more election
Sep. 1st, 2010 02:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hnpccSo as far as I can work out from the current figures on the AEC website we're stuck at:
House of Representatives:
ALP - 71 seats (83 last election)
Liberal - 44 seats (55 last election)
Liberal National Party of Qld - 21 (didn't exist last election, the two parties merged up there apparently)
Greens - 1 (none last election)
Nationals - 7 (10 last election)
Country Liberals - 1 (none last election, they may or may not have existed, I've never heard of them before)
Independent - 4 (2 last election)
Still in Doubt - 1
The two party preferred vote currently stands at 50% for ALP, 50% for Libs, with 776 votes more in favour of the Liberal party.
This does not, by any means, constitute a mandate for anything that I can see for either party.
(Mind you, they've only counted 82.95% of the vote, so God knows whether that'll change. Fortunately Tony Abbott's cousin doesn't work at high levels in a television network, so he can't use it to claim moral victory. At least I don't think he can. Not that that's stopping him or Julia Guillard trying. *sigh* Shut up and talk to the independents, both of you. And can someone check all possible relatives of both of them for potential conflict of interest in the media now please?)
So yeah, negotiations are continuing apparently.
Meanwhile I'm having an argument via facebook with a True Believer who is blaming the voters in the seats of Dennison and Melbourne for the ALP lack of outright victory*, presumably because voters there wanted "warm and fuzzy feelings" by voting Green. I've just pointed out that 83-2 =/= 72 and perhaps he'd like to have a look at the other 9 seats and the factors behind the losses there?
The argument that "you have to vote ALP! Because otherwise the Liberals will get in! And you know it's pointless voting against the major parties anyway!!" really annoys me though, not least because of (a) the inherent entitlement in the argument - I'm sorry, the ALP/Liberals do not possess a God-given right to be in power or opposition and (b) because, hello, preferential voting system?? If enough people are voting against your party that an Independent is elected, well, then I think you need to look at the policies being promoted (or, in the last election's case, the lack of them) and whether the electorate is actually sick of spin being promoted as substance. Sheesh.
Also, we now have a state election coming up. I know this because someone released a plan to build a rail line, this time to Monash University. Which, yay, if I believed for a second it was likely to happen in my lifetime, which I don't. No matter which group of idiots are elected. The proposed freeway through my suburb though? Unfortunately seems likely. *sigh*
*And now I'm wondering who the Liberal True Believers are blaming. Actually I know that - Joyce has already managed to insult all three ex-Nationals Independents. Heh.
House of Representatives:
ALP - 71 seats (83 last election)
Liberal - 44 seats (55 last election)
Liberal National Party of Qld - 21 (didn't exist last election, the two parties merged up there apparently)
Greens - 1 (none last election)
Nationals - 7 (10 last election)
Country Liberals - 1 (none last election, they may or may not have existed, I've never heard of them before)
Independent - 4 (2 last election)
Still in Doubt - 1
The two party preferred vote currently stands at 50% for ALP, 50% for Libs, with 776 votes more in favour of the Liberal party.
This does not, by any means, constitute a mandate for anything that I can see for either party.
(Mind you, they've only counted 82.95% of the vote, so God knows whether that'll change. Fortunately Tony Abbott's cousin doesn't work at high levels in a television network, so he can't use it to claim moral victory. At least I don't think he can. Not that that's stopping him or Julia Guillard trying. *sigh* Shut up and talk to the independents, both of you. And can someone check all possible relatives of both of them for potential conflict of interest in the media now please?)
So yeah, negotiations are continuing apparently.
Meanwhile I'm having an argument via facebook with a True Believer who is blaming the voters in the seats of Dennison and Melbourne for the ALP lack of outright victory*, presumably because voters there wanted "warm and fuzzy feelings" by voting Green. I've just pointed out that 83-2 =/= 72 and perhaps he'd like to have a look at the other 9 seats and the factors behind the losses there?
The argument that "you have to vote ALP! Because otherwise the Liberals will get in! And you know it's pointless voting against the major parties anyway!!" really annoys me though, not least because of (a) the inherent entitlement in the argument - I'm sorry, the ALP/Liberals do not possess a God-given right to be in power or opposition and (b) because, hello, preferential voting system?? If enough people are voting against your party that an Independent is elected, well, then I think you need to look at the policies being promoted (or, in the last election's case, the lack of them) and whether the electorate is actually sick of spin being promoted as substance. Sheesh.
Also, we now have a state election coming up. I know this because someone released a plan to build a rail line, this time to Monash University. Which, yay, if I believed for a second it was likely to happen in my lifetime, which I don't. No matter which group of idiots are elected. The proposed freeway through my suburb though? Unfortunately seems likely. *sigh*
*And now I'm wondering who the Liberal True Believers are blaming. Actually I know that - Joyce has already managed to insult all three ex-Nationals Independents. Heh.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 04:41 am (UTC)Oy.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 05:53 am (UTC)I'm just loving the "It's the Green's fault! They made us lose!" argument that is just so bloody stupid. Now we're on to the "but people have been saying since forever that the ALP is no longer left-wing, so that's not a valid argument" - which, OK, so what changed this election that you lost two seats to pro-left issues candidates then?
The stupid thing is that I think the ALP candidate in Melbourne was a very good candidate. Her party, on the other hand, ran a shithouse election campaign in which they firstly impersonated the other party, then decided to reveal that their newly elected leader was made of plastic, then decided to keep shooting themselves in the foot at every available opportunity.
Put it this way - I think Rudd and Turnbull made a wise choice in not including party logos on their campaigning materials.
Now I'm wondering what the outcome would have been under a first-past-the-post system, and whether we'd have a government yet under that system. If I have a spare hour or so I might check it out.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 05:58 am (UTC)Now we're on to the "but people have been saying since forever that the ALP is no longer left-wing, so that's not a valid argument" - which, OK, so what changed this election that you lost two seats to pro-left issues candidates then?
I don't quite see how that is an argument at all - if they are admitting that there there is no major left wing party, why do they expect left-wing people to vote for Labor anyway?
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 11:07 pm (UTC)I've already told this person when, exactly, I decided to preference the ALP lower than other parties, and they still don't get why the ALP lost votes from people with similar leanings to me. And again, seven seats. Ignoring the Green who's already agreed to work with them, and Wilkie who's off on his own planet, there's seven other seats they lost.
Might be worth their while finding out why - or they can keep blaming the voters in Dennison and Melbourne of course.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-01 05:50 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-02 03:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-02 03:52 am (UTC)