Join 3,574 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Australian Federal Election
November 11, 2007 4:58 PM   Subscribe

The Australian Federal election is winding its desultory way towards resolution on 24 November. So far, it has failed to catch much of the electorate’s imagination, and the centrist Opposition Leader, Kevin Rudd, retains his comfortable lead in the polls, indicating a change in executive government after 11 years of John Howard’s big-government conservatism. Rudd’s “me too” strategy suggests that ideology is dead in Australia. (Previously)

There have been few surprises this campaign, and only the usual level of gaffes and cock-ups. There has been little attention given to the Senate race, despite some interesting horse trading such as Family First preferencing Pauline Hanson. The rise of psephological blogging has provided much-needed relief in the face of The Australian’s prostituting of itself to the conservatives. Personally I reckon Latham had a solid point, though it was easily ignored by the commentariat. It’s all about interest rates and the economy now.
posted by wilful (375 comments total) 5 users marked this as a favorite

 
First post! Good on ya wilful!

I think I might be wrong and the old thread closes later today. I guess we'll find out soon...
posted by Effigy2000 at 5:03 PM on November 11, 2007


ideology is dead in Australia

I've always found the Althusserian concept of ideology as an individual's imaginary relation to reality a useful one, and I don't see that going away any time soon. "I want the most pork" is as ideological a position as Communism or Scientology, albeit less theoretically elaborated.
posted by Wolof at 5:10 PM on November 11, 2007 [1 favorite]


At least with the official launch of the Liberal campaign today and Labor on Wednesday, they'll start paying for the campaigns themselves instead of getting taxpayers to cough up for every shout.
posted by tellurian at 5:30 PM on November 11, 2007


Athusserian!

At least nobody can complain that educated political commentary is dead.

I'm not sure what's meant by "John Howard’s big-government conservatism", though. Doesn't a budget surplus imply small government? Cut funding for services, privatise public assets, turn universities into businesses, push people from public to private health cover, try to leave everything possible (eg superannuation, telecommunications) to market forces (apart from the Bradman Museum)...other than trying to usurp power from State jurisdictions, hasn't most of Howard's agenda been towards the free market, small government model?
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:33 PM on November 11, 2007


/ slight derail
Will somebody tell me what happens if Howard loses his seat in Bennelong, but the Liberals win? Does he still get to be prime minister?
posted by dhruva at 5:41 PM on November 11, 2007


dhruva, he can be Prime Minister, but they would need to find him a seat somewhere, via a byelection. Doable, but politically untenable. He would be forced to retire due to public pressure.
posted by wilful at 5:44 PM on November 11, 2007


UbuRoivas, absolutely not. Public service numbers have increased, tax as a proportion of GDP has increased.

Howard talks about small government, then goes off with boondoggles such as technical training colleges, replicating the MDBC, and handing out truckloads of middle-class welfare.
posted by wilful at 5:49 PM on November 11, 2007


Pimp my vote.
posted by tellurian at 6:03 PM on November 11, 2007


For a comparison of Australian government's from Whitlam to Howard this page from the Federal Parliamentary Library has a good summary.

Wasn't the end of strong ideological differences between Australian political parties the Hawke - Keating governments? What's the difference between Rudd and those guys?
posted by sien at 6:07 PM on November 11, 2007


Rudd's younger.
posted by wilful at 6:11 PM on November 11, 2007


Sorry I misunderstood. I thgouth the difference between Howard and Rudd. The difference between Hawke/Keating and Rudd is yet to be fully determined. A less inspiring front bench, certainly. Easier economic times but worse international times will raise different challenges. Ideologically, Rudd is socially quite conservative. No one really knows what his vision thing is, if he even has one. Appears to be less of an economic reformer than Keating, but this is something that may be a front for the election (unlike the social stuff where I reckon it's all straight up).
posted by wilful at 6:15 PM on November 11, 2007


dhruva, he can be Prime Minister, but they would need to find him a seat somewhere, via a byelection. Doable, but politically untenable. He would be forced to retire due to public pressure.

He would have to step down until they can find him a seat though. Not that anyone is going to fall on their sword for him.
posted by mattoxic at 6:17 PM on November 11, 2007


As an American, pretty much every other countries politics seems pretty banal, although Pakistan has been giving us a run for our money over the past few weeks.

Don't get the wrong Idea, I'm actually quite jealous.
posted by delmoi at 6:17 PM on November 11, 2007


Will somebody tell me what happens if Howard loses his seat in Bennelong, but the Liberals win? Does he still get to be prime minister?

This guy will roll over for him. Always has before.

The Prime Minister of a Westminster system is not elected directly. The formal process is: the election is called and conducted, the new members take their seats, and they choose from among themselves which of them will be PM. If one party has an outright majority (as will happen for the ALP, barring extraordinary ill fortune), then obviously the PM will come from that party; failing this, a coalition must be formed. (The present government is a coalition of the centre-right Liberal and National Parties, and often called "the Coalition".)

In the ordinary course of things though the PM is a long-serving and respected member of the party, whose position as PM is decided well in advance of the election; Kevin Rudd will be PM, unless (by some incredible stroke of ill fortune) he failed to win back his seat, in which case, the ALP members would elect a PM from their number. The rest of the ministry is assigned by the PM, subject to various political processes; normally everyone knows well in advance what they're going to get, or not get, and why. Commonly in opposition, members are assigned to "shadow" ministry positions, and when in government, those members are ideally positioned to have the actual ministry. For example, Wayne Swan has been shadow Treasurer, and debated Peter Costello (current Treasurer, pictured above) on TV, and will likely be the incoming Treasurer.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 6:20 PM on November 11, 2007


Rudd is very clever, speaks well in English and Mandarin (much to someone's small minded chagrin), and is embarking on pretty much the only winnable strategy.

There is heaps of talent to call on, much more than on the conservative side. One just has to look at the current communications minister, or the hapless twit we have as an immigration minister.
posted by mattoxic at 6:22 PM on November 11, 2007


Can you guys explain to me this business about the campaigns formally launching this week? What the hell does that mean? I assumed that the campaigns started when the election was called. What's the real difference? I'm guessing from tellurian's comment that it has something to do with finances. Or is it the point when everybody can start sticking up posters everywhere?
posted by web-goddess at 6:44 PM on November 11, 2007


Ha! That's a fabulous link, mattoxic. Pathetically small, that.
posted by mumkin at 6:49 PM on November 11, 2007


It means that once the campaign has been officially launched, the parties can no longer claim allowances. They are on their own.
posted by mattoxic at 6:50 PM on November 11, 2007


Which as an absolute corruption and a scam. But we haven't heard about it until now because it's in neither party's interest to highlight this.
posted by wilful at 6:52 PM on November 11, 2007


No one really knows what his vision thing is, if he even has one. Appears to be less of an economic reformer than Keating, but this is something that may be a front for the election (unlike the social stuff where I reckon it's all straight up).

Rudd is playing his cards extremely close to his chest. This was thought to be the best strategy for getting rid of Howard, and it seems to be working. Basically, Howard wins elections by telling lies about his opponents. Give him nothing to lie about, and he has to fight on his own merits, which are few and far between.

So, he's currently reduced to lying about interest rates and unions. Historically interest rates have been high under ALP governments, for a variety of reasons; but also under the Liberal government of Malcolm Fraser, in which Howard himself was Treasurer. IMO we actually need an interest rate rise - currently bank investments return next to nothing, which discourages savings, and interest rates on credit are low, which encourages people to get into debt. Howard's stupid economic policies have driven up housing and rent costs, and (if let run their course) would drive down wages, which in turn drives citizen debt up further. As for unions, well, that's a long story - but he's trying to use "union power" as a scare campaign when some ludicrously low proportion of the employed electorate (maybe 10%?) are members of trade unions or associations; and the core of that scare campaign is an assertion that unions are scarier than corporations.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 6:53 PM on November 11, 2007


Mark Latham certainly has a view on Rudd's vision thing, which he spells out in the Latham Diaries: basically, he doesn't have one - he's just another power-seeking, idea-crabbing Right hack, albeit a little brighter than most. His shameless me-too stance up to this point would tend to bear that out. Mandarin yes, but no appeal.

The point of the formal campaign launch is that it marks the boundary between the real campaign and the phony campaign (the last four weeks). Calling the election date marked the end of the fake campaign (the last three years). It's all crap. Shake the bastards up a little and vote 1 Greens.
posted by flabdablet at 6:55 PM on November 11, 2007 [2 favorites]


MeTa, with a summary of the major events of the campaign as related in the first Aussie politics thread.

Also, the Liberal launch is underway. The ABC News page has a live link (near the top of the page). Go watch!
posted by Effigy2000 at 6:56 PM on November 11, 2007


Vaile is talking at the moment.

Hey! "Go for growth" is back!
posted by Effigy2000 at 6:58 PM on November 11, 2007


I have been in a fairly acrimonious argument with a colleague about the Liberal's "mastery" of the economy. I'm yet to receive an answer to my questions:

What specific reforms has Howard and Costello put in place to strengthen the economy?

Costello always says without their reforms, Australia would have been vulnerable to the Asian financial crisis. OK, but what Pete? What reforms? Do you mean, reducing tariff barriers? Floating the dollar? Deregulating the finance industry? Creating savings through compulsory super? Introduction of enterprise bargaining?

Oh, you mean the Keating reforms?

Basically the libs have done nothing except collect tax receipts from BHP, Rio Tinto and the banks.

There was border protection. That was one reform I suppose.
posted by mattoxic at 7:01 PM on November 11, 2007


mattoxic: Widening the tax base to encourage savings and putting it up before the electorate before doing it. (i.e. the GST). It is a substantial change and a good one.

By running a government surplus Australia was less likely to be influenced by the Asian financial crisis.

Did Hawke - Keating tell the electorate before bringing in their reforms?

Also, once the Hawke - Keating reforms were done what major reforms of that sort should the Liberals have done?

Paul Kelly's article in which he suggests that it is Australian intellectuals and pundits who are disappointing, not our recent governments, might be worth a read.
posted by sien at 7:12 PM on November 11, 2007


Mr Downer said Mr Rudd was not the only person in Australia who could speak another language.

"There are thousands upon thousands of Australians, there are tens of thousands of Australians, who can speak foreign languages and most of them don't bother to show off about it," he said.


Yeh, they're generally called "immigrants" & are busy assimilating like crazy because "showing off" their abilities normally results in people yelling at them "talk english or go back where ya come from!"
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:14 PM on November 11, 2007 [1 favorite]


Formalising the independence of the Reserve Bank.

Going debt free as sien has mentioned. GST was economically positive.

Yeah but SFA compared to all the National Competition Policy, Accord, deregulation, floating the dollar stuff.

It's really quite absurd that the narrative that must not be questioned is that the Coalition are superior economic managers, when the evidence from the past 3 governments is the other way.

sien there are still heaps of economic reforms that could be embarked upon. A carbon tax, simplification of personal taxes, recasting the commonwealth grants commission, fixing Telstra, that's off the top of my head.
posted by wilful at 7:19 PM on November 11, 2007


"[...] there are tens of thousands of Australians, who can speak foreign languages and most of them don't bother to show off about it"

Downer studied French as part of his foreign affairs training. I have it on good authority that during the opening of this giant museum dedicated to Australian and Pacific arts, at which Mr Downer represented his country, he spoke not one word of French. Not a "merci", not a "bon soir", not one single word. This, I would suggest, pretty much gives you the measure of the man.
posted by Wolof at 7:27 PM on November 11, 2007


Rudd, a former diplomat who speaks fluent Mandarin, used his language skills during an interview on a Chinese TV station yesterday.

Sounds like a completely appropriate place for Rudd to speak Mandarin.

Regardless this is the kind f distracting pettiness that seems to be so prevalent in any election.

The Gillard attack is also geared to show how vulnerable she is. Poor woman! She was conned! By a man! She needs protection! And of course the implications that she's an idiot and not fit to be in the position she is.
posted by gomichild at 7:39 PM on November 11, 2007


How will the Libs handle defeat? Today's Crikey
8. Errington: How will the Libs react to defeat?

Howard biographer Wayne Errington writes:

My ANU colleague and Crikey commentator Norman Abjorensen is forecasting a death blow for the Liberal Party. If, as seems increasingly likely, the Coalition loses on 24 November, the Liberals are in danger of self-destruction without the spoils of office to help enforce discipline.

The prospect of a new "small-l" liberal force has been foreshadowed for some time. The Coalition parties have handled their two previous in opposition poorly. The Liberals are a party built for government. A successful Liberal Party leader commands a high level of authority. Opposition leaders, almost by definition, have yet to prove their leadership credentials.

Certainly, the Liberals would miss the spoils of office in every state and territory. Yet, the two-party system has been very stable for over fifty years. Something like the Liberal Party will always exist as long as we keep the current electoral system. If a loss causes some soul-searching amongst Liberals about the purpose of their party, that is no bad thing.

The direction of the party may depend on who survives the deluge. The Coalition loss in 1983 left the dries in a difficult position, allowing Andrew Peacock to defeat John Howard for the leadership. This time around, with the likes of Malcolm Turnbull, Gary Humphries, Marise Payne and Christopher Pyne in danger, the election could determine the character of the party in opposition.

After a decade of Howard’s dominance, the right is in the ascendant. Working out exactly who is liberal or conservative after a decade in power, though, is difficult. Nothing has given Howard greater pleasure than watching wets such as Ruddock and Vanstone implement his authoritarian refugee policies. Brendan Nelson, Helen Coonan and Julie Bishop have toed Howard’s line against their ideological instincts.

The main danger of factional wars is that one or both factions decide that they would prefer to lose an election than see the party victorious under the leadership of their internal enemies. Howard was in that position in 1984. Yet, even the troglodyte right in New South Wales has acquiesced to the sensible and centrist Barry O’Farrell as parliamentary leader.

Howard might even become a unifying force in defeat. Whatever the dominant ideology in the party, it always needs to be balanced with the pragmatism that has been the hallmark of successful Liberal governments. Why on earth would the wets leave the Liberal Party at the very time their nemesis leaves office? They’ll be celebrating, not deserting.
posted by wilful at 7:48 PM on November 11, 2007 [1 favorite]


What specific reforms has Howard and Costello put in place to strengthen the economy?

I guess you could include the following:

* changing unfair dismissal laws - making it easier to fire staff without due cause; and
* workchoices - increasing the ability of companies to renegotiate (downwards) employee pay & other entitlements.

I think it is fair to say that these are good for business owners, which should increase efficiency & profits, which in turn creates more wealth which can be reinvested in other businesses, whereby the sacked or underpaid staff can get new or extra jobs to make up for what they've lost. Or something like that.
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:52 PM on November 11, 2007


Words fail to convey my utter disgust at the quality of the line-up this election. I don't believe I've ever seen such a collection of arse-kissing, mealy-mouthed, self-important tossers in my life. Policies aside, it's come down to choosing between the lesser of the two weevils. FAN-tastic.

I plan on spending election night getting pissed. If anyone cares to join the wake, drop me an line - email is in the profile.
posted by ninazer0 at 8:06 PM on November 11, 2007


Policies aside, it's come down to choosing between the lesser of the two weevils.

Wait... how is this different from the last election?
posted by gomichild at 8:11 PM on November 11, 2007


You're quite correct - there should definately be an *again* in there. It was probably my distress at having to vote and thereby encouraging the bastards that made me miss it out.
posted by ninazer0 at 8:17 PM on November 11, 2007


Bored now. Can we vote yet?
posted by pompomtom at 8:24 PM on November 11, 2007


I think it is fair to say that these are good for business owners, which should increase efficiency & profits, which in turn creates more wealth which can be reinvested in other businesses, whereby the sacked or underpaid staff can get new or extra jobs to make up for what they've lost. Or something like that.

There was an American economist on the radio the other day, who was saying that over the last twenty years, the relationship between industrial relations policy and macroeconomic health has been greatly studied. And the conclusion is, it makes no difference at all.

Highly regulated, centralised wage-setting / union dominated countries like France and Ireland? The economy has been doing fine.

Deregulated economies where workers have much fewer protections, like the US? The economy has been doing relatively well over there as well.

Industrial relations policies impact on the individual, but unless you go to the extent of equalizing wages with Bangladesh or Vietnam, it doesn't make a difference to the overall economy at all. The same amount of money is being made.

He made the point that the Howard reforms may actually be the worst sort, because they're actually 20-years out of date. After the fall of the Iron Curtain, there was a movement among economists to change the regulation structure to favour businesses / regulate against union power. This has failed, and economists now warn against it. The other two options are to regulate in favour of workers and unions (the traditional approach built up in the 60s and 70s), or to just tear up the rule book and completely deregulate the whole thing.

Howard hasn't done this. The Workchoices legislation is bigger than the legislation it replaces. It has not deregulated industrial relations, it's just placed rules on unions instead of businesses. The best approach may be complete deregulation. Let workers do what they want. If they want to form unions? Fine. If they want to go on strike? Don't punish them. If they want to sign individual contracts? Don't stop them. Workchoices does not do this. As I said, IR policies don't act on macroeconomic health, they act on individuals, and when the legislation is geared against workers, then it will be the individuals who suffer without any broader economic benefit.
posted by Jimbob at 8:53 PM on November 11, 2007


And who are these lauded "small business owners" who will benefit, anyway? What percentage of the population?

There was a story about the Adelaide electorate of Makin I read at the start of the campaign, where the Liberal pundit was saying "Making is full of small-business owners, so they are likely to stick with Liberal because of the benefits of the Workchoices legislation".

How can Makin possibly have more small-business owners than people working for small businesses? A lot of them probably teenagers working at the local Westfield Shoppingtown. Makin is where I grew up. I know exactly one family there who own a business - and they don't have any real interaction with Workchoices because the only employees of the business are the husband, the wife, and one of their sons.
posted by Jimbob at 8:57 PM on November 11, 2007


WorkChoices isn't deregulation. It adds 400 pages to the Regs.

But in boom times, it's good for the economy. In bust times, it's bad for the economy. That's only on a very narrow analysis too. Stability and security are also good, allowing people to take mortgages etc.

And the economy isn't the only frigging thing in the world.
posted by wilful at 9:08 PM on November 11, 2007


I just came across this, part of a series. Pretty good I thought.
posted by wilful at 9:27 PM on November 11, 2007


And the economy isn't the only frigging thing in the world.

Repeated for truth. I think that's what this election is about.

Is Howard the better economic manager? Majority say yes.
Do we care anymore? Majority say no.
posted by Jimbob at 9:44 PM on November 11, 2007



I guess you could include the following:

* changing unfair dismissal laws - making it easier to fire staff without due cause; and
* workchoices - increasing the ability of companies to renegotiate (downwards) employee pay & other entitlements.


The previous labor government had started the road away from centalised bargaining (those union hacks!)

Workchoices is merely ideology. The unfair dismissal laws are what they are, unfair. The laws are far too young to determine if they are having any real effect in the economy. It's probably the mining and credit boom that is the greater cause of employment.

Regarding the GST, yes that was a reform, and it's interesting that it's never mentioned by the govt, even Costello in his speech today mentioned waterfront reform, but not the GST.
posted by mattoxic at 11:44 PM on November 11, 2007


tom: Bored now. Can we vote yet?

I believe early voting opened 2 weeks before election day - though it would take effort to get the AEC to send you the paperwork...
posted by russm at 2:42 AM on November 12, 2007


failed to catch much of the electorate’s imagination

That's exactly how I'd put it. I was so excited for the election before the election, but now that it's begun it's just boring. Every day just bring more money being thrown around.

That being said - I'd be careful about reading too much into those polls. It's like the US - they do all these national polls, but they don't mean anything. Labor has to pick up 16 seats. They should be doing more polling in the marginals...
posted by maryn at 3:19 AM on November 12, 2007


There's a lot more going on in this election than the rest of you seem to have noticed. Greens look like being absolutely crucial, and are entirely immune to the negatives associated with the so-called death of ideology. They're also not (thank God) Althusserians.
posted by imperium at 10:41 AM on November 12, 2007


"Under our plan, as it applies to Australians under 18 years of age, parents, grandparents and others will be able to contribute up to $1,000 between them each year to a tax-free home savings account for children."
Coalition Campaign Address

So it now takes 3 generations to buy a house? So much for actually addressing the problem.
posted by figment at 2:23 PM on November 12, 2007


Yeah the senate always interests me most, imperium. Unfortunately, it's very hard to predict. As I understand it, Labor has no chance of controlling the senate in it's own right (good), the Liberals look like losing a few senate seats, and the most likely scenario looks to be minor parties with the balance of power. And with the continued rise of the Greens, I guess they are the most likely contenders. Which is probably the ideal situation for me - Labor in government, Greens with the balance of power.

I guess we will have to wait and see how that works in reality - people always accuse the Greens of being unable to compromise, but they've never really had the opportunity.

Kinda sad to see the demise of the Democrats, though.
posted by Jimbob at 2:23 PM on November 12, 2007


"Under our plan, as it applies to Australians under 18 years of age, parents, grandparents and others will be able to contribute up to $1,000 between them each year to a tax-free home savings account for children."

$1000 between them per year. Assuming 5% interest on savings, that's a whopping $50 earned per year. Assuming that tax would be 40% on that $50, that's a saving of $20 a year on each $1000. I realise that the capital & interest would compound over 18 years, but it sure doesn't sound like much, in comparison with housing prices which have been doubling every few years in recent times.

Apart from that, I think the first home buyers' grant demonstrated that giving buyers some kind of financial break or rebate does nothing other than push the price of every single dwelling up by that same amount. This tax-free savings plan would do pretty much the same thing, except that it would reward families who can afford to put aside $1000 per kid per year, and harm those who can't tie up that sort of money for that long.

So it now takes 3 generations to buy a house? So much for actually addressing the problem.

That's pretty much the situation now. It's near impossible for kids of baby boomers to buy into the market without drawing significantly on their parents' nest eggs, unless they want to either live in a shoebox 2 hours from the city (with no public transport), or relocate to places that are affordable for a reason, like Brisvegas, Adelaide, Perth, Hobart, Darwin, Newcastle, Wollongong, Canberra, or any part of Melbourne that isn't Collingwood, Carlton, Fitzroy or St Kilda.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:51 PM on November 12, 2007


Housing crisis is easy to fix- end tax breaks on investment properties, put tax breaks on genuine, means tested first home buyers.

But, the majors would be committing political suicide if the value of these investment properties in the inner suburbs declined.
posted by mattoxic at 3:02 PM on November 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


places that are affordable for a reason, like Brisvegas, Adelaide, Perth, Hobart, Darwin, Newcastle, Wollongong, Canberra, or any part of Melbourne that isn't Collingwood, Carlton, Fitzroy or St Kilda.

I see you left Bourke and Boggabri off that list. What is your secret agenda?

Also, note that the median house price in Perth is now dearer than Sydney.
posted by Wolof at 3:03 PM on November 12, 2007


I guess we will have to wait and see how that works in reality - people always accuse the Greens of being unable to compromise, but they've never really had the opportunity.

"Mr Speaker, we will lift our block on the Supply Bill quite gladly, just as soon as the Prime Minister promises to provide every school with its own heroin injection facility, to bulldoze the entire Gold Coast to create a sanctuary for endangered eastern spotted tree frogs, end enforce the installation of composting toilets in every Australian home"
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:05 PM on November 12, 2007


or relocate to places that are affordable for a reason, like... Darwin

Ha! You can't get a one-bedroom unit for under about $180,000 in Darwin. You can't get a house in the outer suburbs for under $400,000.

I'm moving to Hobart in April, which will provide, hopefully, the opportunity not to spend 50% of our income on rent.
posted by Jimbob at 3:09 PM on November 12, 2007


Canberra's not affordable!
posted by Lucie at 4:15 PM on November 12, 2007


John Howard has said that, if re-elected, it will be at least 18 months before Costello gets the keys to the lodge.

And how interesting is this story about Caroline Overington trying to influence preference flows in Wentworth towards Turnbull?
posted by Effigy2000 at 4:17 PM on November 12, 2007


Damn, I wish it had been Shanahan not Overington. She's claiming it was "just a joke" - this has got to be the most hilarious election campaign ever.
posted by Jimbob at 4:20 PM on November 12, 2007


For your bookmarks - it looks like this will be the place to be for live election results on the 24th. It looks nice, although it appears to be just run by a student with an interest in Soviet history, so I don't know how he is going to be pulling in the data.
posted by Jimbob at 4:24 PM on November 12, 2007


Ha! You can't get a one-bedroom unit for under about $180,000 in Darwin.

Oh, what I wouldn't give to be spat at in the face able to buy a one bedroom unit for about $180,000. Especially somewhere like Boggabri.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:29 PM on November 12, 2007


Possum has today proved that the Narrowing is occuring. On current trends, John Howard is set to be in a position to equal Rudd in the polls on 28th July 2008.
posted by Effigy2000 at 4:36 PM on November 12, 2007


I hear the red light district in Boggabri is pretty hawt.

Possum's statistics are questionable. Well, I guess like any statistics, it's all in the interpretation. If you run a different smoothing window on those phone polls, you get John Howard in a winning position sometime close to the turn of next century. Which is another way of saying, the polls are simply stable but noisy.

It's all those p-values. We don't like p-values around here. It's all about the multi-model inference, information-theoretic approach.
posted by Jimbob at 4:42 PM on November 12, 2007


Boggabri is clearly on track to become the centre of our information economy. They've certainly mastered animated GIFs.
posted by Jimbob at 4:45 PM on November 12, 2007


hehe, the webperson at the Boggabri community portal is probably wondering where all the hits are coming from.
posted by mattoxic at 4:59 PM on November 12, 2007


The Australian has really gone completely mental over the course of this campaign. I'd love to see their circulation figures. Late in the day, it's always the last paper with copies still on the rack at my newsagent.
posted by stammer at 5:54 PM on November 12, 2007


stammer, last nights Media Watch had a good piece on the Australian.
posted by mattoxic at 6:04 PM on November 12, 2007


This podcast from the ABC is depressing. The Voters Who Matter: Prosperity's Children. It's all about me, me, me. My education costs, my house ownership, my tax cuts. University students with pretty selfish views, driven in one case by his share portfolio and how uranium mining will benefit him. Along with that, a surprising (to me) statistic, 'direct share ownership amongst 25 to 34 year olds - 27%, 18 to 24 year olds - 14%'.
posted by tellurian at 6:28 PM on November 12, 2007


And in probably the most redundant statement in the entire history of politics, Howard has said that Costello would need to wait 18 months to 2 years (or more) before receiving the Prime Ministership from him.
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:54 PM on November 12, 2007


Crikey is reporting that the chaser were detained away from the Libs campaign launch....

Chaser frontman Craig Reucassel and two of the show's cameramen were primed for action ahead of yesterday's Coalition campaign launch in Queensland. However, they were foiled by police who detained them for the duration of the launch.

According to Reucassel, six or seven Queensland Police officers confronted the three men who were then taken (in two paddy vans) to Brisbane's South Bank Police Station. "They were very polite", says Reucassel, "not like the old days". The men were then held without charge until the Coalition launch was over. Reucassel tells Crikey he was put up in an interrogation room, while the camera crew was held elsewhere.

Under what legislation were they actually detained? "Anti-lame-joke legislation"? ventures Reucassel.

Nope, the PPRA, a Queensland Police spokeswoman told Crikey today. Which section? They couldn't say. In-depth research suggests section 50 of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000, which has a little bit of a Sir Joh feel to it:

50 Dealing with breach of the peace

(1) This section applies if a police officer reasonably suspects--

(a) a breach of the peace is happening or has happened; or

(b) there is an imminent likelihood of a breach of the peace; or

(c) there is a threatened breach of the peace.

(2) It is lawful for a police officer to take the steps the police officer considers reasonably necessary to prevent the breach of the peace happening or continuing, or the conduct that is the breach of the peace again happening, even though the conduct prevented might otherwise be lawful.

Examples for subsection (2)--

1 The police officer may detain a person until the need for the detention no longer exists.

2 A person who pushes in to the front of a queue may be directed to go to the end of the queue.

3 Property that may be used in or for breaching the peace may be seized to prevent the breach.

(3) It is lawful for a police officer--

(a) to receive into custody from a person the police officer reasonably believes has witnessed a breach of the peace, a person who has been lawfully detained under the Criminal Code, section 260; and

(b) to detain the person in custody for a reasonable time.

The Chaser's style of "breaching the peace" is unlikely one anticipated by the legislation, which is more routinely applied to the drunk and disorderly -- a "reasonable time" for detention could be defined, for example, as the time it takes for someone to sober up.

And detention does seem a little selective; it was not how the Police chose to handle the 100 or so protesters who were heckling John Howard as he arrived.

Were the Police briefed to nab Chaser members if they saw them? Mere speculation, and a suggestion that the Queensland Police media unit was unwilling to comment on. In fact, details were thin on the ground this morning, and no word on what standards would apply for tomorrow's ALP launch, also in Brisbane: "We're not talking about the preparation and planning", said a police spokeswoman.

They would say however that yesterday, "there were cordons in place" and the Chasers were approached because they "looked suspicious, wearing a fake wig and moustache." The ''men'' -- Queensland Police did not wish to confirm their identity because charges weren't laid -- were "searched, spoken to by detectives and released."

Crikey understands that The Chaser is not always the peace breacher. A couple of the crew had a heckler during their panel talk at the recent Brisbane Writers' Festival. He was swiftly removed.
posted by mattoxic at 7:30 PM on November 12, 2007


tellurian, the uninformed selfishness of those interviewees makes me want to slit my wrists. Each of them says, 'Yeah, I guess I'm a bit selfish' and sounds slightly embarassed...but they obviously aren't embarassed enough to change their actions/attitudes. Ugh. *cuts* *dies*
posted by Lucie at 7:44 PM on November 12, 2007


Chaser frontman Craig Reucassel and two of the show's cameramen were primed for action ahead of yesterday's Coalition campaign launch in Queensland. However, they were foiled by police who detained them for the duration of the launch.

Meh. Just a bit of interstate rivalry. The Queensland police were eager to prove that they're more on the ball than their counterparts in Sydney.
posted by UbuRoivas at 8:11 PM on November 12, 2007


Policies aside, it's come down to choosing between the lesser of the two weevils. FAN-tastic.

Since Labor went all economic "rationalist" in the Eighties, there has not really been a genuine two-party democracy in this country. It's just been Tweedledum and Tweedledee taking turns, while a tiny, tiny genuine Opposition takes the opportunity to exercise a bit of leverage during the occasional spat between the two. And yet the media continue to talk about the "two sides of politics" as if they were fundamentally opposed to each other. It's garbage. They're not. The "two sides of politics" are essentially interchangeable groups of lawyers and bean counters and none of them gives a shit about anything except running focus groups and arguing whose turn it is to play Be The Boss.

Until people start voting [1] minors as a matter of course, this won't ever change.

Luckily for us, Australia has a preferential voting system, and voting [1] the minor party you actually prefer has absolutely no downside. You're not splitting the vote for your less-despised major, as you would be for example by voting Green in the USA.

And you don't need to pay attention to the preference deals that everybody is making with everybody else; those deals only apply to voters who can't be arsed deciding who to allocate their own preferences to, and prefer to let somebody else do their thinking for them. If you fully specify your own preferences, none of the preference deals will affect your vote.

Vote [1] your minor party of choice (mine is Greens, because I pay attention to policy positions, not TV), put the mob you care for the least last, and work backward from there. And remind your friends and colleagues that they can and should do the same thing, next time you hear cynical whinging about how "a politician always gets in". I think you'll find that "a politician" is pretty much code for "some shiny-arse from one of the major parties".

And get fired up before going to the booth, by listening to this magnificent Perspective piece from Julian Burnside.
posted by flabdablet at 8:17 PM on November 12, 2007


Guys,

Just popped in to say thanks for the blow-by-blow coverage - I am thankfully unable to access Aus TV and Radio but Metafilter is providing just enough election "buzz" to keep give me my political fix.
posted by dangerousdan at 8:27 PM on November 12, 2007


Luckily for us, Australia has a preferential voting system, and voting [1] the minor party you actually prefer has absolutely no downside.

Is this true? My understanding of the preference system is that if one party doesn't have the absolute majority, the party with the least votes gets knocked out first. In most cases that's not going to be the Greens. Preferences are going to be reallocated from the fragmented right first - the Citizens Electoral Council or the Fred Nile Group or Blokes for the Right to Kill Small Critters. Those will be the first ballots with the chance to push a major party over the line, and in close contests it may take some time before the slightly larger parties need to be called in.

Correct me if I'm wrong, or if it doesn't actually make much of a difference. It's just how the sums play out in my mind.
posted by Jimbob at 8:46 PM on November 12, 2007


(Not trying to distract anyone from voting for minor parties. I always vote Green. But it worries me that my vote will count for nothing in close contests because the preferences will never enter into it.)
posted by Jimbob at 8:56 PM on November 12, 2007


Vote [1] your minor party of choice (mine is Greens, because I pay attention to policy positions, not TV), put the mob you care for the least last, and work backward from there.

Actually, unless things are different to the most recent NSW election, you don't even need to put the coalition - or whoever you hate most - last. There should be no need to number all boxes.

And Julian Burnside QC always rocks.

And Jimbob, it's a bit of a mess to explain, but if no party is clearly over 50% on primaries, then the obvious loser party preferences are reallocated until somebody is the clear winner. Sometimes you could preference minor party A, but they get knocked out so yr vote goes to yr second preference B, but they get knocked out, so they try to pass them to C but they were already out, and it goes on & on until your vote ends up in a still-viable bucket. I can see what you mean about one party getting over the line first, but it's always about getting >50% compared with the second-best party, right? It doesn't matter in which order you count. It probably actually makes *more* sense to reallocate party #3 & ignore the tiny loony parties unless the result is really really really close, but I'm not a scrutineer so am unsure exactly what process they follow.
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:01 PM on November 12, 2007


It's easier to conceptualise if you stop thinking about what happens to your particular vote, and instead think about building little piles.

All the votes come in for your electorate. Imagine there are five candidates. Put all (formal) votes into their respective piles based on #1.

Take smallest pile. This candidate can't win. Reallocate each ballot paper to the pile belonging to whoever was #2 on each one. Note that these will end up all over the place, in all the other 4 piles, but mostly following a similar trend.

Take the now-smallest pile. Repeat until you only have two piles left. The bigger one is the winner.
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:09 PM on November 12, 2007


So should we run a 'guess the seat count' for the election in this thread?

Lower House, closest to the actual numbers gets, well, a warm glow inside and a feeling of smug superiority.

Lower house only? One for both?
posted by sien at 9:18 PM on November 12, 2007


The increasing influence of the Greens has a delightful side effect: the rise of anti-Greens websites. High grade home grown internet stupidity.
posted by plant at 9:21 PM on November 12, 2007


Take the now-smallest pile. Repeat until you only have two piles left. The bigger one is the winner.

Aah, so the winner is only declared when you're only left with two piles?

I thought they stopped counting once one of the piles contained 50%+1 of the vote.

I've been trying to run it through in my head, and I'm trying to figure out a situation where the smallest party could be the spoiler.

Party A: 49%
Party B: 45%
Party C: 5% with all preferencing party B
Party D: 1% with all preferencing party A

In this situation party D would get knocked off, and add to party A. But I guess that's still not over 50% of the vote, so the preference shuffling would continue.

On the other hand:

Party A: 49.1%
Party B: 44.9%
Party C: 5% with all preferencing party B
Party D: 1% with all preferencing party A

In this case, the votes of party D would push party A over the line meaning party C would never need to be counted - but it wouldn't have changed the result anyway.

I guess you're right, it amounts to the same thing. Mathematically, in a close contest, it's probably not actually possible for really-minor parties to have more influence than medium-sized parties.
posted by Jimbob at 9:23 PM on November 12, 2007


Greens-watch. Heh. Family First, Exclusive Brethren, or Young Liberals, I wonder?
posted by Jimbob at 9:24 PM on November 12, 2007


I Game And I Vote: Gamespot AU's guide to the federal election for gamers and the issues affecting them.
posted by Effigy2000 at 9:35 PM on November 12, 2007


I Game And I Vote: Gamespot AU's guide to the federal election for gamers and the issues affecting them.
posted by Effigy2000 at 9:35 PM on November 12, 2007


Whoops!
posted by Effigy2000 at 9:36 PM on November 12, 2007


Here's a video explaining how preferences work. It's by the Greens, so there's a bit of pro-Greens propoganda in there (send a strong message? Jesus!) but it should help explain preferential voting to all y'all.
posted by Effigy2000 at 10:02 PM on November 12, 2007


I've been checking out some of the Senate candidate sites. Is the Citizens Electoral Council the looniest?
posted by tellurian at 10:11 PM on November 12, 2007


It's up there with the looniest of `em, tellurian. Not any better than Family First or Pauline's United Australia Party, in my books.
posted by Effigy2000 at 10:17 PM on November 12, 2007


Aah, so the winner is only declared when you're only left with two piles?

I thought they stopped counting once one of the piles contained 50%+1 of the vote.


as soon as you know that one pile is bound to be >50% then you know your winner. you don't need to get down to 2 piles to find that out.

however, i think that to know the final count (eg to know the swing, what swing is required next time etc), you do have to go through the whole process. so, you can know your winner within hours, but final exact figures can take longer. the actual counting isn't so time-consuming; it's waiting for all the absentee & postal votes to dribble in.
posted by UbuRoivas at 10:20 PM on November 12, 2007


Yeah, I guess once a pile is 50%+1 of the vote, by definition it will never be the smallest pile, so the preferences within it will never be redistributed.
posted by Jimbob at 10:33 PM on November 12, 2007


John Howard vs. The Angry German Kid.

Almost worth it's own FPP.
posted by Effigy2000 at 10:34 PM on November 12, 2007


Greens-watch is by the young Libs, I believe - according to An Onymous Lefty, who's a blogger I occasionally cruise by, who's a Greens supporter

CEC would get my vote as most consistent, longest serving loony party.

sien, the informed opinion is 89 Lab, 60 L/NP, 2 Ind for the lower house. No one really knows what the hell is going to happen in the Senate.

Re preferential voting, here's the official explanation.
posted by wilful at 1:14 AM on November 13, 2007


Let's look at a situation where you have four parties: call them Dum (nominally left major), Dee (nominally right major), LM (left minor) and RM (right minor) and the voting population for a given seat is split 50.1% Left, 49.9% Right.

Let's further assume that 10% of the voters, being quite left-leaning, choose to Send A Message by putting LM first, and that 2% of voters do the same on the other side by putting RM first.

First round:

Dum: 40.1%
Dee: 47.9%
LM: 10%
RM: 2%

Nobody has an absolute majority, so the party with the least votes (RM) is excluded, and its voters' second preferences counted for other parties. Assuming that all the RM preferences go to Dee, we get

Dum: 40.1%
Dee: 49.9%
LM: 10%

Still nobody has an absolute majority, so LM now gets excluded and has its preferences distributed:

Dum: 50.1% (wins)
Dee: 49.9%

The point is this: if you're voting in a seat that would go to your least-despised major if no minors were running, you will not cost that major a win by giving your preferred minor your first preference.

The only time that the preferencing system can apparently go bizarrely wrong is in contests that don't have major frontrunners, and voters follow their party's preference-allocation guidelines (which is what preference deals are done to set up) instead of thinking for themselves. This is how Family First beat the Greens to a Victorian senate seat.

Let's look at the first example again, only this time, the Dum backroom boys have cooked up a preference swap deal with Dee to "protect" themselves against LM, and both majors are enough on the nose that slightly over half their potential voters are putting in minor-party first preferences.

First round:

Dum: 25%
Dee: 24%
LM: 25.1%
RM: 25.9%

Nobody has an absolute majority, and Dee has the least votes, so it's excluded and its preferences are distributed. 90% of the Dee voters are guideline-following sheep, so their preferences flow to Dum; the remaining few go to RM.

Dum: 25% + 90% * 24% = 46.6%
LM: 25.1%
RM: 25.9% + 10% * 24% = 28.3%

Still no absolute majority. LM is excluded, and because no LM voter would go right-wing in a pink fit, all its preferences go to Dum:

Dum: 71.7% (elected, landslide)
RM: 28.3%

and the commentariat will be on about Dum's "historic" landslide win for years to come, even though it still only had upfront support of about half the electorate.

But wait! What if it were Dum that didn't get past the first round?

First round:

Dum: 24%
Dee: 25%
LM: 26.1%
RM: 24.9%

The protest vote to the left minors is huge, and Dum gets wiped out. Because 90% of Dum primary voters are also how-to-vote-card sheep, its preferences mostly flow to Dee:

Dee: 25% + 90% * 24% = 46.6%
LM: 26.1% + 10% * 24% = 28.5%
RM: 24.9%

RM is therefore excluded, Dee picks up all its preferences, and is elected with a landslide majority in a seat most of whose voters would consider themselves on "the other side of politics".

So, in this case, all those votes for LM did act as spoilers for Dum. But it's worth repeating that this will only happen when (a) there is no clear major/minor distinction and (b) parties enter into preference-allocation deals with "the other side of politics" as a deliberate tactic to shut out the real Opposition and (c) voters follow their how-to-vote cards instead of their consciences.

If there had been no such deal, and people had allocated their own preferences according to their own left/right bias, that last election would have gone like this:

First round:

Dum: 24%
Dee: 25%
LM: 26.1%
RM: 24.9%

Second round, with all preferences from the excluded Dum flowing to their "natural allies" LM:

Dee: 25%
LM: 50.1% (elected)
RM: 24.9%

Now, it's worth noting that the Australian majors quite often have asked voters to preference the other major, or an ideological ally of the other major, ahead of the Greens. I think that says something loud and important about the "two sides of politics".

And, as David Langsam pointed out in today's "Perspective", voting [1] minors really does send the majors a message - every such vote denies a major $2.10 in electoral funding. One million small party votes in each House is a $4.2 million big party lesson.
posted by flabdablet at 4:07 AM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


It's up there with the looniest of `em, tellurian. Not any better than Family First or Pauline's United Australia Party, in my books.
After this weekend's meetup, I was inspired to visit Monkeyfilter after a long absence. At the same time as I was looking at the Senate candidates, I came across HawthorneWingo's amazing post and made a comment and the two melded. In terms of looniness, it seems to me that that Pauline's United Australia Party and Family First have their own brand of home-grown paranoia, but to adopt a foreign, discredited association, just adds to the looniness for me.
posted by tellurian at 4:56 AM on November 13, 2007


flabdablet: i think you have too much time on your hands.

it usually comes down to the same thing: giant douche or turd sandwich.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:11 AM on November 13, 2007


Ubu, I am probably at least as cynical about the Great Unwashed Australian Voting Public as you are (Howard's win on Tampa, and 75% public support for the Ooga Booga Terrorist Suspect detention laws were the final nails in the coffin for me); but hipster cynicism needs to be put aside if there is to be any hope of a party with actual principles gaining influence. And I don't want to give up that hope.

Very few people actually understand how our preferential voting system works. If I can make some small contribution to increasing that understanding, and thereby discourage a few hundred people from blindly following a how-to-vote card, I think that's time well spent.
posted by flabdablet at 12:54 PM on November 13, 2007


flabbo, don't get me wrong. i'm a party member & all, although i've done sweet fa so far this election, other than putting up corflutes in my windows. too many other commitments right now. i'll be handing out how-to-votes on election day, tho (a great way of seeing *all* the eyecandy in my suburb, btw), and maybe do some letterboxing this weekend.

it was just a very lengthy & detailed analysis you did there.

i think an important thing people should know is that you don't need to number all candidates. that way, you can make sure that there's *no* chance of your vote going to your hated parties, whoever they may be.
posted by UbuRoivas at 1:58 PM on November 13, 2007


i think an important thing people should know is that you don't need to number all candidates.

Clarification on this is required, too. My understanding was that in Queensland they have "optional preferential voting", while in other states you have to number every square. From here:
In Western Australia, Victoria and Federally, compulsory preferential voting is used. You must "number every square".
Queensland and New South Wales elections employ optional preferential voting. Voters can just give a '1' to one candidate and leave it at that, or do that plus give someone else a '2'; they can fill in as many squares as they like.
If I read that correctly, it also applies to NSW state elections now, but in Federal elections you have to number every box. And I also understood that for voting below-the-line in the Senate, they have some tolerance for errors or missed boxes, but you're still supposed to try to number every box.

Has this changed recently?
posted by Jimbob at 2:22 PM on November 13, 2007


Jimbob: dunno. I suggest that ppl check the electoral commission website for the facts. I never realised that it could be different state-to-state or between state & federal elections.

Meanwhile, Brisvegas residents have definitely switched off the election coverage.

Top five articles from the Brisbane Times in the past 24 hours:

1. Man killed after throwing bonsai
2. Judge honoured for sticking up for goldfish
3. Lingerie models turn up heat in LA
4. Cats fan now knows left from right
5. China recycling used condoms as cheap hair bands
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:30 PM on November 13, 2007


Guys, you do have to number every box. However, there is a margin for error and you're allowed to get some wrong. Best you dont, and make sure you get your top ten right, but you don't have to screw up your ballot paper if you miss a few in the middle.

In Queensland, it's much easier. You just do this:

[1] Andrew Bartlett.

Seriously, someone give me reason you shouldn't vote for him, and should vote for someone else. I'll pre-emptively inform you you're wrong.
posted by wilful at 2:35 PM on November 13, 2007


Yeah, wait just a second there, Ubu. We got our AEC "How to Vote" instruction sheets in the mail last night and I poured over them. I'm pretty sure it said you had to number every box.
posted by web-goddess at 2:35 PM on November 13, 2007


Not only do you have to number every box, but ever since Albert Langer got sent to jail for suggesting that you're allowed to duplicate some numbers in order to deny the majors a preference (Tweedledum and Tweedledee, 1, 2, 3, 3) it's been made clear that repeating numbers will render a vote informal.
posted by flabdablet at 2:48 PM on November 13, 2007


Bartlett... wasn't he the guy who got drunk in the chamber and manhandled a female Liberal senator?
posted by Effigy2000 at 2:53 PM on November 13, 2007


right, ignore my misinformation on how to fill out your vote. that was how things worked in the nsw state election.

getting drunk & manhandling a senator chick? that must have been hawke, right? and we all loved him more for it: "i'll tell you what - any boss who fires his workers for getting drunk & manhandling their female colleagues is a bum!"
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:59 PM on November 13, 2007


If you intend to vote "above the line" in the Senate, be aware that by doing so, you're allowing your candidate to dictate the order of your preferences. You can see precisely what that means here.

I note in passing that voting [1] Andrew Bartlett above the line means you're supporting the Climate Change Coalition, Carers, What Women Want (Australia), David Couper, Michael Brown, Katrina Alberts and Martin Rady ahead of any Greens candidates.
posted by flabdablet at 3:11 PM on November 13, 2007


Yeah. And since Bartlett has been back on the wagon, he has officially become the most boring senator to listen to ever. But hey, that doesn't mean he does a bad job. And he shares the surname of the best US president ever am I rite?
posted by Jimbob at 3:14 PM on November 13, 2007


I think he also misappropriated some Liberal vino.

I heard a whisper he's gay too!

And was once a goth (read satanist)
posted by wilful at 3:16 PM on November 13, 2007


I remain extremely, extremely surprised that Family First have never played the gay card on Bob Brown in their endless attacks on The Greens.

Shit, I'm surprised Eric Abetz and Nick Minchin have never played it.
posted by Jimbob at 3:20 PM on November 13, 2007


And flabdablet, how many of those candidates will get anywhere? Do you have anything against those people?Your vote still ends up with the Greens if they're the final quota.

With teh Greens, you get carers, What women want, Hackett-Jones, Rivett, Alberts, Rady, Climate Change Coalition, the fucking Socialist Alliance, a few independents, the fucking Libertarians (guns are good), before Andrew Bartlett.

Who's the stinky-bum preferencer here, Greens or Democrats?

Jimbob, Bartlet with one T.
posted by wilful at 3:27 PM on November 13, 2007


The Libs must really be worried about Wentworth. Yesterday we heard about Caroline Overington's attempts to sway independent preferences away from George Newhouse, and now, somehow, they have found out that his nomination for the seat may not be constitutionally valid because he didn't resign from a public service position he held 24 hours before declaring his nomination.

Still, I guess the more time they spend trying to save Turnbull's hide (presumably so he can try and save them from the wilderness of Opoosition in 2010) the less time and resources the Libs have to spend anywhere else.
posted by Effigy2000 at 3:28 PM on November 13, 2007


wilful, I'm not trying to make out that one mob's preference deals are any less stinky-bum than another's. I'm encouraging people to investigate exactly what their above-the-line votes mean before casting them.

A lot of Victorians wish they'd done that, last time around.
posted by flabdablet at 3:43 PM on November 13, 2007


Well, if you can believe the article it was a bit of a stupid thing for Newhouse to have done - sending an undated resignation letter that close to the cut-off date. It's the kind of thing that doesn't matter a bit in reality (I would have assumed you would have to resign if elected, not if you were just running as a candidate), but by the letter of the law he may well be in the shit. Surely the Labor hacks have people to organise this sort of stuff?
posted by Jimbob at 3:44 PM on November 13, 2007


Well, it would have taken a lot of Victorians a lot of hardcore analysis to figure out they were voting for Family First last time, wouldn't it? I mean, it's clear as day in hindsight, but Family First getting a seat was by no means a foregone conclusion.
posted by Jimbob at 3:45 PM on November 13, 2007


wilful: That sounds about right on predictions. Over at the Oz politics tipping comp the bulk seem to sit around 82-89 seats for the ALP.
posted by sien at 3:50 PM on November 13, 2007


If "hardcore analysis" means looking at the ALP voting ticket and noting that FF was preferenced ahead of the Greens, then yes, I guess it would have taken some of that.

The whole point of preferences is to say who you prefer. If you cast a vote that says you prefer FF to the Greens, it shouldn't surprise you when the electoral genie grants your wish.

If you don't prefer Family First to the Greens, don't cast a vote that says you do.

Parties named for rhetorical exposition purposes only. No endorsement or denigration of any party is intended or should be inferred. Your vote should vary.
posted by flabdablet at 3:57 PM on November 13, 2007


The group voting tickets I linked to earlier can be a useful shortcut to figuring out a meaningful below-the-line vote, even if you can't be arsed working out where everybody stands in detail.

Have a look at the group voting tickets for the parties you're generally sympathetic to, and see who they list last. Unless there's a really stinky-bum set of preference deals going on, those will generally be people you wouldn't want to vote for. Stinky-bum preference deals are common, though, so don't let your favoured party's preference suggestions dictate yours.

Number the candidates you know of and prefer, in order of preference starting from 1; then start at the highest number available, and number backwards from the candidate you most despise; then use the group voting tickets of all your preferred candidates as a guide to help you figure out what order to number the candidates you've never heard of.

My mother's method is to put the candidate she least prefers right in the middle of the order, on the grounds that she doesn't want some tiny nutjob minority to be the first to get to hand out its preferences. But I think she's missed the point, rather like Jimbob originally did above. The first party to be excluded, and therefore have its voters' preferences distributed, is not the one that the most people put last; it's the one that the fewest people put first. The Monster Raving Loony Party's power to influence the second round of voting is not affected at all by whether you put them at 30 or 65, but their likelihood of actually ending up with a seat may well be.

Just number all the candidates, in the order you prefer them. Attempts to game the system just make it deliver random outcomes.
posted by flabdablet at 4:35 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


As I said before, I've heard on good authority (but cant find the link now) that you are able make some cock-ups, a couple or so, before your ballot is invalidated. So do what lots of us do, start from the top, start from the bottom, don't worry if a few go missing in the middle.

But if you cant count to 65, hmmm, maybe you should just use above the line.
posted by wilful at 5:07 PM on November 13, 2007


Forgot to mention before, here is Andrew Bartlett's blog post on how the QLD Democrats went through their preferencing process.

The main bit:
In deciding our Senate preference ticket in Queensland, the Democrats used the following general principles as a guide to group the various parties:
• smaller parties and independents who are sufficiently like-minded to justifiably put ahead of the Greens – this group included Climate Change Coalition, Carers Alliance and What Women Want, as well as two grouped Independents – Couper and Alberts;
• smaller parties and independent too philosophically different to be able to justify putting ahead of the Greens, but still OK enough to put ahead of the major parties – this group included the Liberty & Democracy Party (LDP), Socialist Alliance, Senator On-Line, the Fishing & Lifestyle Party and another Independent
• smaller parties and independents who are basically too antithetical to Democrat philosophy to preference ahead of the major parties, given the tiny but real risk that our preferences might end up helping to elect them – there are quite a few of these – Family First ended up here after some debate, along with the DLP, Fishing Party, Shooters, CEC, Fred Nile’s mob, One Nation and then Pauline Hanson last.
posted by wilful at 9:35 PM on November 13, 2007


Go for Growth: the Unofficial Liberal Campaign Ad.
posted by Effigy2000 at 11:21 PM on November 13, 2007


Poll Bludger goes out on a limb and predicts no less than six senate wins for the Greens, taking their total numbers in the senate to eight. I don't think this is likely, but I think they will certainly win a decent proportion of those six seats. Add on Nick Xenophon from SA, and of course Steve Fielding, and there looks to be an interesting crop of minors who may be sitting on the cross-benches with the balance of power. Interesting times.
posted by Jimbob at 3:11 PM on November 14, 2007


With the Greens or the Liberal Party being required to pass legislation in the Senate it may not be that much of an issue for the ALP because they can use one or the other to pass what they want.

Surely this would give a centre left party like the ALP a fairly free hand.
posted by sien at 4:34 PM on November 14, 2007


Well I'd like to see how the actual final senate numbers would look, which is something I haven't bothered to calculate myself. Although it will be a sad state of affairs if Labor's policies are so far the the right that they can rely on the Liberals to vote for them all in the Senate.
posted by Jimbob at 4:44 PM on November 14, 2007


If the Libs get too bolshie Rudd would surely (hopefully) be tempted to call a double-dissolution election.

I must sadly concur with the consensus that this election will mark the end of the Australian Democrats.

Rage, rage against the dying of the light. There goes the sensible middle.
posted by wilful at 4:47 PM on November 14, 2007


Meanwhile, in Brisvegas, Rudd might be thinking of invoking the law & order card, to stem the rising tide of bogans bashing goths with bags of goon.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:58 PM on November 14, 2007


Some bogan on the radio this morning said Julia Gillard was a communist and tried to get Rudd to say whether or not she owned a skirt.

I can't even begin to formulate a response. It just makes me sad and angry. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
posted by web-goddess at 5:11 PM on November 14, 2007


"So, 'as you ever seen Maggie's thatch?"
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:24 PM on November 14, 2007


Ah, goon bag. My banana-bending friends introduced me to 'goon-o-fortune', which requires a hills hoist, and complete idiocy.
posted by wilful at 5:59 PM on November 14, 2007


Goon of fortune is in wikipedia. It needs to be saved from deletion.
posted by sien at 6:29 PM on November 14, 2007


F*** off or I'll break the goon!

Funny, when I was in Hobart last week, there was an almost identical story - a group of bogans bashing a group of emo/goths in the mall.

But what constitutes a bogan, these days? Young people are still bogans? When I think of a bogan, I think of a guy in black denim jeans, faded Adidas sneakers, a Megadeth t-shirt with a pack of Winnie Blues stuffed under the shoulder, and a VK Commodore. These guys are approaching their late 30s now, surely? What do these young bogans look like? What are they into? Or has "bogan" changed it's meaning while I wasn't looking?

Admittedly, drinking goon on the street still fits into my definition of bogan, so I guess not everything has changed.
posted by Jimbob at 6:40 PM on November 14, 2007


Funny - when I was a goth, drinking goon on the street was something we'd do from time to time, but I put that down to a punk influence. I don't think we were quite as prissy as today's goths. Less pvc & corsets, more torn jeans & studded leather & mohawks & the like.
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:57 PM on November 14, 2007


Can't help but feel the Dems are pretty much meat at this stage.
posted by Wolof at 10:29 PM on November 14, 2007


Definitely. Though they did alright out of preference deals (helps not being a loonie, or considered by loonies as bad as the gay vegetarian junkies of the Greens party) and if Family First can do it on 1.4%, then Andrew Bartlett is a chance in Qld. But yeah, history.
posted by wilful at 10:53 PM on November 14, 2007


Weird Labor ad that I'm sure had people running into their lounge rooms to try and figure out what the fucking beeping sound was.
posted by Jimbob at 3:29 AM on November 15, 2007


Good grief! Ding, Fart. Puerile.
posted by tellurian at 5:50 AM on November 15, 2007


Kinda sad to see the demise of the Democrats, though.
Tell me about it. I had great hope. I was quite close with Aden Ridgeway at the time when this party was imploding. It was heartbreaking but at the same time eye-opening to hear about the back-stabbing that goes on in politics.
posted by tellurian at 6:10 AM on November 15, 2007


Housing crisis is easy to fix- end tax breaks on investment properties, put tax breaks on genuine, means tested first home buyers.

All this does is send rents through the roof since nobody bothers buying rental properties. Didn't Labor get rid of negative gearing back in the Hawke days and then have to put it back in?

I note in passing that voting [1] Andrew Bartlett above the line means you're supporting the Climate Change Coalition, Carers, What Women Want (Australia), David Couper, Michael Brown, Katrina Alberts and Martin Rady ahead of any Greens candidates.

So you're saying I can save a bunch of time and not accidentally vote for the Greens? Sign me up.
posted by markr at 2:07 PM on November 15, 2007


Didn't Labor get rid of negative gearing back in the Hawke days and then have to put it back in?

Correct.
posted by Wolof at 2:39 PM on November 15, 2007


So you're saying I can save a bunch of time and not accidentally vote for the Greens? Sign me up.

OK, markr, I've signed you up. Your paperwork will be in the mail. Remember, you will be committing a felony under Federal Law if you attempt to vote without these crucial papers.
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:35 PM on November 15, 2007


Jimbob: "Weird Labor ad that I'm sure had people running into their lounge rooms to try and figure out what the fucking beeping sound was."

Yeah, that ad is... out of form. All their other ads so far this election have been great, but this one... erm... not so much. I suspect the point though is to get people who may have been cooking dinner or attending to the kids with the TV blaring in the background to look up and pay attention. On that level, it works. But hell, even I as a Labor supporter though the ad was kind of annoying. Hopefully they replace it with something better soon.
posted by Effigy2000 at 5:22 PM on November 15, 2007


Didn't Labor get rid of negative gearing back in the Hawke days and then have to put it back in?

I don't know that they actually *had* do reintroduce it, I think it was more of a pitch to the middle classes than some constitutional requirement.

Negative gearing on investment properties is the elephant in the room. Governments used to also build low cost rental housing, this has ceased- and indeed, the Victorian government is selling a huge swag of inner Melbourne commission properties (Ashburton/Ashwood/Oakleigh) to cash in on the boom. So neither side is helping.
posted by mattoxic at 6:55 PM on November 15, 2007


tellurian, I remember seeing a painful Kerry O'Brien interview with Ridgway when he was deputy and Stott Despoja was leader.

Does Natasha Stott Despoja have your full support?

Well Kerry, the important thing here is....

But does Natasha Stott Despoja have your full support?

Kerry, the Democrats are a party of........

Very sad, he just couldn't back her- just when the party needed unity and discipline. I blame the demise of the dems on Lees, Kernot and Ridgway.
posted by mattoxic at 7:08 PM on November 15, 2007


Very, very interesting. Back in 1990, the Liberal Party was committed to a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in 10 years. What the hell happened?

In truth, that would have been an extremely difficult target to meet...but it would have been good to at least try, wouldn't it?
posted by Jimbob at 7:13 PM on November 15, 2007


mattoxic: "Very sad, he just couldn't back her- just when the party needed unity and discipline. I blame the demise of the dems on Lees, Kernot and Ridgway."

I don't blame Ridgway so much as I blame Lees and her bestest buddy ever, Andrew Murray. As I said back in the old thread, the two nails in the coffin of the AD's were;

1. Support for the GST (Lee's fault)
2. The constant bitching and carping at Despoja's leadership by Lees and Murray.

Once Despoja (who was probably the party's best hope for redemption in the eyes of the public following the GST fiasco) was forced to resign, I think the public essentially gave up all hope of reconciling with the Democrats. Hence why there are stories of this election signaling the final and utter demise of the Democrats. I'd be sad, but apart from Despoja and maybe Bartlett I've always considered the Dems to be nothing more than liberal Liberal's, so I probably won't shed too many tears for them, I must admit.
posted by Effigy2000 at 8:58 PM on November 15, 2007


I don't know that they actually *had* do reintroduce it, I think it was more of a pitch to the middle classes than some constitutional requirement.

Getting rid of it created a terrible rental squeeze. It was affecting a lot more people than just a few knobs.
posted by Wolof at 11:25 PM on November 15, 2007


Headline: Rudd gatecrashes toddler's birthday party.

In the actual article: Rudd happens to walk past a toddler's birthday party, and they all cheer for him and call out "You've got our votes!".
posted by Jimbob at 11:40 PM on November 16, 2007


Crikey did a little analysis yesterday, comparing The Age and the Australian during the election period, for placement and treatment of the two parties.

The results were unsurprising: The Age showed a small bias towards the ALP (which I think could be explained by the fact they've run a better campaign), with The Australian heavily (far moreso than the Age) biased, towards the Libs if that needed to be spelled out.

Man they've got a reality check coming.
posted by wilful at 12:15 AM on November 17, 2007


Howard has flagged that he will quarantine welfare payments from people convicted of drug use.

Yeah. Because that's what people with a drug habit need. To be broke. Can anyone smell a crime increase? Because I can.

I also smell a big, fat, salty wedge. No doubt Howard wants Labor to say something like that so Howard can be all "Labor soft on drugs" for the last week.
posted by Effigy2000 at 6:58 PM on November 17, 2007


The Sunday Age and the Oz blogosphere (my reading instead of studying) has totally turned it's discussion in the past few days. Howard's end is nigh, of that there is basically no doubt no. Should be a messy week for the coalition, as they start to carve out their post-election narratives. The stench of death is on them, I think this is self-reinforcing. In particular, why would you vote for ratty in Bennelong?

Good news for the Greens, polling is strongly suggesting they'll get the second ACT Senate seat, which was always a bit aspirational for them. Looks like they'll have the balance of power, which should be an interesting test of their responsibility and capacity to compromise.
posted by wilful at 7:04 PM on November 17, 2007


Effigy, I reckon he's talking about food vouchers and the like for druggies. Also some code in there about cracking down on the jurisdictions that are 'soft on drugs'.

Not that Howard's views are relevant any more. I'm calling this election, it's a wrap.
posted by wilful at 7:39 PM on November 17, 2007


I was just at a barbecue in Sturt where Chris Pyne was glad-handing it and poncing away in his usual style. I considered asking him why there was not so much as a single corflute up in the entire electorate featuring Dear Leader's grinning puss, but decided I couldn't be bothered listening to whatever answer he might have.
posted by Wolof at 9:21 PM on November 17, 2007


Eww Chris Pyne. The epitome of Young Liberal self-fondling. I want that man's bollocks nailed above my mantelpiece.
posted by Jimbob at 9:24 PM on November 17, 2007


Eww Chris Pyne.

Yes, another graduate of the Alexander Downer Academy of Elocutionary Arts and Diverse Condescensions.
posted by Wolof at 9:30 PM on November 17, 2007 [1 favorite]


Christopher Pyne's wife highly recommends him.
posted by Jimbob at 9:33 PM on November 17, 2007


From a comment on Possum: Lucky for Carolyn I live in Sturt and I know just what to do on polling day to help Christopher stay home more...Perhaps he could pick up work locally after the election. I’m thinking one of those jobs advertised in the shop windows at Burnside Village might be suitable.
posted by Jimbob at 9:39 PM on November 17, 2007


I finally have my absentee ballots. Charmingly, the Senate ballot is three sheets sticky-taped together.

This Trenchant Lemmings post proved quite handy in sorting out the various minor parties and undeclared groupings in the Senate. It also pointed out a cheery SMH article on the trials and tribulations of the average micro party-

Earlier this year, for instance, a newly formed micro party, Hear Our Voice, had a policy launch in Canberra.
The news media who turned up included a Herald photographer and a local commercial TV crew. But before the TV crew finished unpacking their gear, a call from their news editor redirected them to a nearby house fire.

posted by zamboni at 11:21 PM on November 17, 2007


Not that Howard's views are relevant any more. I'm calling this election, it's a wrap.

I also smell a big, fat, salty wedge. No doubt Howard wants Labor to say something like that so Howard can be all "Labor soft on drugs" for the last week.

Ah, beating up on the druggie bogeyman - the last refuge of the political scoundrel.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:35 PM on November 18, 2007


Lib heartland slips away
posted by Wolof at 6:46 PM on November 18, 2007


DIY preference deals
posted by flabdablet at 7:25 PM on November 18, 2007


Have you guys heard of the party What women want?

It sounds like a dodgy Mel Gibson film, the title of an email joke or a cheap strip show, but no, it is in fact a political party.

UbuRoivas: There's always kiddie fiddlers to attack.
posted by sien at 7:27 PM on November 18, 2007


What Women Want, huh? Is this part of their agenda? They might just get my vote, ahead of the Greens.
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:32 PM on November 18, 2007


oh, hang on, i take that back. there's just been a huge kerfuffle over mefi being too much of a boyzone or something. somehow, ethereal bligh got himself a time out or a banhammer out of it, so one shouldn't joke about these things.
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:37 PM on November 18, 2007


It sounds like a dodgy Mel Gibson film

Or Freud's "Was will das Weib?"
posted by Wolof at 7:42 PM on November 18, 2007


Re: the DIY preference deals link. I entered my postcode, and it told me No Electorates Were Found, so I guess I shouldn't bother turning up to vote on Saturday...
posted by Jimbob at 7:56 PM on November 18, 2007


Oh, fixed. Their evidently well-designed site was utterly confused by NT postcodes beginning with a zero.
posted by Jimbob at 8:00 PM on November 18, 2007


doesn't like my 1xxx postcode, either.
posted by UbuRoivas at 8:16 PM on November 18, 2007


Negative gearing is no elephant in the room anymore. The last raft of tax cuts and super changes eliminated the tax advantages compared to investment via superannuation, which is largely the sharemarket, bonds and commercial property. Residential investment property has low returns and lots of management headaches with tenants etc.
And who believes AU property prices can double again excluding inflation?
Take a look at the rental squeeze in Sydney - there is no growth in investment properties.
Property prices are high because rates went low and heaps of mums went to work, allowing families to pay a higher mortgage.
Those two factors are played out, so prices will stagnate - but that won't tempt investors.
So, it is a sucky time to rent now, as choice is limited and rents are rising, but the last 10 years were comparatively good times to rent, with rents low as a percentage of property value.
posted by bystander at 8:23 PM on November 18, 2007


Oh, and I am going to an election night party, so I will be numbed to whichever party wins.
posted by bystander at 8:26 PM on November 18, 2007


I notice the CEC have been cranking up their election machine in the last week. I received their newsletter in my letter box yesterday, headline "Australia and US Must Unite To Defeat British Imperialism", while they flooded the email at work with spam warning us all that the British Bankers are promoting global genocide through their support of the environment...or something...
posted by Jimbob at 8:47 PM on November 18, 2007


Yeah Jimbob, the Queen is responsible for a large part of the world's drug trade - that's why they're in Afghanistan.

Or something.

In ohter news, The Age's FoI request for the correspondence with the Exclusive Brethren has been held up for over a year now, and will be ruled on, wait for it, after the election. This is the same corro which Bob Brown was told in Parliament did not exist. So someone was misleading Parliament...

Also, apparently these evil god botherers have got a special dispensation to vote this election. And on RN this morning, Howard was heard giving a political speech inside a Korean Church in his electorate. That disgusts me, and I'm not even religious. Something about moneylenders? And/or rendering unto Caesar?
posted by wilful at 9:03 PM on November 18, 2007


Bah, this whole country is a bloody boy zone, Ubu! (I'm still gritting my teeth over the Gillard-skirt issue last week, mostly because it was the same day I'd decided I wanted to go buy some pretty summer skirts, and instead that stupid idiot made me feel as if my intelligence and competence was somehow tied to whether I showed off my legs or not, so out of spite I'm wearing pants and sweating like a man. ARE YOU HAPPY, BOGANS?)
posted by web-goddess at 9:16 PM on November 18, 2007


web-goddes: Why are you stereotyping bogans? Many bogans embrace equal opportunity for both sexes. Toranas for all.

On a serious note, Nichola Roxon does not get nearly enough attention. Hopefully when she becomes Health Minister she will get more. She's my local member, does a good job and is very capable.
posted by sien at 9:19 PM on November 18, 2007


Toranas or Cortinas for all.

Fixed, so as not to alienate the Ford contingent.

And maybe Nichola would get more attention if she wore shorter skirts, or lower-cut tops?

(i've really really gotta stop doing that!)
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:30 PM on November 18, 2007


*dons plaid shirt, revs Pacer*
posted by Wolof at 9:56 PM on November 18, 2007


Ms Roxon actually had a baby recently and was fairly quiet, but as she will be government soon things will change shortly in terms of her presence.

She's willful's local member too I think, what's your opinion of her?
posted by sien at 10:07 PM on November 18, 2007


My 3xxx postcode works just fine, and apparently What Women Want is actually who I should be voting for, ahead of the Greens. Whoda thunkit?

My current member, and I use that word advisedly, is Peter McGauran (he of the aspirational hairdo). I think he's probably rusted on, but it would be rather nice to see the seat go to Jane Rowe. I've spent some time talking with Jane Rowe, and she actually appears to be possessed of some form of Clue. If I can't have a Green, or get What Women Want, I wouldn't be unhappy with Jane.
posted by flabdablet at 2:05 AM on November 19, 2007


I'm distinctly not a fan of Ms Roxon, mostly because of her party's shameful cuddling up to the Coalition regarding same-sex marriages when she was shadow A.G. I wrote her a polite but critical letter on the issue and she did not reply.

State MPs, even senior Ministers, always reply to their constituents.

She also does nothing for her local electorate, we're ignored by her because we're such a safe seat.

That said she seems competent and may well make an excellent Minster. We will find out soon enough. And she embarrassed Tony Abbott, so that's a good thing.
posted by wilful at 2:18 PM on November 19, 2007


I stumbled across the blog of the Libertarian candidate for Solomon. He seems like a nice enough chap, if you're into that sort of thing. Doesn't seem to be a gun-waving nutter, in any case. Although I can't understand his platform of pushing for statehood for the NT (complete with 12 senators, heh). Shouldn't Libertarians want to wipe out the useless, wasteful middle-level of government, rather than promote it? And the LDP really seem to have it in for the Greens,
posted by Jimbob at 2:34 PM on November 19, 2007


Jacques Chester is one of the lead people at one of my favourite blogs, Club Troppo. He's quite open about some of the LDPs problems.

Personally I cannot stand Libertarianism, I think it is anathaema to civil society and they're all a bunch of selfish middle class tools that don't want to pay taxes and believe in fairies (go on wilful, tell us what you really think), but Mr Chester comes across as a quite reasonable and intelligent bloke and he'd get my vote ahead of the Country red-neck party.
posted by wilful at 2:47 PM on November 19, 2007


Downer 'knew' about AWB kickbacks
posted by Wolof at 2:53 PM on November 19, 2007


Just shovelled another load of crap out of the letterbox:

Your vote for Andrew Southcott in Boothby will support the Liberals' bold 9-Point Plan for Australia's future [captalisation is as supplied]

and

Thinking about voting for the Greens?
New Taxes
Higher Taxes
More Expensive Private Health Insurance
More Power for Union Bosses
Heroin Injecting Rooms and Legalised Heroin

I don't know about you people, but I'm worried for the future of this country if these dangerous radicals get anywhere near the levers of power in the Senate! Family First it is, then!
posted by Wolof at 3:05 PM on November 19, 2007


A few interesting points in this blog post. I was only dimly aware that the Territory Senate positions changed at the election, not on 1 July. So the Coalition could well lose control of the upper house by next week, if the ACT polling is accurate. Also, I like Bob Brown's suggestion of being able to get rid of preferences by numbering all above the line.

And the value of an independent Senate staffed by people like Andrew Bartlett is once again confirmed.
posted by wilful at 5:54 PM on November 19, 2007


Learning from the experts: If you look like losing an election, take it to court.
posted by Jimbob at 9:06 PM on November 19, 2007


Wow, I have a lot of Gellibrand buddies in this thread! Holla! Anyone else seeing a lot of Socialist Alliance placards in the last few days?
posted by stammer at 5:15 AM on November 20, 2007


G'day stammer. Er, no, I haven't seen any more than the usual number stuck to the poles near Footscray station. Just got Nicola Roxon's HTV, and she lists two people below the Libs - they must really be awful people.

Most read on the Age website this morning: "PM continues to misrepresent the truth. He must go", by RJ Hawke.
posted by wilful at 1:28 PM on November 20, 2007


wilful: My state MP, Ms Kosky, didn't reply to letters on the same issue (regarding local transport) that Ms Roxon's office did reply to. This was especially galling as she is transport minister.
posted by sien at 1:42 PM on November 20, 2007


sien, when I emailed a whinge about PT to Kosky, I got a very long reply from the Department and a contact email. I subsequently had half a dozen emails to and fro with the friendly bureaucrat. Of course, the final outcome was that I realised even more clearly how PT is going to continue to deteriorate for the foreseeable future in the west.
posted by wilful at 3:12 PM on November 20, 2007


Hmm, the Tampa II has been sighted. Nice timing.
posted by GeckoDundee at 5:00 PM on November 20, 2007


Just got Nicola Roxon's HTV, and she lists two people below the Libs - they must really be awful people.

I threw mine out, but I'm pretty sure they were Family First and the CEC (known to me as the Paranoid Schizophrenic Party).
posted by stammer at 6:39 PM on November 20, 2007


Rudd at the Press Club just then was typically polished, on message and a bit cliched.

Politics will become quite boring soon I think. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing.
posted by wilful at 6:43 PM on November 20, 2007


THE LIBERAL Party is in damage control after the exposure of a dirty tricks campaign in a key marginal seat, where pamphlets designed to tap into anti-Muslim sentiment were distributed by party volunteers.

...


The pamphlet at the centre of the scandal was attributed to the fictitious "Islamic Australia Federation", and purportedly urged a vote for Labor because of its support for Muslim causes.

"We gratefully acknowledge Labor's support to forgive our Muslim brothers who have been unjustly sentenced to death for the Bali bombings," the pamphlet says.

"Labor is the only political party to support the entry to this country of our Grand Mufti Reverend Sheik al-Hilaly and we thank Honourable Paul Keating for overturning the objections of ASIO to allow our Grand Mufti to enter this country."


The Nasty Party.
posted by stammer at 7:51 AM on November 21, 2007


That whole pamphlet story is just disgusting.

Why can't they just state their policies and intentions and let people decide? These underhanded tactics and poo-flinging are so distasteful.
posted by gomichild at 12:20 PM on November 21, 2007


Outgoing Liberal MP Jackie Kelly says a bogus pamphlet that portrays Labor as sympathisers of Islamic terrorists and was distributed by her husband was just a "Chaser-style of prank".

I guess the joke's on them!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHAHAAAAA!!!!

T minus 60 hours & counting...
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:17 PM on November 21, 2007


heh
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:18 PM on November 21, 2007


A chance to rebuild, after a decade of moral erosion

Keating puts the boot in.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:46 PM on November 21, 2007


Labor frontbencher Penny Wong described the incident as "a dirty trick" and "a clear breach" of electoral laws. "What I'm saying is it appears people who are very senior within the NSW division of the Liberal Party are involved," she said.

But Mr Robb hit back, saying it was "offensive in the extreme" of Ms Wong to try to implicate senior members of the party with an orchestrated campaign of this nature.

It's grossly offensive!
posted by Wolof at 2:51 PM on November 21, 2007


Man, this is great. Two days, two signs of Liberal desperation. And both backfired.

I am more certain than ever that this election is in the bag. Only some serious electoral rorting can save the Libs now.
posted by Effigy2000 at 3:07 PM on November 21, 2007


Wolof, it's not just grossly offensive. Get this:

Ms Kelly also accused Labor members of going after the Liberal workers who were distributing the pamphlets.

"An ALP goon squad, which I understand was led by some unionists, have chased down and hunted down and tried to intimidate [my husband & senior Liberal staffers who were distributing the bogus pamphlets overnight]. I understand there was even a fight,'' Ms Kelly told ABC radio today.


On the bright side, The Chaser have offered Ms Kelly a job:

The Chaser's executive producer Julian Morrow has now invited Ms Kelly, who will retire after the election, to join the comedy team.

"Jackie will obviously be looking for a job," Morrow said.

"One of the criticisms of The Chaser is that we don't have any women on our team.

"Bronwyn Bishop has got the inside running, but Jackie is welcome to make an application."

Morrow questioned whether the Liberal party "prank" had truly been in the spirit of The Chaser.

"If this was really a Chaser stunt, where were the big props, where was the Osama Bin Laden costume," he asked.

"The only real similarity [with a Chaser gag] is that the Liberals in Lindsay got caught and may be facing charges.

"It's a bit of a worry when the best argument you have to defend your ethical practices is that you were doing what The Chaser does.

"We are hoping this will lead to a profitable political consultancy for The Chaser in the future."

posted by UbuRoivas at 3:12 PM on November 21, 2007


Signed, sealed and delivered.

So this dodgy pamphlet, did it have an "Authorised by the Liberal Party" fine-print on it? I assume not. Fraudulent, conceited fucking bastards.

This is quite simply the definition of arrogance.

The coalition believe that they deserve to be in power. The believe they are the moral authority. And when the tide turns against them, it confuses the fuck out of them. I mean look at Howard, in the past such a smooth politician, who just can't catch onto the fact that people hate Workchoices, hate GW Bush, don't trust him anymore. He thinks it's all some kind of left-wing propaganda. So he keeps spruiking Workchoices, keeps cuddling up to Bush, keeps banging on about evil unionists, so assured that real aussies are behind him.

You can see it in low-down stunts like this - sinking to any level because they feel they deserve to be in power. The same with the "13 ineligible candidates". Complete and utter desperation and confusion that comes from completely losing touch with the public. Look at the letter from Christopher Pyne's wife I linked to a few days ago - summary "Please vote for my husband so we don't lose the $180,000 ministers salary - don't you know I'm pregnant!"

Pathetic bunch of Tory fucks. I'm going to drink a Coppers Ale for every fucking seat they lose, with a bottle of champas on standby for Bennelong.
posted by Jimbob at 3:30 PM on November 21, 2007


What strikes me about the whole flyer issue is how lame it is. These guys are supposed to be the masters of racially inflammatory wedge politics, but this is totally amateur hour. I could literally come up with a better dirty trick in my sleep. Very disappointing.
posted by stammer at 3:40 PM on November 21, 2007


a Coppers Ale for every fucking seat they lose

Now that sounds like a plan.
posted by pompomtom at 3:44 PM on November 21, 2007


Antony Green writes of the seat of Lindsay;

"A key mortgage belt seat that the media incorrectly labels Labor 'heartland', it covers parts of Sydney that over the last three decades have tended to swing with changes of government."

No wonder Howard thinks this isn't funny. He's just lost another Bellwether seat!
posted by Effigy2000 at 3:48 PM on November 21, 2007


But is it going to be Coopers Red, or Coopers Green?

I prefer to alternate, in honour of watermelon parties, and also the mighty South Sydney Rabbitohs.

I could literally come up with a better dirty trick in my sleep.

Tell me about it. "Alla Akba", for fuck's sake. They might be excused for getting the hu-Akhbar bit wrong, but who in the world is thick enough to misspell Allah as Alla? Bring on the Education Revolution, say I. We can't have it soon enough.
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:52 PM on November 21, 2007


Oh, hang on, Jimbob - you're going to nick beers from the coppers? you realise that you'd be drinking stolen beers, since the coppers confiscated them from the blackfellas in the first place.

And whoops! "Ala Akba" it was. Even worse.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:02 PM on November 21, 2007


Apologies for my angry misspellings. The shame. I would drink Queensland beer out of respect for the Rudd's amazing powers of victory, except they don't brew anything up there that doesn't taste like wombat piss.
posted by Jimbob at 4:06 PM on November 21, 2007


You're showing some real disrespect there, Jimbob. Wombat piss is often the only source of fluids for people crossing the great empty wastes of Australia's Texas.

[Lindsay's] Main suburbs include Penrith, Cambridge Park, Werrington, Mt Pleasant, Kingswood, Emu Plains, Glenmore Park, St Marys and Oxley Park.

That's a real mixture of places. Penrith & St Marys are on the Nepean River, at the foot of the Blue Mountains, old settlements from colonial times & now quite gentrified, despite a bogan reputation. Werrington & St Marys are real ALP heartland places - commuter suburbs of fibro houses, about as far from the city you can get, in the least desirable direction.

Mt Pleasant, Glenmore Park & Oxley Park sound suspiciously like McMansion estates. You can normally tell by names that contain a hint of being wildly misleading. Mount Pleasant is probably neither a mountain nor pleasant (in fact, it sounds like a brand of goon), and the others surely have nothing whatsoever in common with parks, unless you mean 4-door home carparks for the SUVs & Commodores that are mandatory because of a total lack of public transport.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:19 PM on November 21, 2007


Penrith & St Marys Emu Plains are on the Nepean River
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:28 PM on November 21, 2007


Fuck you, haters. XXXX Gold is good shit.

Not as good as Boags, granted, but if you're on a budget it'll do ya.

When a politics thread descends into talk of which beer is the best, you know Howard's fucked.
posted by Effigy2000 at 5:07 PM on November 21, 2007


What's the bet that Howard drinks Crown Lager, as a rule?
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:18 PM on November 21, 2007


Boag's for me. Win, lose or draw.
posted by Wolof at 5:37 PM on November 21, 2007


Howard looks white as a ghost, already hanging his head in defeat at the National Press Club address.
posted by Jimbob at 6:08 PM on November 21, 2007


A dyed-in the wool boagan, I see, Wolof.
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:12 PM on November 21, 2007


What's the bet that Howard drinks Crown Lager, as a rule?

Bet he drinks Budweiser.

How did we get onto beer already?
posted by gomichild at 6:17 PM on November 21, 2007


Yeah, at the pub I ask for a slab of Bogan's. Or pronounce it BO - ags.
posted by Wolof at 6:19 PM on November 21, 2007


(common touch, y'see)
posted by Wolof at 6:26 PM on November 21, 2007


Quick one mefites. Who was the guy who got thrown in jail for advocating preferences that exhausted your vote before giving it to a major party? I think he did something like 1 greens, 2 democrats 3 labor, 3 liberal, 3 one nation.
Only other clues are I think it was in Victoria, and he had an old fashioned name (Alf? Stan?) and probably 7-10 years ago.
From memory he was jailed for contempt after being instructed not to advocate this style of voting.
posted by bystander at 6:44 PM on November 21, 2007


Albert Langer
posted by Wolof at 6:51 PM on November 21, 2007


How did we get onto beer already?

What are you talking about? It's past lunchtime on thursday. This means that in all workplaces across the country, tools are downed, computers switched off, ties removed, and we start the weekend just that little bit early, continuing through friday & only finishing off our last beer at around 1am next monday morning.
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:53 PM on November 21, 2007


Sorry I lose a bit of Australian-ness with every passing year on the outside....
posted by gomichild at 7:45 PM on November 21, 2007


Albert Langer. Do keep up.
posted by flabdablet at 7:48 PM on November 21, 2007


Thanks Wolof. Sorry flabdablet.
I knew I had seen him mentioned somewhere in the last week but thought it was on Possum Pollytics.
I am spending my time revving up my complacent workplace to put some thought into their voting, and we have been having some long discussions about how to use preferences. (although as flabdablet and Wiki note the Langer vote is now informal)
posted by bystander at 8:22 PM on November 21, 2007


A former Liberal Party campaign worker says retiring MP Jackie Kelly and her supporters have form distributing bogus election material.
posted by UbuRoivas at 8:36 PM on November 21, 2007


That sound you hear is the wheels falling off.
posted by Wolof at 8:59 PM on November 21, 2007


The wheels fell off a few days ago. That sound is the axles wearing down.
posted by gomichild at 9:08 PM on November 21, 2007


101 Uses for a John Howard.
posted by Effigy2000 at 9:57 PM on November 21, 2007


This bogus leaflet scandal on the day that the rodent was to make his final big election speech is the most beautiful poetic justice for Tampa & Children Overboard.

Who lives by the racist lie dies by the racist lie.

The photo of Liberal MP Jackie Kelly's husband shielding himself from the cameras behind the bogus & potentially criminal pamplets is priceless.

In other news, Sydneysiders can look forward to a monster free street event in the Newtown area, along the vein of Reclaim The Streets, on election night. It's called Good RidDance & starts at 5pm, meeting at Newtown Square (opposite the station). More info on myspace.
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:59 PM on November 21, 2007


Anyone interested in a very nice property in Canberra?
posted by Effigy2000 at 10:39 PM on November 21, 2007


This is nitpicking to be sure, but I have a feeling Kirribilli is in Sydney.
posted by Wolof at 10:45 PM on November 21, 2007


You would, of course, be right.

It's late in the day and I'm tired, OK?

That's my excuse and I'm sticking to it.
posted by Effigy2000 at 10:56 PM on November 21, 2007


And you are right to do so!
posted by Wolof at 4:12 AM on November 22, 2007


well, nobody told him otherwise, and if they did, he can't recall the exact details of that conversation.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:03 AM on November 22, 2007


JOHN HOWARD faces annihilation in tomorrow's election, with Labor on track to record one of the biggest swings against a government since World War II, the latest Herald/Nielsen poll shows.

Labor leads the primary vote by 48 per cent to 40 per cent, giving it a two-party-preferred lead of 57 per cent to 43 per cent.

This represents a 10 per cent swing to Labor since the 2004 election, which is more than twice the 4.8 per cent swing Labor needs tomorrow to win the minimum 16 seats required to form government.

posted by UbuRoivas at 12:27 PM on November 22, 2007


If the 10 per cent swing were to be replicated uniformly tomorrow, 46 Coalition seats would be lost, including those of Mr Howard, Mr Costello, Malcolm Turnbull, Joe Hockey and eight more ministers.

Oh frabjous day! Calloo Callay! I can't fucking wait!
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:30 PM on November 22, 2007


oh, joy!
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:33 PM on November 22, 2007


THE Liberal Party's campaign to retain the western suburbs seat of Lindsay was in tatters last night after confirmation the husband of its candidate, Karen Chijoff, was involved in the attempt to use race hate against Muslims to sabotage Labor.

As it also emerged Labor caught the culprits in the act after a tip-off from a disgruntled Liberal Party member, it was revealed Greg Chijoff was one of those caught dropping the bogus pamphlets in letterboxes in St Marys.

He was forced to resign from the Liberal Party yesterday.
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:36 PM on November 22, 2007


I always enjoy reading the SMH letters page. The correspondents are right up there with mefites for snark.

Nasty leaflets in the letterbox are no laughing matter

Jackie Kelly and Karen Chijoff clearly think residents of Lindsay are a bunch of dumb, redneck racists ("Lib shame over fake pamphlet", November 22). Why else would they have dispatched their husbands, according to news reports, to put racist material in our letterboxes? I'm deeply offended by the low opinion our local Liberal member and would-be member have of our intelligence and social attitudes.

- Jen Woodcombe, St Clair

Dirty, disgusting, shameful and obscene.

- Cilla Tey, Mulgoa

How illuminating, voters of Lindsay. Now we know what your local Liberals really think of you.

- J. Reeve, Rose Bay

Well done, Liberal Party. What were you saying about union thugs?

- Konstantin Momot, Toowong (Qld)

If the people distributing these pamphlets were of "Middle Eastern background", this Government may well have detained them under its anti-terrorism laws. But since they are Liberal Party members, expulsion from the party is quite sufficient.

- Ian Rodgers, Kingsford

The events in Lindsay speak to the organisational culture of the Liberal Party and how it views Australians, preying on their greatest fears and worst qualities. No amount of economic prosperity justifies support of this kind of thing, and let's call a spade a spade here: it is flat-out, white-sheet-on-their-head racist.

- Michael Davis, Balmain

Just when I thought Howard and Co had sunk low enough in moral scale they go lower again. Distribution of leaflets in the name of a nonexistent Islamic group shows this mob has no limit in the dirty tricks department. I was sitting on the fence with my vote but this behaviour pushed me into the Labor camp. Bye, Howard.

- Virendra Patel, Wentworthville

It is hard to fathom how much lower the Liberals can go in attempting to cling on to power but somehow they have managed a find new nadir. The behaviour of party members reflects that of party leaders. While John Howard can try his best to dissociate himself and the Liberal leadership from this scandal, the electorate has now seen the true face of the modern Liberal Party and it isn't pretty.

- Marc Hendrickx, Berowra Heights

Although it plays on base prejudice, Jackie Kelly characterises the fake ALP leaflet stunt as a joke. If she's right, it seems that the voters will deliver the punchline tomorrow.

- Ian Waters, Surry Hills

I'd like to know when the Liberal Party decided the Bali bombings were funny.

- Jason Helton, New Lambton

What's funny, Jackie, is that John Howard didn't get the joke either. You've just dropped the election. Now that is funny.

- Brendan Rogan, Beacon Hill


And, the punchline: a lone Coalition supporter cries "me too!"

The stupidity displayed by our "leading" journalists at the National Press Club address by the Prime Minister epitomises the shallowness and bias of the media. Question after question concerned a catfight in a western Sydney electorate. There was no mention of the destruction of posters and a balloon in the nearby electorate of Pat Farmer, nor the false union campaign about nursing shortages. Labor supporters need to learn very little from the Liberal Party in the matter of dirty tricks.

- John Grundy, Chiswick

posted by UbuRoivas at 1:39 PM on November 22, 2007


So I won't be here tomorrow night. And by the look of it many of the rest of you won't be either, as we'll all be getting drunk and celebrating the end of an 11 year reign of terror. Should we just cut to the in-thread celebration now? I could get it started with a...

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

YES YES YES!!!!

... or something along those lines.
posted by Effigy2000 at 2:59 PM on November 22, 2007


MAXINE MAXINE MAXINE, OI OI OI

* swigs Andrew Wilkie champers direct from bottle *
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:21 PM on November 22, 2007


I don't like where this conversation is heading...
posted by Effigy2000 at 3:58 PM on November 22, 2007


Exactly why a Green balance of power in the Senate is such an important thing, Effo. Gives the ALP an "out" in terms of softening some of the me-too policies. And if they don't want to soften them, then maybe they'll need to if they want their legislation passed.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:27 PM on November 22, 2007


I was looking back through my old posts (as you do) and came across this one.

It's only a few months over a year old but it seems like it's from a whole other world now.
posted by Effigy2000 at 5:32 PM on November 22, 2007


And the bouquet of blue futurist roses goes to ... Jacalata!
posted by Wolof at 5:47 PM on November 22, 2007


So, Gellibrand Gang, this Election Eve, has anyone else got this week's Maribyrnong Mail? I just picked mine up, and, although I usually make fun of swinging voters, this issue has really made me stop and think about my voting intentions. It's got interviews with all the local candidates, and the CEC chap, Rodney Doel, is very ambitious. His plans for Gellibrand are:

*establishing a Commonwealth National Credit bank
*using its funds to build an Australia-wide circular maglev line, divert water from the North, and construct a nuclear-powered desal plant "using modular high-temperature gas-cooled reactors that can't melt down"
*increasing the population of the continent to 60 million
*initiating a "new classical Renaissance" to battle "cultural degeneration"
*destroying the Australian banks, "without whose co-operation the drug trade could not function"

The last two were in response to a question about drugs in Footscray.

In all seriousness, Ben Courtice, the Socialist Alliance chap, comes across as thoroughly decent but far too honest for his own good. The Green and Democrat candidates are, as you'd expect, equally thoughtful but significantly more polished. Roxon, sadly, answers like a centre-right factionally programmed cyborg, which fits with Latham's opinion of her and the general tone of the Rudd campaign. Family First and the Liberal are just going through the motions.
posted by stammer at 6:25 PM on November 22, 2007


stammer, is Gellibrand the second safest Labor seat in the State, about the fifth safest in Australia? Nicola doesn't ahve to try too hard.

Though there was a cute girl in a a Kevin 07 t-shirt at Footscray station this morning.
posted by wilful at 7:29 PM on November 22, 2007


She'd probably be cuter still minus the t-shirt.
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:33 PM on November 22, 2007


(i mean, if she were in a Greens one instead. not that her cuteness, or lack thereof, should be a matter for comment, anyway)
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:35 PM on November 22, 2007


K M Ellis is going to be soooo dark on you for that remark.
posted by Wolof at 7:36 PM on November 22, 2007


Man I've spent the last month hitting the Australian election threads on Metafilter and looking at virtually nothing else around here, so it appears I missed the sexism controversy I keep hearing snippets of.

Anyway.

The people's flag is deepest red,
It shrouded oft our martyred dead,
And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold,
Their hearts blood dyed its every fold.

Then raise the scarlet standard high.
Within its shade we'll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We'll keep the red flag flying here.

posted by Jimbob at 7:46 PM on November 22, 2007


Me I'll be singing this one:

Stand up, all victims of oppression,
For the tyrants fear your might!
Don't cling so hard to your possessions,
For you have nothing if you have no rights!
Let racist ignorance be ended,
For respect makes the empires fall!
Freedom is merely privilege extended,
Unless enjoyed by one and all.
So come brothers and sisters,
For the struggle carries on.
The Internationale,
Unites the world in song.
So comrades, come rally,
For this is the time and place!
The international ideal,
Unites the human race.

posted by wilful at 7:49 PM on November 22, 2007


I just got SMS spam from the sitting Labor member of my previous seat. I'm wondering how the hell he got my number.

Stammer: I never read the local paper, but that CEC thing sounds like a laugh. Hope we've still got that one around.

So who wants to catch up for a beer at the Royal?

Oh, right, you need a song now*, do you?

hmmmm:

When they kick out your front door
How you gonna come?
With your hands on your head
Or on the trigger of your gun



* Jimbob: I have places free in my revolutionary army** if you'd like to join.

** Oddly enough.
posted by pompomtom at 7:59 PM on November 22, 2007


Yeah I wouldn't mind a link or some more info on this sexism controversy. Like Jimbob, it's pretty much been the Election Threads and nothing else for me here at Villa de Metafilter, and by the sounds of it I missed out on something awesome.
posted by Effigy2000 at 8:02 PM on November 22, 2007


or, more realistically:

The party that became so powerful
by sinking foreign boats
Is dreaming up new promises because
promises win votes

posted by pompomtom at 8:02 PM on November 22, 2007


The tide is "coming back" to the coalition strongly enough for it to win tomorrow's election, Prime Minister John Howard said today.

"I believe the coalition can win this election," Mr Howard told Southern Cross Radio.

"I believe that there is a bit of a tide coming back. I sense it in the streets."


Possum, on the other hand, who relies on a little more than mere "sensing in the streets" offers an interesting analysis of why Howard's switch to the “heading in the right direction” slogan as his weapon of choice translates directly into “I’ve lost”.
posted by UbuRoivas at 8:05 PM on November 22, 2007


By the way, for the IRC inclined there's action in irc.austnet.org #pollbludger. I'm moonlighting as SolomonBloke.
posted by Jimbob at 8:06 PM on November 22, 2007


A polls analyst from Newspoll is expecting tomorrow's federal election to be an extremely close contest and says it could be a week before a definitive result emerges
posted by Wolof at 8:13 PM on November 22, 2007


Yes, and based on the latest ACN poll, Anthony Green is going to be able to call it 20 minutes after the polling booths close.

I'm starting to get sick of polls, really. There's too many of them, too often, and I start to wonder why we have them. I mean, I guess the companies are making money from conducting them, although they're always leaked 12 hours before they're published so I don't see why the newspapers keep buying them.

Sometimes they're wrong in predicting the outcome; usually they do a pretty good job, if you just look at the last week. But they're constantly relied upon over long periods to pick up "trends in voter sentiment" that is often a lot of wishful thinking. Correlation is not causation. And since, with only a few outliers, polls have barely wandered outside the margin of error for the last six months, I don't see how people can read much into them at all. Time-series analysis is a dark art, and as I've said before, I think Possum's regression models are a wee-bit over-fitted.

Just go by the betting markets. Usually a nice integrator, where the numbers come from people's heads, not their hearts (nor from the people being polled telling porkies).
posted by Jimbob at 8:18 PM on November 22, 2007


K M Ellis is going to be soooo dark on you for that remark.

K M Ellis? 63239? He will have to sink to his noob knees & beg to even be given the tiniest taste of my big fat misogynist dick.

* grunts, swills beer, scratches balls, burps *
posted by UbuRoivas at 8:21 PM on November 22, 2007


Just go by the betting markets.

Sure, it makes sense and all, but at this late stage I am vastly more about emotion than sense!

Those poll numbers will be up on the Oz website at 4 PM (Eastern Standard, I presume), btw.
posted by Wolof at 8:25 PM on November 22, 2007


speaking of which, *sings*

Maybe backpack through Peru
Work for time on a farm in Timbucktoo?
To get away from that cocksucker motherfucker
Playing on my mind
To get away from that cocksucker motherfucker
Darkening our times

Ohh cocksucker motherfucker
Ohh motherfucker
Ooh cocksucker motherfucker

posted by UbuRoivas at 8:31 PM on November 22, 2007


I'm not a fan of the betting markets hypothesis. While it is real money being laid down not questions being answered anonymously, people still bet with their heart. And there is no randomness in the sample of betters.

Interestingly, the polls have been very consistent all year, while the betting markets have only recently swung on board.

Pompom, no drinking tonight, tomorrow instead.
posted by wilful at 8:50 PM on November 22, 2007


So this latest newspoll has 52-48 tpp, same as the Galaxy.
posted by Wolof at 9:07 PM on November 22, 2007


An Australian soldier is believed to have died in an operational incident in Afghanistan.
posted by Jimbob at 9:17 PM on November 22, 2007


That's probably just the Australian having a last-ditch stab at skewing the vote.
posted by Lucie at 9:33 PM on November 22, 2007


That's probably just the Australian having a last-ditch stab at skewing the vote.

The poll, or the operational incident?
posted by stammer at 9:41 PM on November 22, 2007


The operational incident, obviously. The Government Gazette will go to any lengths to support the rodent.
posted by UbuRoivas at 10:03 PM on November 22, 2007


Including writing an editorial recommending people vote Labor.

Man, that is some deep cover.
posted by Wolof at 10:08 PM on November 22, 2007


I think the Murdoch arc has been pretty obvious over the course of the campaign. They've done everything they could for Howard, but now that it looks hopeless they've backed the winner so they can say It Was The Telegraph Wot Won It. The Herald Sun is sticking with Howard just because it would be too overtly opportunistic for such a rabid rag to tack left at this stage.

They must be praying for a Rudd win now. How impotent would Murdoch look if Howard pulled it off at the last minute?
posted by stammer at 10:13 PM on November 22, 2007


How impotent would Murdoch look if Howard pulled it off

*bleaches brain, scrubs extra hard*
posted by Wolof at 10:16 PM on November 22, 2007 [3 favorites]


Glenn Floyd is putting his money where a lot of people's mouths are, according to this advertisement from page 9 of today's Age.
posted by flabdablet at 11:54 PM on November 22, 2007


*bleaches brain, scrubs extra hard*

Oh god i'm so sorry i didn't even realise what i said
posted by stammer at 12:13 AM on November 23, 2007


Interesting. Nearly all of the professional commentators are talking about a close one, but all the psephologists are talking about a landslide.

What do you trust, experience or polls?

Anyway, see you here tomorrow night, about the time Antony Green calls Bennelong.
posted by wilful at 1:26 AM on November 23, 2007


Glenn Floyd is putting his money where a lot of people's mouths are

I've checked the International Criminal Court's jurisdiction, and unfortunately, it doesn't extend to cover the crime of being a suckhole.
posted by UbuRoivas at 1:33 AM on November 23, 2007


My random comment was perhaps a little too deadpan ....but yes, I was taking a swipe at the Oz. I'm not actually accusing them of fabricating the death! Just being silly after work drinks. I think that that opinion piece could be what's called 'a beard'.
posted by Lucie at 2:14 AM on November 23, 2007


And so it is done. Sail well, my little votey.
posted by Wolof at 6:11 PM on November 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


The CLP how-to-vote people and the WorkChoices how-to-vote people are all wearing the same dusty-orange colour scheme, which confused the hell out of my wife, who happily accepted the CLP's how to vote card, only to have to explain herself further down the line. Heh.
posted by Jimbob at 6:15 PM on November 23, 2007


Here's a true story from my polling booth today. The missus helped a bloke with his senate card, saying yeah you just ahve to number one box above the line. He said thanks then turned to his mate and asked "Howard, is he liberal or labor?"

Yes, these people live and breathe amongst us, and his vote counts as much as yours or mine does.

Oh my fucking god, I am so in favour of non-compulsory voting these days. Ad it's not that he was chosing to vote for Howard (though it does't help), but just how retarded do ya want to be.
posted by wilful at 6:38 PM on November 23, 2007


wilful - I was okay until the "Howard, is he liberal or labor?", then I died a little inside.

I'm very disappointed that there wasn't a Liberal 'how-to-vote' representative at my polling booth (Ashfield - Grayndler) today. I wanted to do the outstretched hand for the paper and then as they offered it, the quick pull back and scratch the head thing. That would have been a bit childish, wouldn't it? Still, I'd like to have had the opportunity.
posted by tellurian at 7:27 PM on November 23, 2007


Another leaflet surfaces.
posted by tellurian at 7:40 PM on November 23, 2007


Overington slaps ALP candidate at Wentworth polling booth. Laffs ahoy!
posted by Jimbob at 8:11 PM on November 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


Curse you Jimbob, I was just looking to see what the content of the emails was before posting this lovely story. Read them here.
posted by Wolof at 8:18 PM on November 23, 2007


45 min catnap here before heading back to hand out the 5:59 how-to-votes. wanna be there for the final curtain.

later, all :)
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:57 PM on November 23, 2007


*tucks UbuRoivas in*
posted by gomichild at 10:05 PM on November 23, 2007


*flicks ABC coverage on*
posted by Wolof at 11:03 PM on November 23, 2007


are Roy & HG calling this on the radio?
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:06 AM on November 24, 2007


Ubu: Listening to it right now.
posted by zamboni at 12:08 AM on November 24, 2007


electoral commission's virtual tally room
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:13 AM on November 24, 2007


MAXINE MAXINE MAXINE!!!
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:15 AM on November 24, 2007


*refreshes furiously*
posted by gomichild at 12:16 AM on November 24, 2007


Ahhhhh. I am being forced to watch the Channel 9 coverage. Kill me now. Please. They have a sound effect everytime Lab "wins" a seat fercristsake.
posted by dangerousdan at 12:19 AM on November 24, 2007


gomichild: the ABC coverage is reporting roughly 5-8% swings to the ALP in most seats.
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:28 AM on November 24, 2007


Mike Kelly looks like he's got a solid grip on Eden Monaro.

dangerousdan: According to the Triple J coverage, the Kevin07 folks in the media room are really loving the Channel 9 coverage. Maybe it's Pavlovian?
posted by zamboni at 12:30 AM on November 24, 2007


Ta hon. Am at the tally site and the ABC. Am listening to Roy & HG as well.

Dangerousdan turn the sound down and turn triple J on fer cryin' out loud.

And fetch us another beer from the fridge.
posted by gomichild at 12:31 AM on November 24, 2007


Zamboni - they just did a "shredder" of LIB-NAT MPs who had lost their seet. Huge cheers heard in the background when for Howard when he entered the shredder.

Major problem with watching Channel 9 is that I am sober!

Gomi - crippled internet so no streaming and out of JJJ coverage.
posted by dangerousdan at 12:42 AM on November 24, 2007


prob need an "a" somewhere in that last comment.
posted by dangerousdan at 12:43 AM on November 24, 2007


And fetch us another beer from the fridge.

that's funny. i was going to ask you to prepare a plate of turkey for me.
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:49 AM on November 24, 2007


Cranberra sauce, woohoo! Go Election!
posted by dhammond at 12:50 AM on November 24, 2007


that's funny. i was going to ask you to prepare a plate of turkey for me.

What did your last servant die of?

And massage a bit more on the left shoulder please.
posted by gomichild at 12:55 AM on November 24, 2007


hm, anthony albanese's got 75% TPP in my seat.

libs just ahead of us for second place, but with our big booths left to come in - newtown north, camperdown south (*YAY*) & enmore.
posted by UbuRoivas at 1:19 AM on November 24, 2007


. . . and Ray's hairpiece call it for Rudd - 5 min after the ABC.
posted by dangerousdan at 1:31 AM on November 24, 2007


Bye bye Little Johnnie!
posted by gomichild at 1:31 AM on November 24, 2007


David Bradbury (ALP) has easily won Lindsay - the bogus pamphlet marginal.

SUCK IT, RACIST SWINE!

(sorry, couldn't help myself; i blame the Coopers Greens)
posted by UbuRoivas at 1:34 AM on November 24, 2007


YAY! TAKE THAT FAKERS!
posted by gomichild at 1:34 AM on November 24, 2007


(oh, and watch next wednesday for the chaser stunt on jackie kelly)
posted by UbuRoivas at 1:35 AM on November 24, 2007


"it was a chaser style stunt" news bit.

shrub: "it's stupid, it's offensive, it's wrong, it's untrue"

stupid, offensive, wrong & untrue. heh. children overboard coming home to roost! :D
posted by UbuRoivas at 1:41 AM on November 24, 2007


BEST THING EVAR!

kerry o'brien reporting on Maxine McKew's current 50.9 to 49.1 lead over bonsai:

"and the swing to the ABC, i mean, ALP..."
posted by UbuRoivas at 1:44 AM on November 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


If I can cut through the snarkiness a little bit, I'd just like to say that I LOVED voting in my first federal election here today. It's still a novelty to have such a "low-tech" voting experience, with pencils and pieces of paper and cardboard booths. It feels very... democratic. I loved how friendly everybody was at the Hall, even the ones from opposing parties. I love putting my giant paper ballot in the box. I loved being able to cast a vote for a 3rd party and knowing that I was still able to direct my preferences down the line. I know you guys have some very legitimate gripes about the system, but coming from one American-Australian, the system Down Under is BY FAR to be preferred.

This is a fun night of television. I could only stand Channel 7 for about five minutes (that tug-of-war graphic did my head in). And the crowd at the ABC are chanting "Julia"... And they're calling it for Maxine!
posted by web-goddess at 1:45 AM on November 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


On 7 you've pretty much got the Joe Hockey drinking game. Every time he says "postal vote" or rolls his eyes when Work Choices is blamed for something take a drink.
posted by blender at 1:46 AM on November 24, 2007


BEST THING EVAR!

Seconded.
posted by zamboni at 1:47 AM on November 24, 2007


JULIA! MAXINE! YAY!

And congrats web-goddess on your first federal vote.
posted by gomichild at 1:48 AM on November 24, 2007


Not remotely unexpected but Bob Brown is back in (3 Labor, 2 Libs, 1 Green for Tasmania). I'm dying to know how the ACT senate works out.
posted by blender at 1:50 AM on November 24, 2007


MAXINE'S FURTHER AHEAD!!!
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:08 AM on November 24, 2007


Thank you linesmen, thank you ballboys. it's a wrap.
posted by Wolof at 2:09 AM on November 24, 2007


hey, I was skimming this thread and found recognition of my first public political prediction (vague though it was)! I'm pretty sick of all the coverage, waiting to see some official speeches - stats are way easier to understand through the abc website. And it doesn't matter who they are, it feels kind of mean interviewing people who are in the middle of losing their jobs - that must suck.

*takes roses, bows, flags all UbuRoivas' comments as sexist*
posted by jacalata at 2:19 AM on November 24, 2007


Wolof: Our friendly possum psephologist has a different game in mind.

Congrats on voting, w-g.
posted by zamboni at 2:23 AM on November 24, 2007


That's just not cricket zamboni.
posted by gomichild at 2:35 AM on November 24, 2007


jacalata: since when did your gender have the right to flag?
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:36 AM on November 24, 2007


*gives UbuRoivas a wedgie*
posted by gomichild at 2:38 AM on November 24, 2007


Since the first female Deputy Prime Minister was elected, of course! That's why I held off on them all till now.
posted by jacalata at 2:48 AM on November 24, 2007


yay, go Julia! of course, there's some way to go to reach the heights of my other constituency which had, simultaneously, a Green Prime Minister & a Female President, while we were still all interest rates & children overboard down under
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:03 AM on November 24, 2007


well, for anybody who doesn't have access to aussie media, the lying rodent has called the ruddster & conceded defeat.

all over, folks.

bennelong's still line-ball, but with a full moon in taurus tonight, i can see no reason for this to go wrong.

*checks out, waits for the rodent's speech, then heads up the road to the Good RidDance party*
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:30 AM on November 24, 2007


I'm finding it hard to get excited about this, but it's still great to see it happen.

I think I just heard Peter Costello thank his electric chair-man .. gosh he's so charismatic
posted by plant at 3:31 AM on November 24, 2007


Hey I haven't seen the senate results and in complete contrast to what I said in a thread before I haven't read the entirety of this thread, but woo fucking hoo Labor in. Let's hope that they remember the whole ideal of social responsibilty upon which they are based. Workers rights, social reform, funding of independent companies devoted to looking after the needy (however you'd like to define that). It's all about the people, people. Big business will take care of itself because it's fucking loaded and you can only dream of somehow influencing it. Concentrate tax dollars on giving back direcly to the people in the form of proper infrastructure (transport, education, healthcare) and do some fucking good in the world. And pull out of Iraq while you're at it, that's just totally not. anything. to. do. with. us. apart. from. political. sucking. up. (Scuse my affectation, it just needed to be emphasised).

And oh my god, Maxine McKew. I knew you'd do it, yer so fucking clever and articulate. Love and best wishes for your future sparkling career in politics.
posted by h00py at 4:03 AM on November 24, 2007


The people's flag is deepest red,
It shrouded oft our martyred dead,
And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold,
Their hearts blood dyed its every fold.

Then raise the scarlet standard high. (chorus)
Within its shade we'll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We'll keep the red flag flying here.

Look round, the Frenchman loves its blaze,
The sturdy German chants its praise,
In Moscow's vaults its hymns are sung
Chicago swells the surging throng.

It waved above our infant might,
When all ahead seemed dark as night;
It witnessed many a deed and vow,
We must not change its colour now.

It well recalls the triumphs past,
It gives the hope of peace at last;
The banner bright, the symbol plain,
Of human right and human gain.

It suits today the weak and base,
Whose minds are fixed on pelf and place
To cringe before the rich man's frown,
And haul the sacred emblem down.

With heads uncovered swear we all
To bear it onward till we fall;
Come dungeons dark or gallows grim,
This song shall be our parting hymn.

GO YOU GOOD THING!

btw I'm not up to date on beers per seat lost. I've tried my best, but damn, there's only so much a man can do!
posted by Jimbob at 4:17 AM on November 24, 2007


And so now, after seeing Kev's speech and not reading anything else anyone has had to say, I'd like to say hooray and everything looks rosy. Yes, I am excited. I'm also cynical but the speech was fantastic. Lots of things to hold him to. You'd better come through, you fucker.
posted by h00py at 4:30 AM on November 24, 2007


*still here*

Jimbob, *hands over to Muw Horgan, who's been keeping the beers flowing, seat per seat*

Well, don't you think Julia Gillard is just too much?
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:30 AM on November 24, 2007


And yay I like voting too, particularly for the senate because there's no way in hell I'm going to just mindlessly advocate an entire party. Oh, no no no. I will number the candidates from number one to number 65 (or whatever is relevant) until the day I die. I need to make it known who is my very last choice (Pauline, of course, this time) but in the future, whoever insults me with their fuckwittedness, you shall feel the sting of my pencil. I'm looking at you Family First.
posted by h00py at 4:38 AM on November 24, 2007


My first experience voting was in 1996 when I helped, through my preferences, to remove an arrogant government, who really had overstayed their welcome. Little did I know how bad the alternative was going to be.
So I sit here feeling elated that an arrogant government, who really overstayed their welcome has been removed. There is so much promise in this government to make things better that have been neglected for so long. I really hope I don't have the same regrets down the track for the Rudd's mob.

Oh, almost forgot... HOO BLOODY RAY!
posted by CaveFrog at 4:46 AM on November 24, 2007


I like Julia Gillard. She's very clever and articulate and she has devoted her life so far to the Labor Party and, hopefully, its ideals of social justice (which is what unions are all about, the empowerment of the worker so that they are not seen as just drones but actual, valued components of the bottom line which is so goddamned important to one and all.)

And she's a redhead, which I am. And I like that.

But I'd like her even if she were blonde, and that's saying something.
posted by h00py at 4:47 AM on November 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


Hey Huw!

My wive love's Gillard's voice.
Nuff said.
posted by Jimbob at 4:47 AM on November 24, 2007


hang on i missed your potential fraudian slip and thought you were referring to my auld root-distribution-dynamics ecology mate.

Anyway.

Drink on.
posted by Jimbob at 4:50 AM on November 24, 2007


reverse that

hi!

must.not.post.drunk.
posted by Jimbob at 4:52 AM on November 24, 2007


Yer off yer nut.

PS so am I but hooray!
posted by h00py at 4:54 AM on November 24, 2007


No, she's good, fuckya!
posted by h00py at 4:57 AM on November 24, 2007


Awesome.

(having learnt from jimbob's example, not posting drunk).
posted by wilful at 5:07 AM on November 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


hang on i missed your potential fraudian slip and thought you were referring to my auld root-distribution-dynamics ecology mate.

nah, that was him. the spoonerism was meant to protect online privacy.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:10 AM on November 24, 2007


I'm not sure the good guys won, but the bad guys certainly lost.

Highlight of the ABC coverage for me was seeing Costello's victory speech in Higgins. Halfway through an obvious leadership pitch, he was interrupted in favour of a shot of Howard ascending an escalator to deliver his concession. Poetic.
posted by stammer at 5:19 AM on November 24, 2007


I've got to say it was quite an honour to hear the election result from none other than Jay of Frenzal Rhomb fame in the moshpit. How very democratic of me.

For the first federal election I have been able to take a part it's been quite a ball. To the ire of my friends I voted below the line (after researching some of the lesser known candidates beforehand of course) and found it strangely enjoyable.

Also belonging to Granyndler, I noticed the complete lack of Liberal presence, which I suppose was largely due to them focusing entirely on the seats they had to hold on to, not the ones they might win.

But overall, hooray for democracy. Having downed far too many beers than is wise for any man and being trounced in one hell of a mosh, I think I will rest well tonight.
posted by Serial Killer Slumber Party at 6:06 AM on November 24, 2007


THE LONG NATIONAL NIGHTMARE IS OVER!
posted by Effigy2000 at 11:51 AM on November 24, 2007


THE LONG UBUROIVAS HANGOVER HAS BEGUN!

frenzals, huh? jay's sister voted at my booth & the band gave sleeve-liner thanks to a bunch of gals i was hanging out with some time ago, at the wedge (triangular building at the corner of king & wilson). they also did a nice cover of the newtown jets' theme song that gets played over the pa whenever the mighty jets score a try or win a game at henson park:

Newtown is coming,
Hear the Bluebags humming,
Newtown - Newtown
Newtown is flying - there'll be no denying
Newtown - Newtown

Thirteen men all dressed in blue,
Look out 'cause they're coming through
Newtown - Newtown
Here's the team that takes the field,
It's the team that will not yield,
Bluebags hear the crowd - they're roaring
Flashing, dashing Blues are scoring

Newtown is coming,
Hear the Bluebags humming,
Newtown - Newtown
Newtown is flying - There'll be no denying

Newtown - Newtown - Newtown!


Frenzal Rhomb, - band originated in Newtown, Lead singer Jay frequently wears Newtown Jets merchandise [citation needed]

posted by UbuRoivas at 1:53 PM on November 24, 2007


A summary from around the right-wing blogosphere so you don't have to go look yourself. To paraphrase:

"Australians are so stupid! How could they do this, the country will be ruined...they'll see soon enough! I'm putting my money in offshore accounts so Rudd can't have my taxes!"

That last point is interesting. Lefties threaten to leave the country after defeat. Righties just threaten to take their money elsewhere ;)

And there's some bad senate news from the Poll Bludger - the Greens didn't do a well as hoped, Kerry Nettle has probably lost her seat in NSW, they probably won't pick up the ACT seat, and it doesn't look like they'll hold the balance of power in their own right, having to share it with Steve Fielding and Nick Xenophon, two people who the Liberals could probably rely on to block things on occasion. But it is early days, the Poll Bludger might just be hungover and not working his spreadsheet correctly.
posted by Jimbob at 2:13 PM on November 24, 2007


yeh, Jimbob. i was just reading the comments at the SMH. they were all along those lines.

the coalition supporters are the only ones not sleeping off hangovers, it seems.

I'm putting my money in offshore accounts so Rudd can't have my taxes!"

oh, i never realised that the rich didn't already go out of their way to minimise their taxes in every way possible. do you mean that they specifically left their money lying around in taxable places just so as to show some sort of support for howard's wonderful policies? how noble of them.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:21 PM on November 24, 2007 [2 favorites]


YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
posted by Lucie at 2:21 PM on November 24, 2007


*sings*

One morn I awakened
A new sun was shining
The sky was a Kingdom
All covered in Rudd
The moon and the stars
Where the troops that lay conquered
Like fruit left to wither
Poor spiritual food

And the spears of bright sun
All brave with its conquest
Did hover unearthly
In banners of fire
I knelt in the garden
Awash with the dawning
And a voice came so brightly
I covered my eyes

Thank you for giving
This bright new morning
So steeped seemed the evening
In darkness and blood
Let there be no sadness
No sorrow
Let there be no road too narrow
There'll be a new day
And it's today
It's for us

posted by UbuRoivas at 2:49 PM on November 24, 2007


Nettle is gone? That's a shame. I must say I didn't care for her too much but she was a fixture of the Senate for me and whatever else, she stood by her beliefs, which is a rarity in politics.

No word yet from the right wing pundit I'm dyng to hear from, Piers Ackerman (was really hoping he'd be on Insiders this morning, but alas), but I'm leaving his blog page open for the inevitable update.

Also, can I just say that I am fucking ecstatic that Mal Brough lost his seat. That fucker was a terrible Minister, from his callous attitude towards people with a disability to his 'intervention' in the NT. Winning the election and winning Bennelong was nice enough, but for me, personally, seeing Brough turfed out was the icing on the cake.

Well, my hangover is still thumping away but I'm gonna don some sunnies and walk down to the corner shop to buy the paper. I'm gonna keep the front page and turn it into one of those hardwood posters. It's a great day for the nation, for politics and for me, and I wanna make sure I have a keepsake of this historic day.
posted by Effigy2000 at 4:30 PM on November 24, 2007


Mal Brough lost his seat

*emu Zorba the Greek dance*
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:50 PM on November 24, 2007


International leaders congratulate Rudd, laud Howard.
posted by Effigy2000 at 5:47 PM on November 24, 2007


OH MY GOD!

Peter Costello has said he's not gonna run for the Opposition Leaders job!!!

So I guess this means Turnbull will probably be Opposition leader.

Wow. Just wow.
posted by Effigy2000 at 5:57 PM on November 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


Holy crap! I didn't expect to see that.
posted by web-goddess at 6:03 PM on November 24, 2007


That's just extraordinary! I wonder if he's serious about quitting, or if he doesn't want the poisoned chalice of first opposition leader after the thrashing?

I wonder if Turnbull wants it either?
posted by wilful at 6:09 PM on November 24, 2007


wilful: "I wonder if he's serious about quitting, or if he doesn't want the poisoned chalice of first opposition leader after the thrashing?"

My first thought was that he didn't want the chalice, but the story says that he wants to pursue a career in the commercial world after he quits politic. The way the story reads sounds like he plans to stay for the three years he was elected for and then quit in 2010.

If true, there's always the chance he may change his mind if Turnbull or whoever becomes Opposition Leader flounders against Rudd but do the math; if the Libs lose in 2010, which is likely, Costello's first chance at the PM job is in 2013, when he'll be 56. Speaking purely in terms of age (rather than electoral prospects), it's not unlikely that Costello at 56 could be PM and serve two or three terms, but it is hard to imagine when he could earn a helluva lot more in this commercial career he seems keen on.

Still; wow. Just wow...
posted by Effigy2000 at 6:15 PM on November 24, 2007


Holy shit!
There goes my prediction. I was thinking that he was looking overly chipper the whole campaign, and I figured he was hoping for a loss, so he could be the one to rebuild the party from the ashes and win an election in his own right, instead of standing in Howard's shadow.

I guess I was wrong.

I hope it will be Turnbull.
posted by Jimbob at 7:24 PM on November 24, 2007


Someone on Possum actually suggested Brendan Nelson. I have to admit that's probably more likely than Turnbull at this stage. That's assuming they don't do something completely fucking stupid like give the job to Abbott or Downer.
posted by Jimbob at 7:30 PM on November 24, 2007


costello never
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:47 PM on November 24, 2007


Jimbob: "Someone on Possum actually suggested Brendan Nelson. I have to admit that's probably more likely than Turnbull at this stage. That's assuming they don't do something completely fucking stupid like give the job to Abbott or Downer."

Yep. From Possum;
"This leads to the question of which sad old face of a defeated regime will become the first lamb sent to the slaughter. This leader of the Opposition will become the public face of a party that is about to receive the full force of ALP political retribution.

Downer will very likely be forced to resign in disgrace over AWB, Andrews will be persecuted for his negligence, Hockey will be slapped around when the government releases the true statistics of Workchoices and Abbott will be taken to task over a anything he’s touched in the last 6 years. Whoever accepts the mantle of Leader of the Opposition for the first term of the Rudd government is going to be smashed to smithereens."
Indeed...
posted by Effigy2000 at 7:52 PM on November 24, 2007


Whoever accepts the mantle of Leader of the Opposition for the first term of the Rudd government is going to be smashed to smithereens

in our hearts, let it be so.

there's a hell of a lot of FOIing to be done before the true face of those miserable lying asswipes will be fully revealed.
posted by UbuRoivas at 8:23 PM on November 24, 2007


Turnbull throws his hat into the ring.
posted by Jimbob at 9:29 PM on November 24, 2007


Jimbob: "Turnbull throws his hat into the ring."

Perhaps that's why Prime Minister Rudd (oh wow, that sounds good) nominated climate change as one of his Governments biggest priorities in the first 100 days of office. As Possum said, anyone they get from the old regime to be Opposition Leader will be destroyed by Labor as they get access to all the information the Howard Government kept secret for years. Climate change, especially stuff on Kyoto, is gonna be one of the big ones.

Another thought; Turnbull as Opposition Leader would be interesting if and when Rudd revisits the idea of a Republic...
posted by Effigy2000 at 12:23 AM on November 25, 2007


Bennelong update (TPP):

HOWARD, John Winston 35,474
McKEW, Maxine 37,913

and a clear second (30%) in my booth.
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:33 AM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


Piers has updated his blog. Not much sour grapes, sadly. Mostly just talk about Costello not taking on the leadership and who he thinks will run. That said, his writing does feel a little rushed, disjointed... not the usual polished turd that Piers usually turns in. There's not much anger there... I suspect that will come in the coming weeks... but I get the sense that his world has collapsed and he's none too happy with it.

But the real sad news from the Blogosphere is that Matt Price died yesterday at the age of 46. Which utterly sucks. He was one of the good ones.

And with that, I think I may bow out of this thread. It was a fun party, guys. See you round the Metafilter traps!
posted by Effigy2000 at 3:16 PM on November 25, 2007


Piers has updated his blog. Not much sour grapes, sadly. Mostly just talk about Costello not taking on the leadership and who he thinks will run. That said, his writing does feel a little rushed, disjointed... not the usual polished turd that Piers usually turns in. There's not much anger there... I suspect that will come in the coming weeks... but I get the sense that his world has collapsed and he's none too happy with it.

But the real sad news from the Blogosphere is that Matt Price died yesterday at the age of 46. Which utterly sucks. He was one of the good ones.

And with that, I think I may bow out of this thread. It was a fun party, guys. See you round the Metafilter traps!
posted by Effigy2000 at 3:16 PM on November 25, 2007


Yeh, it's been fun. I'm kinda sad it's over.

In other news, Paul Keating has returned to form, with some typically colourful insults against the libs.

Finally, the SMH is hardly as left-wing as it's made out to be. The moderators of the SMH "Your Say" blog refused to allow a single one of my very reasonable comments on what I thought of the end of the Howard era. Bastards. I was like, "Do you know who I am? Do you know who I AM?!?!? I have less than one-third the usernumber of K M Ellis, for chrissakes!"
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:48 PM on November 25, 2007


Really?

I must use my awesome SMH powers to do, well, probably nothing.
posted by Wolof at 9:52 PM on November 25, 2007


Well I have to admit to much daggy excitement on Saturday night. I typed my fingers off and avoided a social engagement.

Let's hope that Labor remembers where the money comes from and adds back to the damned infrastructure which is what all reasonable and responsible governments should do. Yes, yes, there's all that other diplomatic shit and who gets what, where and why and how you'll be punished if you don't do this now and as we say how, but the reason why I've always been an embarrassing lefty but never a libertarian is because I firmly believe in everyone contributing to a kitty (via tax dollars) for distributing *out*. Maybe that makes me a socialist. Because as far as I'm concerned, my tax dollars provide the basis for all-inclusive things such as universal health care, education and basic housing. I rely on the government to distribute the kitty as necessary because be fucked if you could rely on me to do it. We entrust them with these things.

Anyway, let's hope they get it right. I liked everyones speeches, particularly Howard's, which scares me and yet doesn't because I reckon if I can appreciate Howard's final clarion call even though I've despised him for as long as I've been aware of him, that means I'm not totally old and set in my ways.

I really liked Rudd's victory speech too. I was moved by this election more than any other since Joh was defeated, I think.

And on that note, I too shall depart.
posted by h00py at 7:03 AM on November 26, 2007


It's a shame about Matt Price - it seems there's even less reason to read the Australian.

A last few links:
Nosey in Newtown gave me my Inner West election photo fix.
Road to Surfdom takes us backstage at the Wentworth Hotel.
An Onymous Lefty starts the custodiet-ing of the new custodes.

Hmm. Between the two posts, we've upwards of 960 comments.
posted by zamboni at 12:44 PM on November 27, 2007


This pic from Nosey in Newtown was right next door to my booth on Australia St. They had cupcakes, too.

Pigeon Ground is a great little shop. A coupla blocks from my house in Camperdown, it carries a wide selection of eclectic second-hand vinyl, vintage clothing & shoes, plus some nice new hipster fashion. Easily missed, because it's slap-bang in the middle of a residential area. /plug

From the comments: I read in the paper today that on the Sunday following the election, Gleebooks Secondhand had an empty display window save for a battered copy of 'Howard's End'. Heh.
posted by UbuRoivas at 1:56 PM on November 27, 2007


Pigeon Ground have a website and a blog. It looks like a tiny chunk of Brunswick St that got lost on the way to Melbourne.

While trying to find a photo of that Gleebooks display, I discovered the launch for Mungo MacCallum's new election book. I was wondering what he was up to.
posted by zamboni at 2:35 PM on November 27, 2007


Oh, and I should have guessed where they read about the display window. (Column 8, of course. Who else but Granny?)
posted by zamboni at 2:42 PM on November 27, 2007


Not surprised about the Gleebooks window. I'm on their mailing list and they haven't shied away from talking about the election. This was the lead-in on the last email they sent (the day before the election):
Week beginning the new Rudd millenium I think maybe let’s hope. (Friday 23rd November)

Forget this gleemail being an election free zone - it’s all I can think about. I feel sick with anxiety about the result despite the fact that some pundits are now predicting a 6 - 8 seat win to Labor. As we all know there’s only one poll that matters and that’s the one tomorrow. I apologise to my Liberal voter readers for my partisanship, but hey, this isn’t the ABC, and it may well be you guys having the last laugh tomorrow night. If so, you’re welcome to send me gloating emails next week.
posted by web-goddess at 3:23 PM on November 27, 2007


From the SMH: Prime Minister-elect Kevin Rudd has dropped six frontbenchers from his new-look ministry, installing a host of new faces.

Mr Rudd is believed to have dropped Laurie Ferguson, Kate Lundy, Jan McLucas, Kerry O'Brien, Arch Bevis and one other from the frontbench.


But Kerry's been doing such a sterling job for the ALP for so long! Why drop him now?
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:57 PM on November 28, 2007


That swing to the ABC must have been bigger than Kerry thought.
posted by zamboni at 7:21 PM on November 28, 2007


What can I say? Watching Costello in his first post-election interview on Lateline just now. What a smarmy, smirking individual he is. I almost wish that Howard had handed over to him before the election so that he could have got his arse roundly kicked out and learnt some humility. As it is, he propounded the view that he explained to the party that he was the 'fresh face' that would have got them elected and nullified the 'fresh face' of Rudd, and the party rejected him. I think that the nation would have rejected him but he can rest on his laurels and nurture his belief that he was hard done by, by the party rather than the electorate. The transcript is not available yet but I'll be posting it for posterity when it is. It's an education in self-deception. That, and the knowledge that he will now go into the private sector (rather than take on the leadership of the Liberal Party, that he professes to love and champion) and earn a motza on top of his parliamentary package, really rankles.
*breathe*
posted by tellurian at 4:38 AM on November 30, 2007


Senator Kerry O'Brien.
posted by Effigy2000 at 6:04 PM on November 30, 2007


This is a test to see if upgrading to internet explorer 7 at work will stop the triple comment error from appearing. Don't mind me.
posted by Effigy2000 at 9:35 PM on December 5, 2007


so far so good
posted by Effigy2000 at 9:44 PM on December 5, 2007


One more for the road.
posted by Effigy2000 at 10:15 PM on December 5, 2007


Famous last words.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:28 PM on December 6, 2007


Will ye noooo have another wee dram?
posted by Wolof at 4:19 PM on December 6, 2007


no, i've really gotta go...oh, hell, why not?
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:32 PM on December 6, 2007


You put that ellipsis there just to taunt me, didn't you?
posted by Wolof at 9:36 PM on December 6, 2007 [1 favorite]


what...don't you like ellipses...?
posted by UbuRoivas at 10:02 PM on December 6, 2007


One parting drink swipe.
posted by UbuRoivas at 10:06 PM on December 6, 2007


« Older In 1897, Elizabeth Smith Miller and her daughter A...   |   Win a free MRI machine:... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments