Keep Calm Abbott is not PM

Our system doesn't go by who gets the most amount of votes. Its which party gets the majority of seats. (I think)

 

Thats why I explained my post, to clarify its not what I was talking about. Juliar wasnt 'elected', no-one won the election so if anyone is going to claim having gotten the most votes it was the Libs. The only reason Juliar won office is because of negotiations after the election.

 

We already discussed that earlier in this thread, and the best the ALPers could come up was that there was conflicting reports being fed to the government.

If I was a politician and had conflicting information I would not be in a rush to chase the latest version of events. Getting it wrong in the first instance is not proof of a lie, neither is sticking to that story until the actual truth can be discovered.

 

Yes and I agree that she didn't win the election outright - but neither did Abbott.

 

.. and that makes me sad

I was responding though to bugalugs saying;

"but in the end, she is delivering what she was elected to deliver - a price on carbon. "

 

And all the hype over it is just the Liberals stirring the pot, as usual.

 

^^ wants a one party state !?

 

Huh?????????

 

If he had of put an "I don't" in front of the "know", that would have been the truth.

 

Because I am not against us helping the people of Iraq obtain their freedom.

 

Defending someone isnt stirring the pot, calling someone a liar on the evidence presented here is much closer to it. Im happy to be proven wrong, Ive never met Howard, but ALP rants lower the IQ of the readers.

Without evidence of deliberatly misleading I might as well postulate Iraq had the nuclear material that ended up in that Syrian area bordering Iraq, and thus was telling the truth afterall.

 

Technically you don't actually vote for the PM you vote for the member, they are endorsed as PM candidate, and the party chooses them if they win government.

No, the Liberals did not get the most votes. If your "rules" were applied, Abbott would have lost by 30,527 votes.

Two party proffered:

Australian Labor Party 6,216,445
Liberal/National Coalition 6,185,918

Doesn't stop your whinging though does it?

I know how little facts mean to Libs...

 

You have a strange definition of whinging, but I get your just looking for generic terms of insult... typical ALPer. Where'd you get your figures from?

 

I didn't quote the original post, but a quick google got me this from the AEC

http://results.aec.gov.au/15508/website/HouseStateFirstPrefsByParty-15508-NAT.htm

First Preferences
Australian Labor Party 4,711,363
Liberal 3,777,383
The Nationals 462,387

Two party prefered
Australian Labor Party 6,216,445
Liberal/National Coalition 6,185,918

Oh he was right

 

................................................................

 

I was referring to primary votes, so skipping two party preferences you've forgotten the QLD LNP (how convieniant for you?), so the primary would be better abbreviated to;

ALP = 4711363

LIB: 3777383
LNP: 1130525
NATS: 462387 = 5370295 !!

 

WOW You're back tracking so fast it is hard to keep up lol

NO YOU WERENT

 

Huh? Me correcting your mistakes is not backpeddling. Face it, you left out the entire QLD Liberal vote in your list of primaries!!! LOL

 

Anyway, we vote on preferences in this Australia so Abbott lost. Get over it.

Oh, found some more lies from him...

coalition carbon tax

 

Fool, someone quoted statistics, you replied like they had pulled them out of their A@#. So I pointed you in the right direction (Some thing Liberals need often) So stop sulking.

 

Hehe, you've no idea how much I'm 'not' sulking. I dont think your meant to directly insult people in the forum, but as usual if your going to call someone a fool you better be careful your accurate or it makes you look twice as foolish. You've indicated your anti-liberal, and you did comment on the figures when you added;

So dont try and backpeddle out of having an opinion.

I'll explain it to you since you seem to be an APL supporter. Bubalugs said Juliar was elected by the people to do something... not that her party was elected. I said if anyone (person) was elected it was Abbott because he got the most (primary) vote. The primary vote is more representative of the voters individual preference then an adjusted two party preference calculation.

You might think I'm a fool, but I think you might be worse - a typical ALP supporter. If you cannot keep up with an arugment because it goes over your head, or your party brainwashing blocks it, please dont automatically jump into insulting the other side, its a slippery slope. If you disagree and have a point, say it or consider singtfu.

 

Never voted Labor in my life, voted more for the nationals then I ever did any other party.
Then I grew a brain and stopped voting for who I was told and took an active interest in politics, had children, then grandchildren.

Now I look to their future and am most probably more left then the Greens.

But I vote for the best person for my electorate, and they are usually independent.

 

Labor under Hawke and Heating reformed our financial system. Previously whitlam reformed our social system.
Rudd steered us through the GFC.

 

hang on i will fix that post for you....
what you should have posted was
Labor under Hawke and keating stuffed our financial system and sent many aussies to the wall. Previously whitlam reformed our social system turning the whole system into a joke. Rudd steered us through the GFC by wasting the financial gains made by the howard costello years.

 

The only financial gains Costello made were big financial cuts to the education system ESPECIALLY to universities. During this period, universities just died. That's why Australia's at the bottom of the list for innovation. Why? Because scientists don't get any funding to do research. That's why you hear people complaining about researching in Australia (esp. scientific research) is impossible and they move to the United States to study. But oh wait - Howard and Costello doesn't believe in 'science' and wants to go back before the Renaissance. He thinks 'science' is too left wing.

Anyways... During the Howard period with 'education cut-backs', universities died because lack of funding and increase funding was put into private schools because Howard (coming from a private school) expected all Australians to afford university education. This resulted in
(i) Bad innovation (as highlighted previously)
(ii) Classroom sizes expanding (because the teacher/professor ratio had to increase with funding cut backs)
(iii) Half the lecture room would be filled with international students because they were the students that paid upfront.

Remember that one of Australia's biggest trading sector is education and Howard + Costello completely reduced the quality of it.

Education is essential. It removes poverty (some children in Australia are living in 'poverty' still), it closes the gap between rich and poor. Tony Abbott justs wants to widen that gap doesn't he?!

Thank you Labor for the Digital Education Revolution - and it was delivered in perfect timing of the GFC as it acted as a stimulus package. Liberal would never have thought of that. As well as the NBN and Youth Allowance. Liberals would want to treat the rich people nice - give them tax cuts while they would tax the poor more.

We will be reaching surplus soon too - which is excellent. When economies expand then we need surpluses! When economies slow down then we need deficits! This is from Economics 101 Year 11. Fiscal policy (meaning the government controlling tax and spending APPROPRIATELY) as well as monetary policy (Reserve Bank interest rates) is an essential part of a thriving economy. We have the world's best treasurer - why choose the dumbass Joe Hockey. My economics teacher even sent him a year 11 economics text book because he was so economic illiterate.

3 out of 4 economists are for the carbon tax.

Liberal means no NBN (sob sob), no mining tax (WE HAVE A TWO SPEED ECONOMY WE GOT TO SLOW DOWN THE MINING SECTOR ALREADY!!!) and cuts to health and education.

Don't get me started on the environment...

Listen to the professionals and stop watching Today Tonight and ACA.

Statistically speaking, you would find that Liberal supporters are more abundant in the less educated field than the more educated field. Scientists, doctors, nurses, teachers are mostly Labor supporters. Cleaners, manufacturing workers and construction workers all are Liberal supporters. These are statistically true and I'm not trying to criticise anyone.

A recent survey conducted in the western suburbs asked residents
Q: Are you Liberal or Labor supporter?
A: Liberal.
Q: Are your for the carbon tax?
A: No cause I'll be taxed. Life is already hard.
Q: Did you know you will end up better than you already started with tax breaks and compensation.
A: No.

Lol?

Apologies for any political in-correctness - please correct me my fellow scholars