tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7115935.post3052211346555260014..comments2023-12-01T11:40:00.045+11:00Comments on Dikkii's Diatribe: Post election postDikkiihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07897381809885423712noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7115935.post-78922368657633779702010-11-24T00:22:04.739+11:002010-11-24T00:22:04.739+11:00Well, Plonka, I guess that you do get to vote for ...Well, Plonka, I guess that you do get to vote for the PM.<br /><br />I suppose that abuse was a bit strong a term. Nonetheless, I suppose that I'm concerned about the contamination of electoral results by impure votes cast. It skews the results and, in the case of certain seats in this election could potentially lead to misleading results.<br /><br />The other question I have is with the rise of informal votes. At what point do we concede that, if we count informal votes as we do, that a candidate might potentially get elected on a minority of votes cast? Our constitution doesn't allow for this scenario, I believe.Dikkiihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07897381809885423712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7115935.post-66944842460894461342010-11-23T21:09:07.285+11:002010-11-23T21:09:07.285+11:00Well yes... Is it abuse though? The system allows ...Well yes... Is it abuse though? The system allows it and the result has made for interesting reading, not to mention made some people angry, which I find quite amusing. That's the thing about a democracy though, the right people don't always win, the popular ones do. But then sometimes we protest and who knows who'll win...;)<br /><br />As always though, I had to agree with the gist of your argument. I too can never understand why it is people say they didn't vote for this Prime Minister...DUH! No kidding!!<br /><br />Well actually, I did. But then I live in her electorate which made my choice doubly difficult. No, I don't think she's going to be good for my electorate necessarily, but do think she's the best they've got. And yes, for the second time in my life I voted for a Prime Minister (I used to live in Wills, way back when)...<br /><br />But Dikkii, it isn't voting that's the privilege, it's Democracy itself that needs protection. You and I only become offended by being coerced because we'd do it anyway. We take our country's governance seriously, even if we don't get it right every time. Like I said though, that's the glory of it. We feel the pain of our mistakes as well as the gory of our triumphs.Plonkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01552546816593027504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7115935.post-14727984395931668432010-11-22T10:57:53.901+11:002010-11-22T10:57:53.901+11:00Thanks Plonka, and it's lovely to hear from yo...Thanks Plonka, and it's lovely to hear from you. I hope that this means that you're up and about and blogging again.<br /><br />You're right in that voting is a privilege protected by law, however the privilege is abused now by so many Australians that we are potentially getting meaningless results. We have to protect the quality of results in some way or other.Dikkiihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07897381809885423712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7115935.post-70495137554587141852010-11-21T13:44:30.200+11:002010-11-21T13:44:30.200+11:00"Apart from indirectly linking tax evaders wi..."Apart from indirectly linking tax evaders with people who don't vote,"<br /><br />Well, the brethren spring to mind...:)<br /><br />"Our forefathers fought and died for the right to vote."<br /><br />Fallacious. No one fought and died for the right to vote in this country. Yes, the miners fought for representation at Eureka, but that's an entirely different kettle of coconuts.<br /><br />And it isn't really a right either, but... There are many laws that protect rights and make them compulsory, the UN specialises in them and you don't have the right to object. We, on the other hand, can "conscientiously object" to voting, but you'd better have a well prepared argument and be prepared to spend some time presenting it.<br /><br />And I don't think it's a question of morality either. It's simply a legal obligation born out of a desire to ensure a majority representation at the polls. The choice is simple, vote, object or be fined, and I really don't have an issue with it. Democracy is not a right and never has been, it's a privilege protected by law.<br /><br />Anyway, good to see you're still at it Dikkii...Plonkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01552546816593027504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7115935.post-76399068320303516282010-11-20T01:32:41.516+11:002010-11-20T01:32:41.516+11:00Boo :)Boo :)Plonkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01552546816593027504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7115935.post-80765886241240941592010-08-26T14:16:46.449+10:002010-08-26T14:16:46.449+10:00Hi Matt, and welcome. I would like to see some st...Hi Matt, and welcome. I would like to see some stats on this, really I would. One of the things that has been hammered home to me is that if voter registration was made non-compulsory, we'd see some disproportionate demographics represented, voter-wise.<br /><br />If we could find out something concrete on this, it would be an excellent argument for compulsory voting, I agree.<br /><br />Of course, this argument might be weakened if it also turned out to be the case that demographic groups who weren't represented were the same groups submitting informal or intentional donkey votes. Sadly, I suspect that we won't see a survey of this nature using the same sample, which would be ideal.<br /><br />I have to say that I tend to run a million miles from anything that Janet Albrechtsen is associated with, so I don't know what she's written. If I find that I'm in agreement with her, then I'll probably immediately change my mind!Dikkiihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07897381809885423712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7115935.post-42041672847599249292010-08-26T13:52:13.863+10:002010-08-26T13:52:13.863+10:00I agree with you that the list of excuses for comp...I agree with you that the list of excuses for compulsory voting that you describe in the post are very suspect. My main concern with non-compulsory voting - at least in our country - is that we may be likely to see certain demographics disproportionately represented to the detriment of the people in others.<br /><br />Of course, it's quite simple for people to overcome this. They just have to turn up and vote.<br /><br />Whether that reality would eventuate or not, I don't know. However, upon reading Janet Albrechtsen's highly bigoted and elitist recent Twitter comments, I feel the <i>potential</i> risks from non-compulsory voting are quite alarming.Mattnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7115935.post-53129827507401073822010-08-26T09:56:08.551+10:002010-08-26T09:56:08.551+10:00G'day Paul,
Agree with you on the Adam Bandt ...G'day Paul,<br /><br />Agree with you on the Adam Bandt point. My point was not really so much about the Greens' tendency to side with Labor, it was more about the way that Bandt has effectively put himself out in the media as a Labor stooge. The Greens go to great lengths to differentiate themselves from the majors and Bandt's comments have the potential to undermine their work in this area.<br /><br />I liked your point about disenfranchisement and your example. I thought about this initially and thought, well that's a better reason than some of the ones that I get. Although, I did think initially that it's analogous (in a good way, Paul, please don't get me wrong here!) to a reason for mandatory detention for asylum seekers being to screen potential individuals likely to engage in terror-related activity for the following reasons:<br /><br />* It's effective, that is, it works.<br />* It's compliant with the precautionary principle.<br />* You walk away from both problems thinking, "is there a better way that this problem could be fixed?"<br /><br />It's after this third point where the two analogies diverge and become less similar. You see, after a while, it becomes incredibly obvious that your example of a husband forbidding his wife to vote as being more symptomatic of a far broader problem for which compulsory voting is an incredibly narrow fix.<br /><br />I'm actually reminded of a photo that occasionally does the email rounds. It has a bloke with what appears to be a gaping shark bite putting a band-aid on. Helpfully inserted as a caption at the bottom of the photo in large, bold capitals is the word "Epic Fail."<br /><br />And much like the third dot point above, I walk away thinking that there has to be a better fix than what is definitely a band-aid on a shark bite problem.<br /><br />I do have to pull you up on this statement:<br /><br /><i>And even so, the level of informal voting this time is miniscule when compared to other countries who have similarly uninterested electorates and struggle to get 50%. At least this result still looks legitimate.</i><br /><br />The informal vote count in Werriwa this election is NOT miniscule. I'm not even sure that this was the worst electorate, and even the nationwide stats showing informal votes cast as a percentage of the primary vote are friggin embarrassing.<br /><br />Nevertheless, it is a better result than the less than 50% engagement figure you've quoted, although I think that it is beneath all of us to compare Australia to the disgraceful 'benchmark' (I use this term advisedly) you have referenced.<br /><br />Agree with your sentiments in the last paragraph except for one point, which is pretty minor. The press has been guilty of suggesting that there was a change of government mid-term. There wasn't, only the leader changed. Therefore, it went the full term, albeit a shortened one for an election.Dikkiihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07897381809885423712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7115935.post-67334293882501867852010-08-26T03:49:36.920+10:002010-08-26T03:49:36.920+10:00Some points I disagree with:
Bandt siding with th...Some points I disagree with:<br /><br />Bandt siding with the ALP? I don't think there was ever any doubt about this. Everyone knows where the Greens stand on the political spectrum, and I daresay the Greens would have far more to lose if they were responsible for putting an Abbott-led conservative government into power than they do by agreeing to give supply to an ALP government.<br /><br />They might have slightly more luck with a Turnbull government, or a Baillieu government in Victoria, but still, I wouldn't put any money on it happening.<br /><br />Compulsory voting: I see it as a good way to prevent disenfranchisement. Eg, overbearing husband can't force wife to stay at home for fear she might vote for the wrong mob, and get away with it. <br /><br />And even so, the level of informal voting this time is miniscule when compared to other countries who have similarly uninterested electorates and struggle to get 50%. At least this result still looks legitimate.<br /><br />Stability: the Victorian 1999 election threw up a similar result, with two independents that were from the conservative side of politics, and one ex-Labor independent. That government went full term. Frankly, I think the ALP have the advantage here. With the Greens having the balance of power in the Senate after July, a left of centre government in both houses will be a far more stable proposition than a right-wing one in the lower house only.Paulhttp://weblog.leapster.org/noreply@blogger.com