party, in this case the Greens. And before non Australians jump up and down about helping the LNP, our SUPERIOR electoral system means that preferences will likely go to one of the major parties. So of the two major parties, the ALP got my preferences. For those non Australians, imagine voting for Jill Stein in the US election, but if she doesn't come close, your second choice gets your vote, so it could still end for Hillary if you preferred her over Trump. Bonus points, you conscience is still relatively clear, since if you don't preference, your vote is disallowed, and if you do, it goes to the lesser evil anyway and you still get to say I didn't vote for them. This also incentivizes the lesser evil to shoehorn some policies from the third party.

Edit - another aspect of our system I didn't think was superior, until the events of recent years, is that we have compulsory voting. Failure to vote is punished by a fine. This incentivises the parties to be more moderate, because the majority of the people are not in the extremes of either camp. Since you already have to turn up to vote, you're most probably going to vote the people who more reflect your views, even if you would normally prefer not to turn up. Thus the parties try to capture the moderates.

Contrast to the US, where its incentivise to appeal to "the base," so you get more extreme policies to motivate the base to turn up and vote.

[The_Saint]

As an aside on the compulsory voting: due to everyone actually having to go to the polls and not being able to protest by staying home, we (Australia) get a lot of independents and minor parties (relative to similar political systems) because that's how people protest: by voting for random politicians outside the two major parties.

Though it seems to have been reduced over the last couple of election cycles.

[GuppyShark]

Compulsory voting may have a downside/be exploitable: https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election ... 51op4.html

TLDR: The conservatives won this seat on a sliver of a margin (currently 1.4k votes out of 88k, <1%) and there were also Chinese posters placed at the polling booths that appeared to be official directions saying "The correct way to vote is Vote 1 Liberal and then..." in the same colours and format as the independent non-partisan electoral body, in an electorate heavy with Chinese voters for whom English is not their first language.

This may be naivete or the rise of social media but I don't remember things like this happening before in our elections.

[Gandalf]

I don't see how that's as a compulsory voting issue.