The election thread - Two middle-late aged white men trying to be blokey and convincing..., same old shit, FFS.

[scblack]

Electoral death.

So when Paul Keating took over from Hawke, did he lose the next election?

Not taking over the leadership, I am talking if a candidate changes from Labor to Liberal, or Liberal to Independent. They were voted in as a Party candidate, then defected and people hate that. Like Rob Oakeshot - where is he now? Wilkie?

I now forget exactly who it was defected from Liberal to be one of the independents???

When Gillard took over from Rudd, did she lose the next election?

She did NOT win that election, she simply managed to shore up the votes of the independents enough to secure government. That is not an election win.

Frankly, Anyone could have beaten Rudd after that debacle

Absolutely, I said it in here that Donald Duck would have won that election over Rudd.

 

[placebo]

does a soufflé rise twice?

If by soufflé you mean a deliberately barren female lawyer elected to parliament who then stabs an elected prime minister in the back and takes his place, it looks like they do rise twice.

 

[pharmaboy]

Not taking over the leadership, I am talking if a candidate changes from Labor to Liberal, or Liberal to Independent. They were voted in as a Party candidate, then defected and people hate that. Like Rob Oakeshot - where is he now? Wilkie?


well, fucking ignore all that then - fair enough , changing teams at half time is fucked

I now forget exactly who it was defected from Liberal to be one of the independents???

She did NOT win that election, she simply managed to shore up the votes of the independents enough to secure government. That is not an election win.

well Abbott didn't win either, all he did is shore up the nationals to vote with him.. ... So was the PM then? Abbott or Gillard? - feels a bit like losing on a penalty shoutout, or a dodgy Indian umpiring decision, but the records will still show who was PM for the period

Absolutely, I said it in here that Donald Duck would have won that election over Rudd.

Sorry so unco, that breaking up quotes is hard for me to do....

Edit and I'm voting for Mickey Mouse next time ( or will it be Minnie?)

 

[pink poodle]

You vote for a person in a presidential election. Here in Australia we don't have presidents, you vote for a party not a person.

Like it or not, that's the system we have. If you think you voted for Tony Abbott specifically that was your mistake (and what a mistake it was). Once elected, the governing party can do whatever they like with their leadership.[/b]

And what a mistake! So much foolishness...

No, to be truly pedantic you vote for a person to represent your electorate. They will usually support their party and leader, but can choose to leave the party and become independent, or even to support another party. I think it would do our democracy a great service if all of our elected representatives made representing their electorate their highest priority.

For example, I despise Bob Katter's views on just about everything, but he really does advocate hard for the issues in his electorate, and I respect him for that. (and that alone)

Recently Tasmanian senator that sold off Telstra comes to mind...

Not taking over the leadership, I am talking if a candidate changes from Labor to Liberal, or Liberal to Independent. They were voted in as a Party candidate, then defected and people hate that. Like Rob Oakeshot - where is he now? Wilkie?

I now forget exactly who it was defected from Liberal to be one of the independents???

She did NOT win that election, she simply managed to shore up the votes of the independents enough to secure government. That is not an election win.

Absolutely, I said it in here that Donald Duck would have won that election over Rudd.

Such rage...did SHE not win? Or the labor party not win?

A similar scenario happens in my tradtional labor stronghold where liberal party members run as independents. Deliberately hiding their ties. Sometimes it works for them, other times it does not.

If by soufflé you mean a deliberately barren female lawyer elected to parliament who then stabs an elected prime minister in the back and takes his place, it looks like they do rise twice.

Double baked

 

[John U]

Wilkie?

Wilkie was convincingly reelected in the 2013 federal election, gaining a swing of 15 points to increase his majority to 65 percent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wilkie#Political_career

I think we could do a lot worse than to have a decent independent to vote for in our electorate. Cath McGowan comes to mind, who took the place of Sophie Mirabella.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathy_McGowan_(politician)

I am an idealist, but why be tied to a party line if you don't agree with it. It's like all of the individuals in the past who have sold out their beliefs to join one of the major parties. That hasn't turned out well in a lot of circumstances.

People only voting labor or LNP seems to be part of the problem with our system at the moment. Or maybe that should be 'people only voting who their parents voted for'.

Whatever it is, the system currently has a few issues,

 

[placebo]

I now forget exactly who it was defected from Liberal to be one of the independents???

Peter Slipper, who faded quietly into the background after.

She did NOT win that election, she simply managed to shore up the votes of the independents enough to secure government. That is not an election win.

She probably promised to sell her arse to become P.M., thus securing the independant support needed to form a minority government.

 

[floody]

Turnbull won't go for Abbott. No point. He's also burned up most of his credibility and would be shackled to Abbott's shit schemes that he supported else he would look an even greater flake than Mr Rabbit is.

 

[johnny]

This was written about 24 hours ago but stupid work kept interrupting.

Which is why people have issues running the country out of his PMO.

No, to be truly pedantic you vote for a person to represent your electorate. They will usually support their party and leader, but can choose to leave the party and become independent, or even to support another party. I think it would do our democracy a great service if all of our elected representatives made representing their electorate their highest priority.

For example, I despise Bob Katter's views on just about everything, but he really does advocate hard for the issues in his electorate, and I respect him for that. (and that alone)

By way of the constitution this is correct. In Indonesia the party owns the seat, if a sitting member leaves the party s/he loses their seat and the party replaces the person with some one else from their ranks. However, as P.vore says, the sitting member in Australia can switch parties, form their own party go independent etc., but the seat remains theirs. Members are supposed to represent their electorate and campaign on matters that their electorate elects them to promote/address.

OF course there are unwritten conventions such as the candidate that stands within a party is subscribing to the Party's values and that is what you can expect from that candidate. Secondly, that the party is taken to an election by a leader, decided by the party and the party is elected by the voters with the knowledge that it will form govt under the leadership of that person. There are arguments to say that the party is elected to rule guided by their values and if the leader of that party is not performing that the leader will be replaced and will lead within the party's values. There's and argument that we are moving more to a presidential system where we elect a party to put the particular leader in...., etc. etc.

Given that these are all unwritten conventions we cannot really know how people vote. The only clear guide we have is the constitution, opinion polls and relative surveys.

 

[dolphinman]

Interesting discussion.

I think more and more the electorate are beginning to align themselves with the local member and how they represent them, rather than the party, hence the rise of the successful independent. As an aside - would be good to see historical trends of number of independents in Parliament. I think the primary reasons for this is a combination of the the shift away from the left and right dichotomy (no massive diff between Lab and Lib), the Lab and Lib parties inability to stick to their perceived core values, and that real policies (socialist, liberal or conservative) are shoved aside for cheap sloganeering.

Because voters cant see how the fit into the bigger vision (there isnt one!) - they keep it local and focus on what their local member will do for them - ignoring the party to a degree.

Assuming that is the case I reckon that swapping from a party to being an independent is not the death knell some are arguing. A swap from lib to Lab, or vice versa would be though (uncommon).

Oh - and Johnny - are you baking some humble pie for me - Id say its 50/50 whether I need to tuck into it (re: my comment saying tones wont go a few pages back).

 

[Pastavore]

Oh - and Johnny - are you baking some humble pie for me - Id say its 50/50 whether I need to tuck into it (re: my comment saying tones wont go a few pages back).

This is rotorburn. He is either brewing you a Humble beer, or purple-anodising a Humble chainring.

 

[johnny]

Interesting discussion.

I think more and more the electorate are beginning to align themselves with the local member and how they represent them, rather than the party, hence the rise of the successful independent.

....

Oh - and Johnny - are you baking some humble pie for me - Id say its 50/50 whether I need to tuck into it (re: my comment saying tones wont go a few pages back).

How can you differentiate from an anti-LNP/ALP protest vote to voters focusing on local issues and the rise of the independents? Not saying there isn't a way, interested to hear your thoughts.

I'm pretty confident that I have 3 packs of Tim Tams coming my way due to bets I have in the office regarding the tenure of Tony.

 

[dolphinman]

How can you differentiate from an anti-LNP/ALP protest vote to voters focusing on local issues and the rise of the independents? Not saying there isn't a way, interested to hear your thoughts.

Not sure I can. I'd like to hope that the protest vote is not that common...but maybe I'm giving Joe Public too much credit. Tony Windsor, in particular jumps out as a good example of what I'm talking about - a good local representative who won his seat a few times (I think) - which kind of removes that anti vote from the equation. Also Wilkie. Xenephon not so much as he is a senator. Once an independent has won more than one election I think the protest vote can be ruled out.

Cathay McGowan in Indi on the other hand - People would have voted for Pol Pot rather than evil midget sophie.

 

[pharmaboy]

Barrie Cassidy was on ABC this morning, petty much saying it's all on next week, and there will be a spill. Word is that the only contender is Malcolm, and all he needs do is make sure that he's not about to start an emission trading scheme. And for laughs, Christopher Pyne is doing the rounds for deputy.

So perhaps Tony lasts an extra week , perhaps the conservatives think they can hold out for another year, or MT goes direct to PM without having to win an election .

The ALP must be shitting themselves with this news

 

[silentbutdeadly]

The ALP must be shitting themselves with this news

That is something I very strongly doubt...given the ructions that happened last time this game of chair swapping was played in the Liberal Party, even when it's over...it won't be over until the whole board is cleared.

 

[pharmaboy]

Oh C'mon, if you were Shorten, right now you look like taking govt even with a late swing to the current govt, with possibly one of the least popular PMs for decades . The last thing you'd want right now is a new PM who rates as preferred PM above yourself and everybody else..

TA got up against Gillard ( well, let's call it a dead heat)because the ALP went into total meltdown 2 years into their first term.

 

[Bermshot]

What's the average of psychopaths within the populace that go undiagnosed?

 

[RCOH]

Turnbull's challenging*

edit: turnbull's most likely to challenge following spill motion to put forward by Luke Simpkin.

*blame journalists.

 

[pharmaboy]

What's the average of psychopaths within the populace that go undiagnosed?

You mean sociopaths don't you?

About 1 in a hundred. For more fun, American psycho

Probably narcissist is the better term and yes pretty common in people in power, because it's all about them. The best leader in politics is never chosen, because it's a fight between people who think they should be leader

 

[Norco Maniac]

The ALP must be shitting themselves with this news

That is something I very strongly doubt...given the ructions that happened last time this game of chair swapping was played in the Liberal Party, even when it's over...it won't be over until the whole board is cleared.

Via Mark Knight, cartoonist/Herald Sun

 

[Bermshot]

You mean sociopaths don't you?

About 1 in a hundred. For more fun, American psycho

The definition between both would be slim yeah?