| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| What system of voting do you prefer? |
| Preferential Voting |
|
55% |
[ 5 ] |
| First-Past-The-Post Voting |
|
44% |
[ 4 ] |
| Undecided |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 9 |
|
| Author |
Message |
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| David wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | On the other hand, a grass roots movement that really attracted peoples attention would have a chance of success. |
No way. The Greens are arguably the most successful minor party ever (not counting the Nationals), and it's taken them 20-30 years to get where they are now (10-15% of the vote). If it was so easy for a sensible new party to come along and grab 30%+ of the vote, it would happen all the time, particularly over the course of the last two elections when the choices have been so poor.
At least minor parties can have an influence on politics here, though. In the US, they're redundant. |
+
There's more ways for interest groups to have an influence than standing for parliament.
The other point with that - how many people currently vote Greens do so because they know that once that vote is wasted it goes to Labor?
What would happen to the Greens primary vote if people knew it was a first past the post system? |
|
|
|
 |
David 
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | The other point with that - how many people currently vote Greens do so because they know that once that vote is wasted it goes to Labor? |
Many. I'm one of them! But my vote isn't wasted, because a high Green vote is a threat to Labor. This isn't some hypothetical thirty-years-down-the-track thing, they're losing seats to the Greens now. That has a direct impact on the policies they adopt.
As for your last question, I already answered it on page 1: it would drop considerably, because a vote for the Greens would be one less vote for the ALP, and that might well mean a Liberal government, so many progressive people would reluctantly vote Labor instead. I'm not sure why you'd think that's a good thing—isn't it better that people can vote for a party that aligns more closely with their values? I preference the ALP, but I don't identify with them at all.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
1061
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | The other point with that - how many people currently vote Greens do so because they know that once that vote is wasted it goes to Labor? |
Many. I'm one of them! But my vote isn't wasted, because a high Green vote is a threat to Labor. This isn't some hypothetical thirty-years-down-the-track thing, they're losing seats to the Greens now. That has a direct impact on the policies they adopt.
As for your last question, I already answered it on page 1: it would drop considerably, because a vote for the Greens would be one less vote for the ALP, and that might well mean a Liberal government, so many progressive people would reluctantly vote Labor instead. I'm not sure why you'd think that's a good thing—isn't it better that people can vote for a party that aligns more closely with their values? I preference the ALP, but I don't identify with them at all. |
Actually the ALP have just jumped ahead in Prahran and will most likley take Melbourne as well. |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | No way. The Greens are arguably the most successful minor party ever (not counting the Nationals). |
Two points. I think you're forgetting the Australian Democrats who were a true force until they committed suicide. Nationals are not a minor party. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | It's like ordering dinner, you don't get to go through the menu and list them all in preference, just fkn pick one. |
Congratulations. Exactly wrong! Difficult to see how a statement like that could be more wrong.
Voting is like ordering dinner. You say "I'd like the grilled schnapper" and if the man says "sorry, we don't have any schnapper today" you say "fine, give me the chicken". You get to decide from the available alternatives and if your first choice isn't available, you go to your next choice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPN3KTtrnZM
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | | Nationals are not a minor party. |
They get about half the vote that the Greens get.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Do you have any idea what I am talking about? |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | | Wokko wrote: | | Nationals are not a minor party. |
They get about half the vote that the Greens get. |
In Victoria yes, because they've traitorously ignored their constituency to stay in bed with the Liberals. Shooters/Country and Independents are eating them up. QLD and NSW Nationals need to take note. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | The other point with that - how many people currently vote Greens do so because they know that once that vote is wasted it goes to Labor? |
Many. I'm one of them! But my vote isn't wasted, because a high Green vote is a threat to Labor. This isn't some hypothetical thirty-years-down-the-track thing, they're losing seats to the Greens now. That has a direct impact on the policies they adopt.
As for your last question, I already answered it on page 1: it would drop considerably, because a vote for the Greens would be one less vote for the ALP, and that might well mean a Liberal government, so many progressive people would reluctantly vote Labor instead. I'm not sure why you'd think that's a good thing—isn't it better that people can vote for a party that aligns more closely with their values? I preference the ALP, but I don't identify with them at all. |
So are you suggesting that we need to have preferential voting because if people just had to vote for who they wanted the Libs would win every time?   |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | It's like ordering dinner, you don't get to go through the menu and list them all in preference, just fkn pick one. |
Congratulations. Exactly wrong! Difficult to see how a statement like that could be more wrong.
Voting is like ordering dinner. You say "I'd like the grilled schnapper" and if the man says "sorry, we don't have any schnapper today" you say "fine, give me the chicken". You get to decide from the available alternatives and if your first choice isn't available, you go to your next choice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPN3KTtrnZM |
But at the time you cast your vote, they are all available. It's only a multo choice gig because that's what we've made it, if it was a simple one person one vote and no preferences maybe more people would value it more. For the people who get shafted, the flavour of the lube doesn't matter much. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
In elections, someone always gets shafted. The difference is, you are championing a system where the majority usually gets shafted ('coz they wanted someone else) and only the largest single minority gets its way. That's not fair and it's not democratic.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | David wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | The other point with that - how many people currently vote Greens do so because they know that once that vote is wasted it goes to Labor? |
Many. I'm one of them! But my vote isn't wasted, because a high Green vote is a threat to Labor. This isn't some hypothetical thirty-years-down-the-track thing, they're losing seats to the Greens now. That has a direct impact on the policies they adopt.
As for your last question, I already answered it on page 1: it would drop considerably, because a vote for the Greens would be one less vote for the ALP, and that might well mean a Liberal government, so many progressive people would reluctantly vote Labor instead. I'm not sure why you'd think that's a good thing—isn't it better that people can vote for a party that aligns more closely with their values? I preference the ALP, but I don't identify with them at all. |
So are you suggesting that we need to have preferential voting because if people just had to vote for who they wanted the Libs would win every time? |
No, that's what Wokko is saying. I have no reason to think that the Libs would be advantaged by this—there are many small right-wing parties, too.
Re: the Democrats, I'd say the Greens have already surpassed them and the DLP.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Big call there, David, especially as regards the DLP, who despite never taking government nevertheless dominated Australian politics for a very long time. They were the vital wall of stone that kept Labor out and Menzies et al in for close-on two decades, then they stonewalled the long overdue transformative Whitlam reforms in the early '70s before, finally, Gough had the balls to take them head-on with a double dissolution and pretty much wiped them out as a serious force. The Greens have probably gone past the Australian Democrats now though, so another few years of growth for them will make your statement clearly true.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| HAL wrote: | | Do you have any idea what I am talking about? |
nope
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ Why let that stop you? It never stops any of the rest of us. 
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
