Would you vote if you didn't have to ?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

honk.. honk.. the current ranga clown is proof that your vote and opinions are worthless......

Really?

We used to have one of those sort of situations in QLD.........now they can share a single taxi to work.....

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by flappist

Really?

We used to have one of those sort of situations in QLD.........now they can share a single taxi to work.....

theyre all the same.. populist back room puppets say one thing do another.. how do you know a politician is lying.. their lips are moving......

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

honk.. honk.. the current ranga clown is proof that your vote and opinions are worthless......

No, the electorate got exactly what they voted for.

The fact that Julia Gillard (not all the names the uneducated like to call her) was better at negotiating than Tony Abbott is absolute proof why she should have the job. It is something the LNP and their supporters just can't get over.

If you listen to people who are actively involved in the Parliament they will tell you that the Parliament is working fine, so well in fact that in 2011 the Government were able to pass more Bills than any previous Government in a 12 month period, not too bad for a hung Parliament where negotiation is required every single day, I can't imagine Tony Abbott being able to do it. Tony Abbott meltdown

If you wanted to see a truly democratic Government is action you should have watched the current Government in a public forum last night in Paramatta, and if you wanted to see a proper leader then there she was on display for everyone to see, no script, just pure interaction with a live audience - well done Julia.

[mik]

you can`t be serious Mr Trev!

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

No, the electorate got exactly what they voted for.

The fact that Julia Gillard (not all the names the uneducated like to call her) was better at negotiating than Tony Abbott is absolute proof why she should have the job. It is something the LNP and their supporters just can't get over.

If you listen to people who are actively involved in the Parliament they will tell you that the Parliament is working fine, so well in fact that in 2011 the Government were able to pass more Bills than any previous Government in a 12 month period, not too bad for a hung Parliament where negotiation is required every single day, I can't imagine Tony Abbott being able to do it. Tony Abbott meltdown

If you wanted to see a truly democratic Government is action you should have watched the current Government in a public forum last night in Paramatta, and if you wanted to see a proper leader then there she was on display for everyone to see, no script, just pure interaction with a live audience - well done Julia.

you cant be serious.. pass me the bucket.....

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

you cant be serious.. pass me the bucket.....

Originally Posted by mik

you can`t be serious Mr Trev!

I am absolutely serious.

You can't be serious if you would vote for a Party led by Tony Abbott, my god he is an embarassment to the LNP and to the Australian public, he is a bumbler.

I believe they would have a better chance of winning the next election with Turnbull and both you know it.

The biggest problem with younger voters and some older voters is that they honestly believe everything that is written in the press and is reported on the nightly News.

Watch Q&A, watch programs like last nights Paramatta forum, I think you might be pleasantly surprised.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

you cant be serious.. pass me the bucket.....

I agree with some of what he is saying. The truth is that Gillard is the PM because she was able to negotiate a government. Abbott was not, and it did take him some time to get over it.

Gillard does seem effective in making the Parliament run, she does have good negotiating skills. This does not mean that you have to agree with her policies, but it is important to acknowledge that she does have some skill.

FWIW, I believe that Abbott has been very effective in damaging the government through a very negative campaign. Unfortunately for him it also has damaged him in the eyes of the electorate. I am not sure what the Liberals will do going into the election. They have to go positive at some point and I don't know if they have the right person in there for that.

[graham_h]

Originally Posted by Mont5.0

why wouldnt you vote? Thats a chance for you to voice your opinion. Think if everyone chose not to vote.

But does it change anything ?
Has any government ever done the right thing by it's people ?
Personally I wouldn't bother

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by cs123

I agree with some of what he is saying. The truth is that Gillard is the PM because she was able to negotiate a government. Abbott was not, and it did take him some time to get over it.

Gillard does seem effective in making the Parliament run, she does have good negotiating skills. This does not mean that you have to agree with her policies, but it is important to acknowledge that she does have some skill.

FWIW, I believe that Abbott has been very effective in damaging the government through a very negative campaign. Unfortunately for him it also has damaged him in the eyes of the electorate. I am not sure what the Liberals will do going into the election. They have to go positive at some point and I don't know if they have the right person in there for that.

and I agree with what you are saying CS, all 3 sentences in fact.

People seem amazed that there are people out there who actually support what the Government is doing and what they are trying to acheive.

You shouldn't be amazed that not all people believe all the negativity that the LNP are pushing out at a 1000 miles per hour (and yes they are being very effective at it at the moment, they are winning that battle)

People shouldn't be amazed that there are people who don't believe all the negativity of the Murdoch Press, the right wing press and the rich elite.

People shouldn't be amazed that there are people who reckon out of the 2 choices Gillard is by far the best option, and yes there are LNP supporters who believe that as well, they mightn't like the Labor policies, but they acknowledge that Gillard is the better option which is reflected in the 'prefered PM' polls

[flappist]

This is starting to become secular which is against T&C.

If this continues the thread will not.

[Trevor 57]

Point taken flappist, I will cease and desist forthwith

[gumbi_18]

I would still vote. But I wish there was a third option marked "Vote of No Confidence." I don't feel that either of the major parties represent a good choice. I'm generally a Liberal voter but Abbott is an idiot who I don't want to see running the country.

[Trevor 57]

Never ever waste a vote, we are lucky to have the privilege of being able to have a say on who runs the country, don't go by the leaders, look at the Parties policies and look and ask questions of the locals who are running in elections, ask them what they are going to do for you, then decide who you want to vote for, if any.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

what? pull out a gun and shoot someone, that is what many non-democratic countries do.

It doesn't have to be that extreme, and I don't neccessarily have to go about it with violence either.

You can be annoying, hold a sign and make loud noises, and the exchange of money and favours can go far in the descision making process.

[Chopped]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Never ever waste a vote, we are lucky to have the privilege of being able to have a say on who runs the country, don't go by the leaders, look at the Parties policies and look and ask questions of the locals who are running in elections, ask them what they are going to do for you, then decide who you want to vote for, if any.

But what if the barrel is now full of bad apples.....

I often wonder if voting was not compulsary then which way would most voters lean, left or right ?

Most compulsary voters like "popular promises" (what will they give me) rather than "policies" (what is good for the country). Both Liberal and Labour have used "popular promises" to stay in power.

[Tribal]

If there was something worth voting for, I think it would be a waste to choose not to support it...

(These rest of what I want to say breaches T&C's)

[Mont5.0]

Originally Posted by graham_h

But does it change anything ?
Has any government ever done the right thing by it's people ?
Personally I wouldn't bother

Thats my point. you wouldn't bother, i would. And yes i have seen governments doing right by its people, then they decided to vote back in the labour party . If everybody didnt bother voting- fair enough,-but how long before they are bitching and moaning saying they didnt get their say?

[atec77]

Originally Posted by buggerlugs

http://www.news.com.au/national/figh...-1226317057696

Of course , anything to dump labour into the abyss

[Cam]

I do love this country, and am glad that we have a democracy.. But i cant help but think that despite the liberals winning by a maaaaassive margin.. They got 49.7% of the vote, which means more then half of the state wanted someone else in power...

Am I just crazy in thinking like this?

[jmack]

when you rock up to a polling booth and said community leaders of certain ethnicities tell and show them how to vote because they dont speak english.people should only vote if they believe in the policies of the person they are voting for not because she is a female(questionable) or he nhas nice hair or some other stupid reason thaqt some of even my relos have done .as ive said i dont care which side u vote for just do it for the right reasons

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by cs123

I agree with some of what he is saying. The truth is that Gillard is the PM because she was able to negotiate a government. Abbott was not, and it did take him some time to get over it.

Gillard does seem effective in making the Parliament run, she does have good negotiating skills. This does not mean that you have to agree with her policies, but it is important to acknowledge that she does have some skill

having the skill to negotiate does not make someone a leader

if what is negotiated is only done to stay in power, even though they do not necessarily believe in it, then they are not a leader's butt

the world is full of people in high places, not because of what they know, but who they know or what favours they did to get there. people will do some pretty disgusting favours to get somewhere


whether anyone in australian politics, either past, present or future has done this, i do not have an opinion, but gaining power through lies is a fairly cheap way to get it. unfortunately it seems to be the only way some people can get the power they so richly crave . . . . at the expense of the working people

[Rodp]

I had snuck off the electoral role for a good 10 years, unfortunately due to home ownership and a lot of ignored letters suggesting my eligibility, my enrolment was done for me.

I don't feel like I'm wasting my vote when I feel that no candidate or party has done enough to earn it (the trend continues looking at the major party leaders at the moment)

I believe it would be a waste casting a vote for the sake of casting a vote and I believe voting should not be compulsory for this very reason. If I were ever to put my name on a ballot paper, I'd change my name to Aaron Aaronsen.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

It still amazes me that some people still think that when they vote they are voting for the Leader of a Party.

You should be listening to your local applicants for the job of joining the political arena, listening to what they can do for you and make you decision to vote for the person who best suits your needs.

There is nothing about 'parties' in our constitution.

Why is it always what they can do for you. how about putting the Nation first then everything will go from there, like clock work. a healthy Nation you have then not some experimental low life hog wash full of dip sticks running around like chooks.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

honk.. honk.. the current ranga clown is proof that your vote and opinions are worthless......

You are absolutely right there with that pathetic dictating pond life steering the Nation down the drain.
Old Rudd did the right thing to try to kick it out before it destroys the whole ALP for good..

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by castellan

You are absolutely right there with that pathetic dictating pond life steering the Nation down the drain.
Old Rudd did the right thing to try to kick it out before it destroys the whole ALP for good..

I could say a lot but it would breach the T&C so I won't lower myself. Flappist have given a warning, did you not see it?

[Lukeyson]

I wouldn't, and don't anyhow

[cs123]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

having the skill to negotiate does not make someone a leader

if what is negotiated is only done to stay in power, even though they do not necessarily believe in it, then they are not a leader's butt

I'd disagree. The ability to negotiate and reach consensus is core to the position of a leader of a political party and Prime Minister. I'd say it's probably 80% of what they do.

The Prime Minister is a leader but is also there at the whim of the Caucus, and as we saw they can be fickle. The need to be able to negotiate outcomes internal to the party like what electorates will get what funds, to seeking consensus with the parties and independents to get their bill through parliament.

There are lots of porkies told, of this there is no doubt. Tell too many and **** too many people off and then you are in trouble.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by cs123

I'd disagree. The ability to negotiate and reach consensus is core to the position of a leader of a political party and Prime Minister. I'd say it's probably 80% of what they do

true, but the negotiations need to be best for their country, not their own interests
just agreeing with other ministers means nothing - they need to agree on the correct things

[BHDOGS]

Im confused by this whole debate everybody moans and complains about whats best for the country then critizises the government who has the facts and figures more then most people can who believe they are making the right decision for the country just because you personaly believe a decision they make isnt right for the country doesnt make it wrong people need to wake up and realize there are differing views to all things thats how democracy works or perhaps take away having to vote then we can wind up like america where the only people who vote are regliious nuts rich people and those who want to twist the agenda to suit there own tastes it would be the lazy fat masses who suffer eg 90 perfect of the population not the rabbid 10 percent who are nutty enough to force opinion there way just go to the dam polling booth vote for somebody even if its the nazi party and enjoy ur democracy instead of sitting around complaining or better yet move to a country without or even talk to people who have lived there and would kill for a vote eg syria. The biggest problem with a constant democracy is the complacency and ignorance it breeds in its population who come to expect there thoughts above all others are correct.

[BPXR6T]

Nope, actually I haven't voted for a long time. I'm constantly on the move so the gestapo haven't caught up with me yet. Well they did catch up with me once and gave me a fine, but that's when I did actually vote and they lost my vote! The flavor of politics from both sides is unpalatable to me, I refuse to vote for either side. Wasn't the last election the worst voter turn out on record with a huge number of donkey votes.