thorfinn: <user name="seedy_girl"> and <user name="thorfinn"> (Default)
[personal profile] thorfinn
I'm in Higgins: http://www.aec.gov.au/election/vic/higgins.htm

We appear to have a Greens house of reps candidate, so my $2.31 worth of primary vote will be heading to them. Then in order, Independent I.T. Nerd, Blind Young Labor Guy, Liberal Ms I'm Not Costello Honestly, and Family First Goes Last.

For the Victorian Senate, I started with the Australian Sex Party ticket, and played with it until it made me happy... ;-) So my ticket looks like:

https://www.belowtheline.org.au/editor.html#vic-GFEDC76543fhjlnokmTSRpqVUabcQPvwxYXON0ZMJLK21BWAzydegirstuIH

Thus, my $2.31 primary senate vote goes to the Australian Sex Party - who are standing up against pretty much everything that I consider very wrong with what's going on in Australian Politics.

The rest of the ticket is scattered around issues parties, and preference flow will no doubt primarily wind up landing on Labor in the middle of my ticket. I've put Conroy towards the bottom of the ticket, but not last.

The switch-over point on my ticket (where I go from numbering in group ticket order because I'm "for", instead of numbering upside down because I'm "against") is at the Lib/Nat coalition ticket, starting at number 36.

Pretty much everyone below that point, including the Lib/Nat coalition, are mostly religious nut cases of one stripe or another that wish to do things that are bad for me and my friends. I have absolutely nothing against religious people, but the groups in politics are truly nut cases who wish to do harm to me and my friends.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-18 03:56 (UTC)
greylock: (Default)
From: [personal profile] greylock
Interesting. I wasn't going to do the switchover this year, I figure there's not a lot of point when it gets down to it, but I probably should go back through mine and bias it a bit.

Personally, I'd have voted the Climate Sceptics lower because they are certifiable. I have no idea how far down the ticket votes tend to go anyway. I'd be surprised if it was more than one-third.
I wonder if I can find out.

I wish I'd known I could use the link from BTL. I just printed out how to vote advisories.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-18 04:19 (UTC)
greylock: (Default)
From: [personal profile] greylock
Being as I will probably vote Greens in all top three spots, I'm not too worried about how far down by preferences will flow. Once they hit Labor they're pretty much dead in the water.

The Climate Sceptics are crazy for sure, but for me, the religious nutcases are more likely to have a direct and immediate impact on the lives of me and my friends

Have you looked into the Climate Sceptics, or just looked at their name? Some of them are Moon Landing Fake/birther/truther types.
Personally, I'd trust the CEC or One Nation over them.


(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-18 04:35 (UTC)
greylock: (Default)
From: [personal profile] greylock
I just think that they will have less impact than the religious nuts.

Oh, I'm with you now. Hrm. I may need to rethink my lower orders.


As for preference flow, I'm not sure how many senators are up for election in WA,

Six, same as usual:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_2010#Senate_terms_expiring

Three Libs (will probably get back in), two Labor (one I've never heard of) and one Green (high profile, moderate Rachel Siewert).

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-18 04:20 (UTC)
17catherines: Amor Vincit Omnia (Default)
From: [personal profile] 17catherines
I think you may find that link goes to the Sex Party standard ticket - I tried creating my own ticket there, and then copying the link - and I ended up with the Sex Party ticket again!

That, or you've somehow convinced the website to make your preferences the ones it defaults to...

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-18 05:22 (UTC)
17catherines: Amor Vincit Omnia (Default)
From: [personal profile] 17catherines
Firefox. How odd. I'm now getting Greens at 6, too, but no matter what I do, I can't convince the site to give me a linkable version of my ticket... not that it matters, I've more or less stated it on my LJ, though I've refined the top few candidates a bit!

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-18 08:58 (UTC)
ideological_cuddle: (Default)
From: [personal profile] ideological_cuddle
I'm being a lazy sod this year, having confirmed that the Sex Party Senate ticket is about what I'd be voting anyway -- including, rather delightfully, putting Conroy last of the ALP candidates -- I'll be voting above-the-line for the first time ever.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-18 12:52 (UTC)
kraig: Salty+Zack (Default)
From: [personal profile] kraig
Looking at that link, and judging by other comments I've seen on .auian elections... I can't, for the life of me, figure out how you all vote. Above the line? Below the line? What is this madness? The obvious pages on Wikipedia seem mostly interested in demonstrating compulsory voting arguments. If I understand what I found correctly, you get to put a number in the box next to every candidate in descending order of "I want this person representing me," and you seem to have a ton of candidates. Are you voting for a rep for your region and you have that many possible reps? Or are you ranking all possible representatives? What does 'below the line' mean?

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-18 18:59 (UTC)
loosechanj: (Default)
From: [personal profile] loosechanj
Is voting for non-major parties as hopeless as it is here in the U.S.?

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-24 01:05 (UTC)
kraig: Salty+Zack (Default)
From: [personal profile] kraig
Sorry for not replying earlier, been a busy week. Thanks for the writeup, most helpful. :)

We can also have PM changes without elections - here, the PM is (almost always) the leader of the ruling party. It's possible to have a PM who wasn't elected by the public at all, in fact, if the ruling party's leader didn't win their riding. I'm a poor historian, but I think if that's happened the situation hasn't lasted long.

Our PM isn't actually our head of state though; that's the Governor General, the Queen's representative. Practically speaking, the GG is appointed by the PM and approved by the Queen.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-19 00:35 (UTC)
darren_stranger: (Default)
From: [personal profile] darren_stranger

Ah, i'd forgotten Mr Conroy. Thanks for the reminder.

What bad things do you fear from the religious nutcases?

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-19 03:31 (UTC)
darren_stranger: (Default)
From: [personal profile] darren_stranger

Hmm, while i haven't seen anyone openly calling for homosexuality to be criminalised, i don't doubt that some would like to see that. Reading the Christian Democratic Party's policies on education (including teaching the dangers of homosexuality), immigration (including preference for Christians and a moratorium on Muslim immigrants) and religious freedom (including the right to refuse to rent a home to a gay couple) is enough for me to move them to the bottom of the list.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-19 04:09 (UTC)
darren_stranger: (Default)
From: [personal profile] darren_stranger

So much stupid, so little room at the bottom..

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-19 04:22 (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
Have a look at the changes in reproductive rights laws in Victoria and the changes that have come in regarding access to IVF. If they tried to bring in CPOC and police checks for people who don't require ART to conceive (in other words heterosexual couples who do not have a medical condition or other cause impacting upon their fertility) the screams would be heard on the moon. The changes in the law were brought about because homosexual and single people wanted access to ART.
BTW: My names Cate and I'm only a nonnymouse on here as I can't be bothered creating an account.
Thorfi thank you for the link and the interesting discussions. *hugs*

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-19 05:03 (UTC)
darren_stranger: (Default)
From: [personal profile] darren_stranger

I wonder if we'll live to see a time when the very idea of homophobia is as anachronistic as racism, sexism and religious discrimination are now.. oh, wait. :(

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-19 04:35 (UTC)
From: [personal profile] lintilla42
Yes, it became a real toss up after the first few boxes were numbered. I believe the Sex Party came up fairly well on my ballot paper as i stood there looking at the rest of them not wanting to number any more boxes :P

(no subject)

Date: 2010-08-20 12:17 (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
i've got slightly contrary notions.
with the idea that any weird ideolog party is sure to be funnier than lib/lab.

hence lib last. lab 2nd last....

my friend once tried to convince me not to vote for the greens just because they couldnt run it if they won :)
i tried to convince there wasnt a hope in hell they'd win, so a vote for them was a just a general finger up at the duopoly

April 2014

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789 101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags