Victorian by-elections

[red750]

By-elections held in Prahran and Werribee this weekend. The sitting Greens member in Prahran has conceded, handing the seat to the Libs. Labor has squandered a nearly 10% lead in Werribee. Count has not finished, but there is a difference of only 1% between Labor and Libs on a 2pp basis. There were 12 candidates contesting the seat.

[facthunter]

Not sure "squandered" is the right word". . There's a lot of factors to consider. . Nev

[spacesailor]

Like labour splitting Australia with the " voice " .

spacesailor

[facthunter]

For about the 5th time, space.  It was an Election PROMISE.AND the VOTE in Victoria nearly got over the line. Local issues would play the Major Part in the by election where the incumbents nearly always lose a bit. The changing demography in  Werribee could be a factor also Melbourne is growing too fast.   Nev

[spacesailor]

If only half the Labor supporters were offended.  Like me .

We're does it leave Labour .

spacesailor

[Marty_d]

Be offended by things that matter. Whether or not the Voice got up makes zero difference to your life.

[facthunter]

It's called LABOR. A really silly name in a modern context.  Social Democrats would be better.   Nev

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

4 hours ago, red750 said:

Labor and Libs on a 2pp basis

"2PP" - Does this help at all in an election? Even after looking it up on the AEC website, I still don't understand what practical use it's for.

[facthunter]

After distribution of preferences..   You can follow a "How to vote card " or do it your own way. IT can help keep out the one you don't want. Nev

[Marty_d]

Because I'm a helpful sort I'll assist you @Grumpy Old Nasho... just give the most conservative people the highest numbers, and the most progressive ones the smallest numbers. 

Does that help?

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

No, that doesn't help sorry.

 

I think it's to brainwash constituents into thinking there's only two parties that really matter in our elections, the ALP and the Coalition.

[facthunter]

The preferences apply to any candidate you CHOOSE.. By the way, your HERO, Trump sees all serving people as "Suckers & Losers" and has just whacked a 25% tariff on OUR steel and Aluminium.. AND WE have a positive trade balance with the USA. Nev

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

Trump sees all serving people as "Suckers & Losers"

If you are referring military serving people, then I for one, was a sucker and loser alright, but I can't go back and change things, all I can do is warn younger generations about the nazi concept of conscription. And not to vote for any govt that tries to bring it in again.

[Marty_d]

The Australian armed forces are a professional institution which don't want untrained conscripts.

It's bullying countries like Russia, led by your mate Donny's puppet master, who do conscription these days.

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

This is what I object to, the AEC giving special treatment to the major parties.

 

AEC

The term 'two party preferred' (TPP) refers to a distribution of preferences (votes) between the two major parties – the ALP and the Coalition (Liberal/National parties). This comparison is usually used to try to predict the possibilities of forming a government. It is a tool that examines the proportion of votes that will go to the major parties after all preferences have been taken into consideration.

 

[rgmwa]

I don't think it's special treatment. They're just recognising the reality that with two major parties taking most of the votes, a minority party or an independent is not going to have the numbers to form government. It's also just a prediction tool, not some kind of award to the major parties.

 

[spacesailor]

Do the "  other " parties get any preferences. 

If a major party failed to get more votes than a minor party , would that 'minor ' party,  take preferences .

spacesailor

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

1 hour ago, rgmwa said:

I don't think it's special treatment. They're just recognising the reality that with two major parties taking most of the votes, a minority party or an independent is not going to have the numbers to form government. It's also just a prediction tool, not some kind of award to the major parties.

 

I'd have to hear that from the AEC before I would tend to believe it. Singling out those two parties, the "ALP" and the "Coalition", is in essence, pre-empting, as well as anticipating one or the other will win. No party should get preferential treatment by the AEC in that sense IMO. It's there for all parties, independents, etc.

 

If the ALP and the Coalition always get the most votes, and that is the "reality", why not abandon voting and just let the ALP and the Coalition alternate every three (or four) years, to govern. That would cause a big outcry though, wouldn't it? But probably not from the rusted-on ALP and Coalition voters. I reckon the AEC is corrupt and helping to ensure the two major parties always get to rule Australia, and have tricks up their sleeve to make sure they do.

 

The award part of it is the money-for-votes public funding, $20,000,000 for each major party give or take with the fluctuation of vote numbers. It's another way to keep them in power, and it's more corruption from the AEC, and the ALP and Coalition who voted for public funding. I'm sure they worked it out that since minor parties don't get any where near that amount, they'll always lag behind.

 

 

Edited February 10 by Grumpy Old Nasho

[red750]

GOn, do you understand what preferential voting is all about?

 

Let's suppose Joe Bloggs votes for Clive Palmer. Clive is never going to get enough votes to form government. So he votes for the other candidates in his order of preference. If he prefers Labor over LNP, he  gives them his second preference. That way, he doesn't get who he preferred, but he gets another opportunity to choose fron those who are left. So his vote is not totally wasted. So the second preference is added to the count of the party selected, then the third preferences are distributed , than the 4th and so on.

 

It's like going to a shop to buy a pineapple ice cream. If they don't have pineapple, you have other choices., the most popular ones. You are not forced to have vanilla, you can choose another flavour. Without preferences, you would have to walk away without an icecream.

 

 

 

 

[octave]

 

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

21 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

Do the "  other " parties get any preferences. 

If a major party failed to get more votes than a minor party , would that 'minor ' party,  take preferences .

spacesailor

That comes under "TWO CANDIDATE PREFERRED" - in the AEC's website.

Edited February 10 by Grumpy Old Nasho

[Jerry_Atrick]

Geez, GON.. seriously... The AEC doesn't distribute preferences. It counts them.

 

You don't have to be a supported of Q'Anon, do you?

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

7 minutes ago, red750 said:

GOn, do you understand what preferential voting is all about?

Oh yes, I know what it's all about. But I'm on about something else though, the AEC should not mention any party by name, except in it's summing up of the results, which is of course after all the votes come in. Pre-emption of any kind by the AEC is simply corrupting the democratic process. And I'm sure they are aware of their own foolish corruption. We are too dumb and gullible to be aware of it.

[rgmwa]

9 minutes ago, Grumpy Old Nasho said:

Pre-emption of any kind by the AEC is simply corrupting the democratic process. And I'm sure they are aware of their own foolish corruption. We are too dumb and gullible to be aware of it.

The AEC is not pre-empting anything. it is simply recording the election results, not corrupting them. You are boxing at shadows and seeing things that are not there. I assume when you say `we are too dumb and gullible to be aware of it', you are not including yourself among the deluded masses?

[red750]

Counting doesn't start till the polls are closed. Giving a running commetary cannot affect the result. While counting may commence in the eastern states while WA polls are still open, no progress figures are released until WA polls close.