Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Sept 9, 2013 19:14:49 GMT
Corangamite was a Lib gain but it's red on that map. The map shows the Senate vote in each electorate. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2013 19:25:49 GMT
Had a little bet with a friend of mine from the right that they will have a new PM by Xmas 2014, just a fiver.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 9, 2013 19:29:15 GMT
Had a little bet with a friend of mine from the right that they will have a new PM by Xmas 2014, just a fiver. Malcolm Turnbull I presume. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2013 19:30:22 GMT
ha ha ... not him ...
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,036
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Sept 9, 2013 20:18:54 GMT
Corangamite was a Lib gain but it's red on that map. The map shows the Senate vote in each electorate. Though Corangamite is still blue on it. Corio, which is next door, is red. |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Sept 9, 2013 23:27:07 GMT
The map shows the Senate vote in each electorate. Though Corangamite is still blue on it. Corio, which is next door, is red. I might have noticed that if I had had time to look closely. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 9, 2013 23:28:40 GMT
Still no final declarations. I thought we'd had a few by this time in 2010 but maybe I'm misremembering: vtr.aec.gov.au/ |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Sept 9, 2013 23:34:42 GMT
Don't think we ever get any actual declarations until at least a week after the poll - they have to allow some time for the late ballots to come in, and then formally do the transfers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 10, 2013 2:07:01 GMT
I can't understand how Aussies can fill in a Senate ballot paper with 110 candidates where each has to be assigned a unique number between 1 and 110 without a single mistake.
In this country I'm sure most people would muck it up by putting in, say, two 57s and no 58, etc.
And the idea that the average voter could sensibly decide which candidate deserves to be assigned number 102 and which 103 just seems utterly mad.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Sept 10, 2013 2:29:26 GMT
I can't understand how Aussies can fill in a Senate ballot paper with 110 candidates where each has to be assigned a unique number between 1 and 110 without a single mistake. In this country I'm sure most people would muck it up by putting in, say, two 57s and no 58, etc. And the idea that the average voter could sensibly decide which candidate deserves to be assigned number 102 and which 103 just seems utterly mad. The reason it is possible is that the vast majority of voters (usually more than 90%) vote "above the line" which means that they simply tick the party of their first preference and thereby agree to whatever list of preferences that has been decided by their party. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2013 9:18:58 GMT
A little more detail on the odd result in Fowler. This poll bludger post observes that the Vietnamese-origin Liberal candidate enjoyed a 20% swing against him in Cabramatta, the centre of the Vietnamese population in the electorate. See also this from a blog post in June: So it sounds as if the Vietnamese electorate responded negatively to the Liberals' attempt to insult their intelligence. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2013 9:28:50 GMT
I can't understand how Aussies can fill in a Senate ballot paper with 110 candidates where each has to be assigned a unique number between 1 and 110 without a single mistake. In this country I'm sure most people would muck it up by putting in, say, two 57s and no 58, etc. And the idea that the average voter could sensibly decide which candidate deserves to be assigned number 102 and which 103 just seems utterly mad. The reason it is possible is that the vast majority of voters (usually more than 90%) vote "above the line" which means that they simply tick the party of their first preference and thereby agree to whatever list of preferences that has been decided by their party. I believe it is higher than that even - 99% or more who vote above the line. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 10, 2013 13:22:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Sept 10, 2013 13:52:44 GMT
I can't understand how Aussies can fill in a Senate ballot paper with 110 candidates where each has to be assigned a unique number between 1 and 110 without a single mistake. They're allowed into the count if they number at least 90% of candidates and they can do up to three sequencing errors - the savings provision that gave rise to "Langer votes" was never repealed for the Senate. As a further back-up they can also preference above the line as well. The BTL takes priority but if it's mucked up the ATL kicks into play. I think that kicks in much earlier. Once the quotas get to about five figures the personal basis in STV starts to slip away and here we're looking at much larger quotas. Also the Senate isn't the primary thing being voted on - I think the only area where a major party devotes its TV slots to the Senate is the ACT for the Liberals. IIUC the Constitution makes reference to Senators being individually elected without specifying how so list systems would be hard to introduce. There was a bizarre list system with preferences and quotas used in the early days of the ACT assembly. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 10, 2013 14:16:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 10, 2013 17:22:59 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by erlend on Sept 10, 2013 22:17:50 GMT
Had a little bet with a friend of mine from the right that they will have a new PM by Xmas 2014, just a fiver. I saw a little joke which said that the Australian cricket team had been on tour so long that they had had 3 Prime Ministers in the time. While not actually true (they were home before the election and I am not sure they had arrived while Gillard was still in office) I found it funny. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 11, 2013 3:51:16 GMT
Clive Palmer, probably the next member for Fairfax: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clive_Palmer_(businessman)#Announcements"In February 2013, at a press conference in New York, Palmer announced plans to build a modern-day replica of the liner RMS Titanic. It is planned that Titanic II will be built in China and will make its maiden voyage from Southampton to New York in 2016. Palmer hopes to re-create the Titanic as closely as possible with its familiar outside looks and also on the inside. According to Palmer, the Titanic II will be 883 feet long, weigh 55,800 gross tons and will carry 2,435 passengers and 900 crew. The Titanic II will honour the memories of those who died and survived on the Titanic, Palmer said. The Titanic was operated by the White Star Line, and Palmer’s cruise company is called Blue Star Line. Like the original ship, there will be no TVs aboard and probably no Internet service, he says.[23][29]"
"After announcing the Titanic II plans, Palmer announced his plans to build a park that features animatronic dinosaurs. He originally proposed it be called Jurassic Park after the film of the same name, but this was changed due to copyright issues. It will officially be called "Palmer Coolum Resort: Dinosaur Park". Palmer ordered more than 160 Animatronic dinosaurs, which included an initial shipment of a 3.5 meter tall, and 20 meter long T-Rex, nicknamed "Jeff". Palmer received full council approval for the park on 25 July 2013, and it will open to the public in 2014.[30]""Clive Palmer says he won't win Fairfax because 'Australian electoral system is corrupt'": www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special-features/clive-palmer-says-he-won8217t-win-fairfax-because-8216australian-electoral-system-is-corrupt8217/story-fnho52jj-1226715514962 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2013 6:05:47 GMT
Had a little bet with a friend of mine from the right that they will have a new PM by Xmas 2014, just a fiver. I saw a little joke which said that the Australian cricket team had been on tour so long that they had had 3 Prime Ministers in the time. While not actually true (they were home before the election and I am not sure they had arrived while Gillard was still in office) I found it funny. It is true for all formats. They were here by early June for the Champions Trophy and are still here playing the ODI series. That said, only 2 or 3 players have been here for the full tour. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2013 6:11:30 GMT
|
|
