2019 Federal Election Discussion

[ozfflyer]

what's to stop someone voting many times ?

 

[moa999]

With the huge pre poll, it's going to be impossible to call tonight which is a pity but we will watch the coverage

I actually think the AEC needs to change their methodology.
Start counting the pre-polls on Thu/Fri beforehand, just don't release any results and have separate people enter in the Labor v Coalition count.
Also start data entry on the Senate papers.

 

[love_the_life]

I actually think the AEC needs to change their methodology.
Start counting the pre-polls on Thu/Fri beforehand, just don't release any results and have separate people enter in the Labor v Coalition count.
Also start data entry on the Senate papers.

We were discussing this very thing but because the parties provide scrutineers to oversee the count, it would be impossible to keep a lid on any trends etc.

 

[tgh]

what's to stop someone voting many times ?

..nothing at all..

swmbo quizzed an electoral official about it today.. they can't stop it and don't try

 

[ozfflyer]

We were discussing this very thing but because the parties provide scrutineers to oversee the count, it would be impossible to keep a lid on any trends etc.

was a scrutineer years ago & it's all very dodgy. Other party kept saying a vote was illegit, when it was debatable, but there were 6 scrutineers from other side & only moi. Guess if it was close, they'd have a recount.

 

[cwd]

what's to stop someone voting many times ?

How does the threat of a year in prison sound as a deterrent?

The great thing is, while you won't be stopped doing it on the day, you will be caught later, so we know how often it happens. It's also possible to figure out whether it could have impacted a particular contest.

More than 18,000 people asked to explain why they voted twice at election

More than 18,000 people have been asked to explain why they apparently voted more than once at the federal election.

www.smh.com.au

 

[ozfflyer]

How does the threat of a year in prison sound as a deterrent?

The great thing is, while you won't be stopped doing it on the day, you will be caught later, so we know how often it happens. It's also possible to figure out whether it could have impacted a particular contest.

More than 18,000 people asked to explain why they voted twice at election

More than 18,000 people have been asked to explain why they apparently voted more than once at the federal election.

www.smh.com.au

almost impossible to catch anyone, who's smart enough. How would they ?

All you need is someones full name & address & probably vote early.

What would happen if you tried to vote multiple times under the 1 name ?

Unions have been doing it for decades.

 

[OATEK]

almost impossible to catch anyone, who's smart enough. How would they ?

All you need is someones full name & address & probably vote early.

What would happen if you tried to vote multiple times under the 1 name ?

Unions have been doing it for decades.

As long as it is down to someone just marking one name in a list of 60+k voters there will always be a claim for clerical error. We would need a complete overhaul to close off the potential abuse of the system.

 

[I love to travel]

A good laugh that will hopefully balance some of the more interesting parts of this thread. I loved the Jacinda Arden one

Election Day: Overheard at the polling booths

Australians have shared what they overheard at the polling booths on Saturday and the results are both funny, sad and terrifying.

www.news.com.au

 

[love_the_life]

MrLtL keeps asking for the half time scores.

 

[moa999]

We were discussing this very thing but because the parties provide scrutineers to oversee the count, it would be impossible to keep a lid on any trends etc.

Not sure if it matters though (some other countries allow polling over a much longer period)
- pre-poll votes are often quite different (favouring coalition) to the rest of the voting
- even if you knew there was possibly a swing one way or another, would you change your vote?

 

[love_the_life]

Not sure if it matters though (some other countries allow polling over a much longer period)
- pre-poll votes are often quite different (favouring coalition) to the rest of the voting
- even if you knew there was possibly a swing one way or another, would you change your vote?

I think it is more that the scrutineers would feed the info back to their candidates who could change their pitches based on the results of individual seats, announce new policies, throw some new dirt around etc etc. Whether it would change people's voting, who knows but there would be still swinging voters to woo.

 

[Cossie]

I'd like to see fixed terms, 4 or 5 years and first past the post, much simpler.

 

[amaroo]

All done - such a good feeling

 

[love_the_life]

I'd like to see fixed terms, 4 or 5 years and first past the post, much simpler.

Though the rationale for preferential voting is that the candidate has to be acceptable (in some way) to 50%+1 rather than first past the post where it is likely to be much less.

 

[cove]

I used to think 4 or 5 years would ge good until we got Whitlam, Fraser and Rudd. One year of them was too much.

 

[Cossie]

I used to think 4 or 5 years would ge good until we got Whitlam, Fraser and Rudd. One year of them was too much.

What was wrong with Fraser?

 

[Cossie]

Though the rationale for preferential voting is that the candidate has to be acceptable (in come way) to 50%+1 rather than first past the post where it is likely to be much less.

If it stopped people like Anning being elected in, would that be a bad thing?, although no idea how it would have worked with the citizenship debacle.

 

[cove]

Fraser was related to a plank and had trouble understanding quite a bit as a result of this.
I think he lost his property Nareen when a Lloyd’s Insurance Syndicate went sour and he had unlimited liability that he had failed to recognize. Others may know more about this.

 

[Cossie]

Was a great feeling knowing that I didn't have to put a number against "your local senator", he'll probably still get re-elected unfortunately

If that's true about Nareen, he would not have been the only person to lose their shirt...

(along with his pants!)