October 09, 2004

• You know, it took me so much time to figure out why there were all these people wearing rat costumes and trying get H to eat cheese. Apparently, some other politician called him a rodent, is this true?
• One of the guys on Howard's own side (Sen George Brandis) is alleged to have called him a "lying rodent". He denied it, although he would pointedly *not* deny calling him a either liar or a rodent.
• Strike the spare "a". I'm overwrought, obviously.
• If Howard manages to hang to the prime ministership, I guess it will be a fillip to the Bush administration as well. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Labour is trailing.
• The bad: Labor looking virtually certain to lose 2 seats in Tasmania. The good: Swing towards Labor in Eden-Monaro of +3%. The winner of Eden-Monaro has been the winner the general election for the last 30 years.
• Can someone breakdown the parties for me? I looked, and I found this in my search, which could help someone much smarter than me understand Ozzie politics. But I can't find any description of party stances.
• Left to right ... Greens, Labor, Democrats, Liberals, One Nation/ Family First.
• Thanks Wolof. By name alone, I was pretty sure the Liberal was left of Labor. (I was thinking Labor party might mean the "put 'em to work!" party, but now I can see it's the "protect the worker" party)I'm glad I asked.
• Where's National fit?
• I think my team is fucked. Three more years of the lying fucking rat. Thanks, Australia!
• Australia, you have my sympathies.
• *gets even more shitfaced than usual, starts searching house for drugs*
• Latham makes concession speech. 9.13 in the evening and it's all over.
• *buys Wolof another drink* Sorry, man.
• sorry, Wolof
• Thanks, guys, most kind. You know, we vote on paper ballots here and the result comes through as quickly as this ... why do they feel they need electronic voting in the States?
• Bummer, Wolof.
• why do they feel they need electronic voting in the States It's a multifaceted issue that I've had a long interest in. Paper ballots are not a panacea. I recommend, if you have access to the NY Times database (say if you are at a university), that you do a search for 'ballot fraud'. The number and variety of attempted frauds is quite astonishing. With electronic voting, there is at least the prospect of removing overt fraud. Note that it is not a cut-and-dried issue. Electronic voting has the potential for worse fraud than paper ballots if implemented poorly. I subscribe (as most computer geeks do) to the following minimal requirements of an electronic voting system: 1. It must have a voter-verifiable paper record that is the final and legally binding form of the ballot. 2. The machine specifications and voting software must be open, certified, and open for public criticism. So far we in the US barely have a certification process. 3. The voting hardware must be built to order for the specific purpose of voting. There is no need for a voting machine to be a general purpose PC running Windows. It is unclear at present if electronic voting systems in the US meet a sufficient level of quality. Many people are afraid of electronic voting machines because they are told to be afraid of them. This doesn't mean that there is no reason to be concerned about companies like Diebold, but it would be foolish to claim that electronic voting cannot work. (For the US at least, there is an unfortunate complication -- the federal election commission has no jurisdiction over state elections. It publishes a recommendation that states are free to follow, but if you are in a state like Pennsylvania (where I am), you can see anything from old-fashioned paper ballots to monolithic lever-assisted machines to optical scan machines to direct-recording electronic machines. It is a wildly heterogeneous system. The problems would be immensely simplified if federal elections were unified under one independent body, like they have in Brazil or India.) </derail>
• Electronic voting has the potential for worse fraud than paper ballots if implemented poorly. Well, this is what bothers me. I will sacrifice perfection in exchange for the least worst. Also, it's all done under a federal body here, as I would consider proper for a process undertaken at a federal level. Standardised ballot papers, etc.
• Shit.
• Oh, and sorry, knicks -- the Nats are one notch to the right of the Libs. The Nats are basically the farmers' party, as the Libs are the doctors' and lawyers' party.
• Sorry ithis turned out so dismally, Wolof.
• Yes, today should probably be recorded as a day of mourning in Australia. We sold our credibility and our humanity for shiny promises and for a Prime Minister who has misled the Australian people too many times. Truly, a sad day.
• I voted against the cunt, but it looks like we have to dial 0 for Oswald. Australians are far too apathetic for their own fucking good.
• A Government needs 76 seats in the House of representatives to govern with a majority. Following redistributions, the starting point for the 2004 election was Coalition 83, Labor 63, Independents 3, Green 1. ... Labor winning eight seats from the Coalition would have removed the Howard government's majority. -- sidebar 83 - 8 = 75 They predict 75 seats for the Libs. So, to me, this means that the Libs lose the majority, or that they've "removed the Howard government's majority." So, this is good, right? Doesn't this hurt the lying rat? This seems like an improvement. Maybe not as much of one as the Labs getting 76, but it's still seems like it's a positive step. Yet the way everyone is talking, it sounds like things got worse. Hmmm
• The Coalition = Libs + Nats.
• I'm willing to shoot the strutting little prick if someone pays my airfare.
• I will sacrifice perfection in exchange for the least worst. You seem to believe that electronic voting is ipso facto worse than paper ballots. (Or paper ballots better, if you prefer.) I am not convinced. Paper ballots have a long and glorious history of abuse.
• i've been working all night. getting updates from friends as we went. in all, fellow aussie monkeys, i am crushed. i am under 30, earning less than A$30K, unpartnered, have no children, nor any prospects of owning my own home. i do not have private medical insurance. i do not own a car. i have a university education that i still haven't paid for (and I was in the first year that the prices rose, 1996). i welcome refugees, and opposed (vocally) the war on iraq. i have lost out from every piece of government policy ever passed by the Libs. every day, my hope weakens. new zealand monkeys, i know things are not perfect for you, but it is better. can i come and play?
• Fuck. Bad luck, OzMonkeys. Sorry you'll have to endure another term of the lying little shite. Buggeration. I don't know which is more frustrating - being in the position of knowing that you could have got rid of him, or knowing there's not a chance in hell of it (as we've got with Blair). Fuck. Damn. Piss. Good luck with the drugs.
• My sincerce condolences, guys.
• Sorry OzMonks. Just woke up to the news.
• Electronic voting has the potential for worse fraud than paper ballots if implemented poorly. You trust your government to implement electronic voting well? What you need (as noted above) is a national standards body. This devolving national responsibilities down to the state level is asking for trouble.
• They just announced the decision on NPR. Condolences, Australians.
• Wait, those are the "Liberals"? Jeez.
• You trust your government to implement electronic voting well? Trust? Hell no! Did you completely not read my point about an open certification process.
• *logs in to swear a lot* swears a lot Great, another three years of the little maggot. *sigh*
• Sorry, all. Heard it on NPR this morning. If it makes you feel any better, Afghanistan appears to have it worse. I think Wolof's "sacrifice perfection in exchange for the least worst" comment was not a denouncement of electronic voting per se, but more specifically these horrid Diebold POS terminals and the way they're being implemented in the US right now. I'm not opposed to electronic voting, but those had better be some robust fucking systems, and the ones they're using now aren't.
• Wait, those are the "Liberals"? Jeez. now you see why the real "lefties" of the world see the US liberals & republicans as pretty much the same...
• What you need (as noted above) is a national standards body. This devolving national responsibilities down to the state level is asking for trouble. Yeah, you're absolutely right. It's not likely to happen anytime soon. The Republicans, who are forever crowing about "state's rights" and are ostensibly opposed to centralization of federal power (so they say; in practice it's much different) have the most to gain from suspect and inconsistent balloting practices... and they currently hold all three branches of government.
• Election reform in the US isn't likely in the present political climate. The present electoral system is baked too crisply into the laws and statutes, not to mention that moving presidential elections out of the jurisdiction of states would require a constitutional amendment. This is not a partisan issue. The Democrats are not likely to propose such an amendment soon either.
• fuyugare, your points about the intrinsic merits are well taken, but there's not a chance in hell of electronic voting being well implemented in the current political climate -- you must be aware of how advantage is being taken of every possibility of gaining an advantage by fair means or foul (see: gerrymandered districts). In the real world, paper ballots, whatever their own possibilities for abuse, are infinitely better than the horror that Diebold elections would be.
• A lesson in e-democracy from India
• why do they feel they need electronic voting in the States? Answer one: to a great extent, they don't. The most common method of voting is a paper ballot that's optically scanned. Do you mean hand-counting instead of machine counting? Why not hand-count? The number of offices and elections. People from foreign lands tend to hugely underestimate the amount of electing that happens here, though it's more bug then feature at this point. Looking at a sample ballot, y'all were electing one office: MP. In an average, boring state this November, you might be electing: President and VP as a pair US Representative US Senator State Governor State Lt Governor (not normally anyone's running mate) State Attorney General State Secretary of State State Treasurer State Comptroller State Agriculture Commissioner State Insurance Commissioner State Board of Education member Another state Board of Education member State judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge Another state judge State Representative State Senator State referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue Another state referendum/initiative/other ballot issue County commission member Another county commission member County DA County Attorney County judge Another county judge Another county judge Another county judge Another county judge Another county judge Another county judge Another county judge County/local school board member Another local school board member Another local school board member Mayor City council member Another city council member Local ballot issue Another local ballot issue Another local ballot issue Another local ballot issue Another local ballot issue Another local ballot issue Another local ballot issue Another local ballot issue Another local ballot issue Some states run most of their state election in the off-years (ie, 1998, 2002), so there the big elections would be in those years. The number of ballot propositions might vary between zero and around a hundred. Hand-counting all those offices and elections would be very unwieldy -- it will either take 50--100 times as long, or involve 50--100 times as many people handling the ballots. Allowing representatives of all the various candidates and of all the various interests with a stake in the ballot propositions into the hand-counting room to observe would likewise be unwieldy.
• Autralian monkeys welcome to seek refugee status is New Zealand. Will have to adjust to swimmers and cricket teams that do run crush all before them.
• Well, it's a beautiful day. At least they can't fuck that up.
• condolences. how does this guy keep winning term after term if he is so horrible?
• It was all about mortgages this time. H is perceived to be an excellent economic manager, and a lot of people have hyperextended themselves on the loan front because of the housing bubble these blokes (H foremost among them) created. Now the punters are scared shitless that rates will rise, so they go for the familiar. The amazing thing is that Ratty pork-barreled like a mofo but still gets to wear the "economically responsible" hat. Also, people are so dirt dumb that they think they're making a fortune when the value of their house doubles in 2 years. It doesn't occur to them that it's of no earthly use if they can't realise the profit ... the house you&#039;re moving into has also doubled in price! OK, I don't have a mortgage, but I'm going to have to buy a larger house next year and it's going to cost a fuckload of money. Even if we do get loads more for this one.
• the election was won on interest rates? you are fucked. i live in calif (sf-bay area). if the interest rates drop to -10%, i still could not afford a home. there's lotsa land in oz, no? why the spike in housing costs?
• 1. Imposition of new Goods and Services Tax adds 10% to the price of materials for your new home. 2. Construction industry goes mad as people attempt to build before the tax comes in. When the tax does come in, anyone who was seriously thinking of building has already done so. Construction industry goes flat, hibernates. 3. Introduce subsidies to stimulate construction. $7000 for a new house, $7000 more if you&#039;re a first time buyer. 4. Price of all houses immediately jumps by $14000. 5. Inflationary spiral of house prices now established. 6. If you don&#039;t buy a house sooner rather than later, you&#039;re going to miss out completely. 6. You now owe the bank a terrifying amount of money. 7. Vote John Howard!
• Ozmonkeys, my sympathies: even I, with no knowledge of Aus. politics, knew that H was the wrong one. I think I saw/read somwhere that in an experiment, two sets of volunteers were asked about Bush's Iraq policy. One set was asked to just watch tv, and the other set was asked to watch something about 9-11. The second set supported Bush's Iraq policy demonstrating that if you scare people they will vote in your favour. I think pretty much the same thing happened in Australia- in the last few days, the TV was filled with ads about how terrible it would be if Labour won.
• Like I say, let's assassinate him.
• rxreed: Australia has plenty of land, but most of it isn't where people want to live. They have a few major centres (Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth), and people mostly want to live in Sydney or Melbourne (except for South Africans and Poms, who all end up in Perth). Sure, there's lots of room in Tasmania or the Northern Territories. No-one wants it, though. Wolof: Family First in control of the Senate? Family First? Have you lot been accepting the US religious right over there along with all the South Africans?
• No, Family First are home-grown nutters. And I think it's probable the Libs will control the Senate in their own right. So we can expect an absolute torrent of legislation to pass through around about July. *takes deep breath, gets ready to suck it up for another 3 years*
• While I can't honestly offer condolences to you Aussies, since I was hoping Howard would win, I'm sorry you all have had bad experiences under his party. Hope the next three years are better. And someone on "your side" please chastise Nostril for his unbecoming comments. Is this what it's come to when someone we don't like gets elected? Assassination "jokes"? I'm not laughing.
• Was just listening to the radio, and it appears Family First (aka Assemblies of God, political wing) are a real possibility to hold the balance of power in the Senate. Cripes!
• Oh, and no killing people for having different politics in a demokrasi, pliss.
• I think this election for many came down not to "Who do you like more" but "Who do you dislike less." A case of better the devil you know. Labor really blew a great opportunity here. Howard's popularity was at an all time low, what with Iraq, kids overboard, Bush ass kissing etc but Labor failed to capitalise by putting forward a candidate with more leadership potential. As much as I dislike Howard, I find Latham boorish and arguably ill equipped to handle such responsibility. The chip on his shoulder and constant ramblings about growing up on the wrong side of the tracks tires quickly and has proven to be divisive within the community. Given this I was suprised not to have seen a greater swing to the Greens. P.S- Did anyone catch Bush giving a shout out to little johnny congratulating him on his win? It was so cringewrothy I was instantly embarassed to be an Australian.
• howard is credited with the economic boom in australia, no? *trying to learn more* p.s. i am really enjoying learning more about politics abroad. thanks monkeys! i may soon shed my american ignorance and arrogance.
• bah.
• My condolences, Australia. Sorry to hear you got stuck with him again. Nostildamus has the right to bring up assassination as a solution to the problem Australia has again. While extreme, the possibility of violent comment on election results or acts committed while in office has been a part of the political landscape since the beginning of the concept of government. Et tu, Brute? As for voting problems, I caught a preview of an interview with Bill Maher that the CBC is airing soon. One of his comments was brilliant (I'll paraphrase): Why are votes counted in a devil-may-care fashion, as if 'close enough' really were the best we can do? If this were money being counted, no-one would just shrug his or her shoulders and accept whatever amount was handed to him or her without counting it down to the last penny. Why are votes considered unimportant?
• Death to all extremists!
• Australia has plenty of land, but most of it isn't where people want to live. They have a few major centres (Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth), and people mostly want to live in Sydney or Melbourne (except for South Africans and Poms, who all end up in Perth). What are Poms?
• Poms are the English. And I live in Perth, there are no vast numbers of South African here, although there are some UKians. I prefer Perth to the East. It has everything one might need, plus cheaper cost of living. And its further away from madness.
• As I recall a pompom is a woolly ball A pom (just one) may be woolly, too but can't be stitched easily to cap or shoe Pom grows in the wilds of the British Isles where 'twas born then strays from Home to the woolly outback where it's treated with disdainful scorn
• So, where do the Yanks end up?
• Yank guy lives near my Granny, he jumped ship about 9 years ago. So, I suppose, wherever they like.
• When good Americans die they go to Paris. -- Oscar Wilde
• I read beesusses' poem as: Porn grows in the wilds of the British Isles where 'twas born I like my version better.
• So, does the fact that Howard won indicate that Iraq was more or less a forefront of the election?
• Iraq had approximately three fifths of bugger all to do with it. Wasn't even mentioned in the campaign -- neither side wanted to touch it. Sorry to disappoint.
• f8xmulder, seeing as how I disagree with you vehemently on U.S. politics, W(why)TF did you want Howard to win? I'm starting to think you are the anti-christ (I kid). Do you have a vested interest? It just strikes me as odd. Do you live in Australia?
• Howard is a staunch supporter of the Iraq war and of keeping troops in that country. I think it's fairly obvious why I wanted Howard to win. I've followed the campaign somewhat, so I'm not totally ignorant of the politics of it. I do not live in Australia. We Yanks can still look beyond our own borders. Wolof: Hmmm. 3/5ths of 0? ;-) Despite the fact that Latham promised to pull troops out if elected? Despite the fact that Howard promises to keep the troops in Iraq? Despite the fact that the Australian embassy in Jakarta was targeted by al Quaeda? Despite the fact that Australia is one of the Big Four of the Coalition partners? Despite the many anti-war/anti-Howard protests? Undoubtedly, it wasn't the primary issue. That seems to be the economy. But I imagine Iraq did play an important role in the minds of voters, even if it wasn't mentioned much in the campaign...
• Are you so desperate for someone, somewhere to prop up that illegal, failed mass slaughter of civilians in Iraq that you'll pretend Australians must just have endorsed it? All the Aussie TV coverage I get in New Zealand was focused on financial issues: interest rates, Howard's $6 billion in spending promises, healthcare affordability, and whatnot. Heck, New Zealand apples were the biggest issue in some areas. Which is a shame, because Howard's asshattish path in going into Iraq helped get several hundred people killed in Bali for what has proven to be a pack of lies; it's unlikely his ongoing commitment to that, missile shields, or a massive build-up of the Aussie armed forces will bring Australia much of a benefit.
• Er, I feel obliged to point out that the Bali bombing took place before the Iraq invasion. Also, Australians, Americans, whatever, Amrozi and his pals scarcely knew the difference. They hate the lot of us anyway.
• rodgerd: Whatever gave you the idea that I am desperate? It's like there's this prevailing theme here: If you support Bush then you must be some desperate fool grasping at straws. It's liberal arrogance at its finest.
• No, there are more options, f8xmulder. If you support Bush you might be a sociopath who likes seeing one of your kind in office, you might be insane, you might be a greedy, rich asshole, you might be a homophobic, racist slime who believes that the idiot Bush will rewrite the constitution to outlaw everything you dislike, you might be a religious-right wacko.... As you can see, there are many reasons to vote for Bush. And none of them good.
• Hey, mac, try to remember there's a person on the end of that line. f8xy's been around here for a while, and he's OK.
• Just think, we could have Tony Abbot as PM within the next 3 years. Keep that Tony Jones interview on ice. prismatic, having a fairly similar demographic profile to yourself, all I can say is I too was underwhelmed by the campaign. The only fortunate thing being that I missed at least a third of it by being at a couple of sporting tournaments.
• I'm just happy that we all get to share in the misery that is our leaders. Yay for us! Well, not you f8x, I'm mad that your happpy with our leaders! ; p
• And here I thought encouraging discussion of Aussie politics would help get us away from the prevailing American debates. You better all get back over to that Canuck thread and talk about how it's amazing how the Governor General seems to have exactly the same monotone in English and French. (Wolof, you can laugh at her accent, if appropriate).
• I find Canadian French difficult to follow.
• Don't we all.
• I actually find it easier :)
• Darshon: hugs!
• Just pointing out the options, Wolof. And anyone voting for the war criminal is not 'OK'.
• don't feed the troll
• I tend to agree with Decani insofar as I think there's far too much reflexive squealing of "troll" around here lately*. Unedifying spectacle, in my opinion. /troll *I was very saddened by that whole SideDish/ Spackle incident. I liked both of them.
• I agree, as always, with the lovely and effervescent Wolof. I do think that we need to all maybe take a step back, a deep breath, and I only wish we had the thread up that linked to everyone's photo to remind us all that there are indeed real people at the end of our web connections. I'm quite looking forward to having a new pet argument topic. Maybe dealing drugs to toddlers, something that isn't quite so inflammatory.
• Dealing drugs to toddlers - that was the Greens policy! Or so Family First said.