Discussion:
2PP vote finalised
(too old to reply)
netvegetable
2010-09-21 21:40:02 UTC
Permalink
So much for the government being illegitimate.

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/

This despite what some people propagandised ......

Barnaby Joyce: “We’d won the two-party preferred vote by the time the
independents made their decision.” (Lateline, 7/9).

Andrew Bolt: “Labor won fewer votes, fewer seats of its own and less of
the two-party preferred vote.” (Herald Sun, 8/9).

Alan Jones: “Is it a healthy democracy when a party wins the majority of
the two party preferred, wins the majority of the primary vote and wins
more seats in the Parliament than the other party but the other party
forms government?” (2GB, 8/9).

Sarah Martin: “Yesterday, Julia Gillard’s Labor Party won government
despite losing the primary vote and the two-party-preferred vote, or
securing a majority of seats.” (The Advertiser, 7/9).

Kerry Chikarovski: “The Coalition won the primary vote, they won the two-
party preferred …” (The Drum, 7/9).

Lateline: “Labor loses two-party preferred vote” (report headline, 30/8).

Kenneth Wiltshire: “It is probable that the Coalition will win more third-
party preferences.” (NB: This of course is absurd – Labor got 65 per cent
of third party preferences, much as they always do – but I think we know
what he’s trying to say.) (The Australian 6/9).

Lisa Wilkinson (to Wayne Swan): “Now, you won fewer primary votes, fewer
two-party preferred votes and fewer seats.”
(Swan explains to her that she’s wrong.)
Wilkinson: “But in the end you got 49.9 per cent of the vote and the
Opposition got 50.1.”
Swan: “No, I don’t think that’s … Lisa, that is not a final count.”
Wilkinson: “Well, that’s what the AEC is saying and that’s what Australia
said at the polls.” (The Today Show, Nine Network, 9/9).
bringyagrogalong
2010-09-21 23:13:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
This despite what some people propagandised ......
Barnaby Joyce: “We’d won the two-party preferred vote by the time the
independents made their decision.” (Lateline, 7/9).
Andrew Bolt: “Labor won fewer votes, fewer seats of its own and less of
the two-party preferred vote.” (Herald Sun, 8/9).
Alan Jones: “Is it a healthy democracy when a party wins the majority of
the two party preferred, wins the majority of the primary vote and wins
more seats in the Parliament than the other party but the other party
forms government?” (2GB, 8/9).
Sarah Martin: “Yesterday, Julia Gillard’s Labor Party won government
despite losing the primary vote and the two-party-preferred vote, or
securing a majority of seats.” (The Advertiser, 7/9).
Kerry Chikarovski: “The Coalition won the primary vote, they won the two-
party preferred …” (The Drum, 7/9).
Lateline: “Labor loses two-party preferred vote” (report headline, 30/8).
Kenneth Wiltshire: “It is probable that the Coalition will win more third-
party preferences.” (NB: This of course is absurd – Labor got 65 per cent
of third party preferences, much as they always do – but I think we know
what he’s trying to say.) (The Australian 6/9).
Lisa Wilkinson (to Wayne Swan): “Now, you won fewer primary votes, fewer
two-party preferred votes and fewer seats.”
(Swan explains to her that she’s wrong.)
Wilkinson: “But in the end you got 49.9 per cent of the vote and the
Opposition got 50.1.”
Swan: “No, I don’t think that’s … Lisa, that is not a final count.”
Wilkinson: “Well, that’s what the AEC is saying and that’s what Australia
said at the polls.” (The Today Show, Nine Network, 9/9).
Thanks.

Goes to show what hopeless, ill-informed, lying ratbags the
conservatives are.
Anonymous
2010-09-22 10:43:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
No party got more than 50% votes.

Preferential system is manipulation of peoples votes.

Australia NEVER had legitimate election winner.

All Government are installed by agreement between Freemasons and Fabian
Society.

NEXT PM
Aaron
2010-09-22 16:02:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
No party got more than 50% votes.
Preferential system is manipulation of peoples votes.
Australia NEVER had legitimate election winner.
All Government are installed by agreement between Freemasons and Fabian
Society.
NEXT PM
Translation: This guy does not understand how a democratic republic
works or why he does not get to dictate the outcome of elections, so
he invents a conspiracy theory. Pathetic!
Anonymous
2010-09-23 01:32:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aaron
Post by Anonymous
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
No party got more than 50% votes.
Preferential system is manipulation of peoples votes.
Australia NEVER had legitimate election winner.
All Government are installed by agreement between Freemasons and Fabian
Society.
NEXT PM
Translation: This guy does not understand how a democratic republic
works or why he does not get to dictate the outcome of elections, so
he invents a conspiracy theory. Pathetic!
Jewish ignorant idiot has spoken from the lodge trying to defend unGodly
conspiracy he is part of.

Read carefully:

There is no democracy in Australia.

Voting is obligatory - penalties apply for not voting.

We have no elections in Australia but selections.

The most educated and intelligent Australians - with the best UNI degrees
and dual citizenship - are excluded as candidates because their experience
from other country may bring positive change from retarded Westminster
system.

As a fraud call "preferential elections" give no choice to others, my balot
paper is always informal.

As direct votes for winning party are ALWAYS below 50%, this means that
majority of voters are AGAINST "elected" government.

Prime minister of Australia is not elected but selected.

Contrary to USA, Australians DO NOT vote for top political positions like
Governor General or Prime Minister.

Australian election system serve manipulation of country by Freemasons and
Fabian Society
for interest of foreign powers so preferential voting system we have in
Australia is not only complete fraud but also a treason.

NEXT PM
Aaron
2010-09-23 05:29:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous
Post by Aaron
Post by Anonymous
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
No party got more than 50% votes.
Preferential system is manipulation of peoples votes.
Australia NEVER had legitimate election winner.
All Government are installed by agreement between Freemasons and Fabian
Society.
NEXT PM
Translation: This guy does not understand how a democratic republic
works or why he does not get to dictate the outcome of elections, so
he invents a conspiracy theory. Pathetic!
Jewish ignorant idiot has spoken from the lodge trying to defend unGodly
conspiracy he is part of.
It has been mentioned before: "Scratch an anti-masonic kook, and you
will find an antisemite." I Guess you have to be a moron to be
either.
Post by Anonymous
There is no democracy in Australia.
Austrailia is a democratic republic with more than two political
parties, as you proved in your link.
Post by Anonymous
Voting is obligatory - penalties apply for not voting.
Irrelevant - it would be even more strict if Australia was a democracy
instead of a republic.
Post by Anonymous
We have no elections in Australia but selections.
...and yet YOU posted a link to election results.
Post by Anonymous
The most educated and intelligent Australians - with the best UNI degrees
and dual citizenship - are excluded as candidates because their experience
from other country may bring positive change from retarded Westminster
system.
So only candidates without split loyalties may apply for office. It
might be paranoid to support this rule, but if the potential candidate
had Israeli Citizenship, you would demand that he withdraw, even if he
was the Messiah himself!
Post by Anonymous
As a fraud call "preferential elections" give no choice to others, my balot
paper is always informal.
As direct votes for winning party are ALWAYS below 50%, this means that
majority of voters are AGAINST "elected" government.
That is a really moronic thing to say. You should be placed in a
primary school for remedial education.

Ballot are cast FOR candidates, not against them. When there are more
than 2 candidates receiving a significant percentage of votes the
winner is the candidate with the MOST votes, not a majority. Even a
small child should be able to figure this out. You are displaying
typical paranoid schizophrenic symptoms.
Post by Anonymous
Prime minister of Australia is not elected but selected.
Contrary to USA, Australians DO NOT vote for top political positions like
Governor General or Prime Minister.
Yes, Australia uses a parliamentary system like the ancient Jews, and
the US used a presidential system modeled after the Masonic Lodge.
Post by Anonymous
Australian election system serve manipulation of country by Freemasons and
Fabian Society
for interest of foreign powers so preferential voting system we have in
Australia is not only complete fraud but also a treason.
Aside from your complete irrationality, you seem to be demanding that
Australia change to a more Masonic system because you want Masons to
control the government so that one of your fantasies will come true.
Unfortunately for you, Masons are not allowed to use the Lodge to
influence politics. In the past, there have been violations of this
law which resulted in men being expelled from Masonry and Lodges
loosing their charters. It rarely happens today though.

If you had a valid argument for political change in Australia, and
could express it without insane conspiracy theories, you could effect
election reform, but you just sound crazy.
Post by Anonymous
NEXT PM
FarmI
2010-09-25 08:26:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aaron
Translation: This guy does not understand how a democratic republic
works or why he does not get to dictate the outcome of elections, so
he invents a conspiracy theory. Pathetic!
LOL. That seems to be a fairly common attitude here in this ng.

BTW, I owe you an apology Aaron. I gave a bum steer on compulsory voting.
My only defence for being wrong is that when I became a silent elector, I
was advised (probably cynically now I come to thing of it) that it was
compulsory to be marked off the roll but there was no way of checking if a
vote had actually taken place.

netvegetable
2010-09-22 18:51:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
No party got more than 50% votes.
Preferential system is manipulation of peoples votes.
You obviously don't understand how the system.

With preferences, you don't only get to vote for who you want. You also
get to decide where your vote goes if your first choice doesn't win
enough support.

[snip]
Anonymous
2010-09-23 01:46:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by netvegetable
Post by Anonymous
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
No party got more than 50% votes.
Preferential system is manipulation of peoples votes.
You obviously don't understand how the system.
With preferences, you don't only get to vote for who you want. You also
get to decide where your vote goes if your first choice doesn't win
enough support.
Not true. Australians decide nothing in preferential voting scam.

The most Australians do not understand the system but I do. This is why I
vote informal.

People think they vote for someone. But the candidate they vote for is
excluded by preferential system and votes are at the end given to one of 2
big parties.

In the last 2 elections majority votes were AGAINST John Howard and AGAINST
Tony Abbott and Gulia Gillard.

When Pauline's One Nation get elected she was put in jail on lame excuse
that there was accounting error.

There was no choice to elect anyone in Australia than Labor or Liberal party
because at the end all votes are channeled to them.

Only in isolated electorates, where people has unique problems and unique
opinions on how to resolve the problems caused by any of 2 big parties
independents or minor parties can win.

This year we have government chosen by 3 independents from the most
problematic areas of Australia plus Wilkie whose life was destroyed before
by Howard'sGovernment Mafia.

How can anyone with brain call this democracy?

Many people whose votes are given to 2 big parties vote for someone else as
they are AGAINST monopoly of 2 parties, who are actually the same
incompetent group of mostly failed lawyers, and bot parties are run by big
business and foreign secret societies Freemasonry and Fabian Society.

People of Australia are sick of the governments full of lawyers and other
useless fools.

If Australia has direct voting system like the rest of the world, in second
voting circle most of the Laborals crooks will be eliminated and honest
candidates will get more votes.

Losers are all Australians.

We have no elections in Australia but selections.

The most educated and intelligent Australians - with the best UNI degrees
and dual citizenship - are excluded as candidates because their experience
from other country may bring positive change from retarded Westminster
system.

As a fraud call "preferential elections" give no choice to others, my balot
paper is always informal.

As direct votes for winning party are ALWAYS below 50%, this means that
majority of voters are AGAINST "elected" government.

Prime minister of Australia is not elected but selected.

Australian election system serve manipulation of country by Freemasons and
Fabian Society
for interest of foreign powers so preferential voting system we have in
Australia is not only complete fraud but also a treason.

NEXT PM
Plank
2010-09-23 03:12:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous
Post by netvegetable
Post by Anonymous
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
No party got more than 50% votes.
Preferential system is manipulation of peoples votes.
You obviously don't understand how the system.
With preferences, you don't only get to vote for who you want. You also
get to decide where your vote goes if your first choice doesn't win
enough support.
Not true. Australians decide nothing in preferential voting scam.
The most Australians do not understand the system but I do. This is why I
vote informal.
People think they vote for someone. But the candidate they vote for is
excluded by preferential system and votes are at the end given to one of 2
big parties.
In the last 2 elections majority votes were AGAINST John Howard and AGAINST
Tony Abbott and Gulia Gillard.
When Pauline's One Nation get elected she was put in jail on lame excuse
that there was accounting error.
There was no choice to elect anyone in Australia than Labor or Liberal party
because at the end all votes are channeled to them.
Only in isolated electorates, where people has unique problems and unique
opinions on how to resolve the problems caused by any of 2 big parties
independents or minor parties can win.
This year we have government chosen by 3 independents from the most
problematic areas of Australia plus Wilkie whose life was destroyed before
by Howard'sGovernment Mafia.
How can anyone with brain call this democracy?
Many people whose votes are given to 2 big parties vote for someone else as
they are AGAINST monopoly of 2 parties, who are actually the same
incompetent group of mostly failed lawyers, and bot parties are run by big
business and foreign secret societies Freemasonry and Fabian Society.
People of Australia are sick of the governments full of lawyers and other
useless fools.
If Australia has direct voting system like the rest of the world, in second
voting circle most of the Laborals crooks will be eliminated and honest
candidates will get more votes.
Losers are all Australians.
We have no elections in Australia but selections.
The most educated and intelligent Australians - with the best UNI degrees
and dual citizenship - are excluded as candidates because their experience
from other country may bring positive change from retarded Westminster
system.
As a fraud call "preferential elections" give no choice to others, my balot
paper is always informal.
As direct votes for winning party are ALWAYS below 50%, this means that
majority of voters are AGAINST "elected" government.
Prime minister of Australia is not elected but selected.
Especially in this "election", where the selection committee consisted
of three (3) dolts.
Post by Anonymous
Australian election system serve manipulation of country by Freemasons and
Fabian Society
for interest of foreign powers so preferential voting system we have in
Australia is not only complete fraud but also a treason.
NEXT PM
The most honest appraisal of our system I've heard for a long time. Most
refreshing and right up the top end of the spectrum of intelligent
commentary, in stark contrast to forgottobringalongabrain and faghead.
The former is a genuine retard, but deserves to be mocked as such as a
consequence of his attitude; while the latter just makes it up as he
goes along. Both live in leftie fantasyland and belong right down the
bottom end of the intellect spectrum, in the company of the majority of
the leftards.

Thank you for your attempted edification of the leftard throwbacks.
netvegetable
2010-09-23 10:15:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous
Post by netvegetable
Post by Anonymous
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
No party got more than 50% votes.
Preferential system is manipulation of peoples votes.
You obviously don't understand how the system.
With preferences, you don't only get to vote for who you want. You also
get to decide where your vote goes if your first choice doesn't win
enough support.
Not true. Australians decide nothing in preferential voting scam.
The most Australians do not understand the system but I do. This is why
I vote informal.
People think they vote for someone. But the candidate they vote for is
excluded by preferential system and votes are at the end given to one of
2 big parties.
Explain exactly how candidates get "excluded". Do you mean they are
excluded the majority of voters "preferred" someone else, as expressed in
the preferences on their ballot sheets? What's wrong with that?
Post by Anonymous
In the last 2 elections majority votes were AGAINST John Howard and
AGAINST Tony Abbott and Gulia Gillard.
When Pauline's One Nation get elected she was put in jail on lame excuse
that there was accounting error.
There was no choice to elect anyone in Australia than Labor or Liberal
party because at the end all votes are channeled to them.
Only in isolated electorates, where people has unique problems and
unique opinions on how to resolve the problems caused by any of 2 big
parties independents or minor parties can win.
This year we have government chosen by 3 independents from the most
problematic areas of Australia plus Wilkie whose life was destroyed
before by Howard'sGovernment Mafia.
The majority of voters preferred that government. So why do you have a
problem with that?

[snip uninteresting stuff]
ralph
2010-09-22 20:41:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
" Figures and calculations on this website should not be considered
final until notified as such - until then all results are indicative
only."

Just out of interest where did it say finalised? I see 93% counted.
Anonymous
2010-09-23 01:50:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by ralph
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
" Figures and calculations on this website should not be considered
final until notified as such - until then all results are indicative
only."
Just out of interest where did it say finalised? I see 93% counted.
They are still adding spare votes from Afghanistan and filling the empty
boxes on 7% of balot papers to produce wanted results. :)



The most Australians do not understand the system but I do. This is why I
vote informal.

People think they vote for someone. But the candidate they vote for is
excluded by preferential system and votes are at the end given to one of 2
big parties.

In the last 2 elections majority votes were AGAINST John Howard and AGAINST
Tony Abbott and Gulia Gillard.

When Pauline's One Nation get elected she was put in jail on lame excuse
that there was accounting error.

There was no choice to elect anyone in Australia than Labor or Liberal party
because at the end all votes are channeled to them.

Only in isolated electorates, where people has unique problems and unique
opinions on how to resolve the problems caused by any of 2 big parties
independents or minor parties can win.

This year we have government chosen by 3 independents from the most
problematic areas of Australia plus Wilkie whose life was destroyed before
by Howard'sGovernment Mafia.

How can anyone with brain call this democracy?

Many people whose votes are given to 2 big parties vote for someone else as
they are AGAINST monopoly of 2 parties, who are actually the same
incompetent group of mostly failed lawyers, and bot parties are run by big
business and foreign secret societies Freemasonry and Fabian Society.

People of Australia are sick of the governments full of lawyers and other
useless fools.

If Australia has direct voting system like the rest of the world, in second
voting circle most of the Laborals crooks will be eliminated and honest
candidates will get more votes.

Losers are all Australians.

We have no elections in Australia but selections.

The most educated and intelligent Australians - with the best UNI degrees
and dual citizenship - are excluded as candidates because their experience
from other country may bring positive change from retarded Westminster
system.

As a fraud call "preferential elections" give no choice to others, my balot
paper is always informal.

As direct votes for winning party are ALWAYS below 50%, this means that
majority of voters are AGAINST "elected" government.

Prime minister of Australia is not elected but selected.

Australian election system serve manipulation of country by Freemasons and
Fabian Society
for interest of foreign powers so preferential voting system we have in
Australia is not only complete fraud but also a treason.

NEXT PM
netvegetable
2010-09-24 08:21:26 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 06:41:32 +1000, ralph wrote:

[snip]
Post by ralph
Just out of interest where did it say finalised? I see 93% counted.
Oh ok. Here's the news from smh

http://tinyurl.com/2egnbxs

Here's the concession article from the Aus (after having crowed for
several editorials when the Coalition were temporarily slightly ahead
during counting)

http://tinyurl.com/24o6jlz


Here's the post from the pollbludger, from whom I flogged all the above
quotes in the OP

http://tinyurl.com/2fz7vnu
Anne Onime
2010-09-23 13:16:20 UTC
Permalink
X-No-Archive: Yes
Post by Anonymous
Post by Aaron
Post by Anonymous
Post by netvegetable
So much for the government being illegitimate.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
No party got more than 50% votes.
Preferential system is manipulation of peoples votes.
Australia NEVER had legitimate election winner.
All Government are installed by agreement between Freemasons and Fabian
Society.
NEXT PM
Translation: This guy does not understand how a democratic republic
works or why he does not get to dictate the outcome of elections, so
he invents a conspiracy theory. Pathetic!
Jewish ignorant idiot has spoken from the lodge trying to defend unGodly
conspiracy he is part of.
It has been mentioned before: "Scratch an anti-masonic kook, and you
will find an antisemitic."

Because so called "freemasonry" is a Jewish conspiracy.

I Guess you have to be a moron to not see it.
Post by Anonymous
There is no democracy in Australia.
Australia is a democratic republic with more than two political
parties, as you proved in your link.

However, Australia is not a republic.

Further more, Australia is not democratic.
Post by Anonymous
Voting is obligatory - penalties apply for not voting.
Irrelevant - it would be even more strict if Australia was a democracy
instead of a republic.

Idiot Aaron again claim that Australia is a republic.
Post by Anonymous
We have no elections in Australia but selections.
..and yet YOU posted a link to election results.

.. to self declared Australian Election Commission which should be reflecting the facts: Australian Selection Commission (ASC instead of AEC).
Post by Anonymous
The most educated and intelligent Australians - with the best UNI degrees
and dual citizenship - are excluded as candidates because their experience
from other country may bring positive change from retarded Westminster
system.
So only candidates without split loyalties may apply for office. It
might be paranoid to support this rule, but if the potential candidate
had Israeli Citizenship, you would demand that he withdraw, even if he
was the Messiah himself!

No problems - I know some nice Israeli citizens, some of them live in Melbourne.

Regarding Messiah, the word has one 2,000 years ago. Of course, Muslims and Jews deny this fact.
Post by Anonymous
As a fraud call "preferential elections" give no choice to others, my balot
paper is always informal.
As direct votes for winning party are ALWAYS below 50%, this means that
majority of voters are AGAINST "elected" government.
That is a really moronic thing to say. You should be placed in a
primary school for remedial education.

Fair enough.... BTW which kindergarten are you enrolled my dear Aaron?

Ballot are cast FOR candidates, not against them.

Not in Australia in the last 2 elections. Firstly, Australians want to remove PM John Howard (Freemason with low intellectual capabilities) so they massively vote Labors.
This year, Australians wanted to prevent Tony Abbott (also Freemason and Rhodes Scholar) to become Prime Minister. They vote against not for.

When there are more than 2 candidates receiving a significant percentage of votes the
winner is the candidate with the MOST votes, not a majority.

What is a significant percentage? In Australia winners are getting a little bit more than 30%. Which imply 70% are against them.

Even a small child should be able to figure this out.

Except you Aaron.

You are displaying typical paranoid schizophrenic symptoms.

..which you post as a reply all the time. You really need a help of professional psychiatrist Aaron.
Your delusions are far to high even for a Freemason.
The effects of hoodwinking, terrible massacres from the masonic oath and cable-tow around your neck had detrimental effect on your sanity.
Post by Anonymous
Prime minister of Australia is not elected but selected.
Contrary to USA, Australians DO NOT vote for top political positions like
Governor General or Prime Minister.
Yes, Australia uses a parliamentary system like the ancient Jews, and
the US used a presidential system modeled after the Masonic Lodge.

Is this teaching from your kindergarten or your lodge?
Post by Anonymous
Australian election system serve manipulation of country by Freemasons and
Fabian Society
for interest of foreign powers so preferential voting system we have in
Australia is not only complete fraud but also a treason.
Aside from your complete irrationality, you seem to be demanding that
Australia change to a more Masonic system because you want Masons to
control the government so that one of your fantasies will come true.

Australian Lieberal Party is fully controlled by UK Freemasons. Doesn't work.

Unfortunately for you, Masons are not allowed to use the Lodge to
influence politics. In the past, there have been violations of this
law which resulted in men being expelled from Masonry and Lodges
loosing their charters. It rarely happens today though.

Is former Australian Prime Minister John Howard expelled yet?

Agree with you that it rarely happens today because of extreme corruption in Freemasonry.


If you had a valid argument for political change in Australia, and
could express it without insane conspiracy theories, you could effect
election reform, but you just sound crazy.

Sounds crazy but I have influenced positive changes in Australia. Search and study my previous posts from 1992 onwards.
I do this for almost 20 years and you Aaron joined Freemasonry THIS YEAR and you think you are superior authority for Freemasonry.

What a fucking Jewish idiotic kindergarten wanker you are Aaron.

You are even more stupid than Kiwowitz, David Farook Simpson, Alex Fisher and Jim Bennie together.
Post by Anonymous
NEXT PM
P.S. Because you are so stupid and mental, I am redirecting all future posts from you to alt.idiots. To be fair to you, this reply will disappear from the Internet in 6 days.
Have a nice evening in your cockooland !
FarmI
2010-09-23 13:35:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aaron
Post by Anonymous
Voting is obligatory - penalties apply for not voting.
Irrelevant - it would be even more strict if Australia was a democracy
instead of a republic.
And you're both confused. There is obsolutely no compulsion to vote in
Australia. What IS compulsory is having one's name marked off the elctoral
roll.
Aaron
2010-09-24 01:00:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by FarmI
Post by Aaron
Post by Anonymous
Voting is obligatory - penalties apply for not voting.
Irrelevant - it would be even more strict if Australia was a democracy
instead of a republic.
And you're both confused. There is obsolutely no compulsion to vote in
Australia. What IS compulsory is having one's name marked off the elctoral
roll.
I did not say that there was, but since I did not take the time to
fact check its claim, I was not in a position to call the kook a liar,
all that I had proof of was extreme ignorance and a high probability
of paranoid schizophrenia (though modern psychologists use a more
quantifiable numerical system now, I just refer people to them for
examination).
FarmI
2010-09-24 13:24:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aaron
Post by FarmI
Post by Aaron
Post by Anonymous
Voting is obligatory - penalties apply for not voting.
Irrelevant - it would be even more strict if Australia was a democracy
instead of a republic.
And you're both confused. There is obsolutely no compulsion to vote in
Australia. What IS compulsory is having one's name marked off the elctoral
roll.
I did not say that there was,
I note your quibble, however you claimed that 'voting is obligatory' and
that 'penalites apply for not voting'. That is wrong.
Aaron
2010-09-25 04:54:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by FarmI
Post by Aaron
Post by FarmI
Post by Aaron
Post by Anonymous
Voting is obligatory - penalties apply for not voting.
Irrelevant - it would be even more strict if Australia was a democracy
instead of a republic.
And you're both confused. There is obsolutely no compulsion to vote in
Australia. What IS compulsory is having one's name marked off the elctoral
roll.
I did not say that there was,
I note your quibble, however you claimed that 'voting is obligatory' and
that 'penalites apply for not voting'. That is wrong.
You do not seem to be following this thread very well. I made NO
claims about obligatory voting or penalties; another poster made those
claims and having no direct knowledge, I did not dispute their claim.

A web-link to a supposed Australian law was posted that outlines some
very small fines. If this page is in error, you will have to prove
that.
netvegetable
2010-09-24 01:15:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by FarmI
Post by Aaron
Post by Anonymous
Voting is obligatory - penalties apply for not voting.
Irrelevant - it would be even more strict if Australia was a democracy
instead of a republic.
And you're both confused. There is obsolutely no compulsion to vote in
Australia. What IS compulsory is having one's name marked off the
elctoral roll.
Obsolutely no compulsion except what the Commonwealth Electoral Act
says.....


http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cea1918233/s245.html

COMMONWEALTH ELECTORAL ACT 1918 - SECT 245
Compulsory voting

(1) It shall be the duty of every elector to vote at each election.


http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cea1918233/s200dk.html

COMMONWEALTH ELECTORAL ACT 1918 - SECT 200DK
Voter to mark vote on ballot paper

Except as otherwise prescribed by the regulations, the voter, upon
receipt of a ballot paper under section 200DJ, must without delay:

(a) go to an unoccupied compartment of the voting place and mark his or
her ballot paper in private; and

(b) fold the ballot paper so as to conceal his or her vote and deposit
it in a ballot‑box; and

(c) leave the voting place.
Aaron
2010-09-24 00:30:42 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 15:16:20 +0200 (CEST), Anne Onime
Post by Anne Onime
X-No-Archive: Yes
Post by Anonymous
There is no democracy in Australia.
Australia is a democratic republic with more than two political
parties, as you proved in your link.
However, Australia is not a republic.
Further more, Australia is not democratic.
Do you have any sort of proof to back up this claim?

Do you claim that there is no Australian parliament?

Do you claim that there are no elections to select candidates?

Do you simply disagree with the method of elections?

What sort of government do you thing Australia has?
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...