Labor can win

Six months is a long time in Australian politics, especially when the people who decide our elections are non-interested swinging voters who have little or no idea of what is really going on. 

For all of the logic and reasoning that says Labor can’t win, due to their blatant lies, corruption, incompetence, and waste, none of it matters because the people who determine our election outcomes don’t have a clue. All they see is what’s on the surface, and Labor knows it.

Labor knows that provided they keep attacking the Liberals and Tony Abbott, and defending themselves as if they’re the victims, they can maintain an election-winning image. They can literally fake it until they make it because the people who decide who governs Australia aren’t really paying attention.

Disengaged voters don’t know Abbott’s not sexist – they haven’t watched him closely enough for long enough. As far as they know, his whole attack could be based on sexism and greed. After all, they think he looks sexist and people know he fancies big business.

It’s hard to imagine Labor winning in the face of the type of ads the Liberals will run, but if Labor retaliates hard and it turns into a brawl – a campaign of fear and smear based on lies and sensationalism about workers rights, misogyny and boat people, the melee that ensues will be lost on the swinging voters. They’ll switch off and say ‘they’re all as bad as each other’, and this is a battle Labor knows how to win.

Remember that under our system of compulsory voting, almost anything is possible. Policy doesn’t matter, substance doesn’t matter and truth certainly doesn’t matter because the people deciding our election outcomes aren’t really paying attention.

The reason they aren’t paying attention is because our leaders rely on force to motivate people to vote. They don’t need to inspire or motivate anyone with good ideas, all they need to do is be a little less repulsive than the other guys and compulsory voting does the rest.

If the ALP gets close before the next election and then gets another bump in the polls from a leadership switch, the new 1.5 million voters thanks to automatic voter enrollment could be enough to get them over the line.

The ALP knows this, which is why they’ve introduced automatic enrollment. The Liberals know it too, which is why they oppose it.

Unfortunately, opposing automatic enrollment is not the answer. The Liberals must oppose compulsory voting. But they’re too stupid to realize it.

They’re too stupid to realize that they would hold the moral high ground if the oppose compulsory voting, but look like fascists when they oppose automatic voter registration.

Jason Kent

Free Our Right To Vote

Comments

[Nona Florat]

1.

I strongly support compulsory voting. That is not the problem.

In the US Dictator Obama is in power for (at least) another four years, because voters are not paying attention.

[Smutsie]

2.

Hey Nona -

Voting is not compulsory in the good old USofA.

Obama won because his troops on the ground did a better job than the Republicans at recruiting voters.

In a strange way, Obama did not win himself, his troops won for him.

Most telling comment on Fox News by almost sane Republican "we leave recruiting to the blue hairs ..." i.e. what we call the blue rinse set.

Another reporter made the best comedy hit -

"I am outside Obama's election headquarters here in Nairobi ..."

[Brett]

3.

Swinging voters only decide elections if each of the parties retains their base or core vote. Of course the reality is that even the core or base vote varies from election to election ; which is the problem Labor currently faces. Labor is now down to its rusted on voters (that rump that will never change their vote). In better times their vote was higher because there are many people who most commonly vote Labor but who have now deserted them because of the very obvious failings of the current government and of Gillard. In normal times you wouldn't call those people swinging voters but in the current circumstances they has switched. The polls repeatedly tell us this. Unless Labor gets its base vote back up to to 39-40% range, it will lose. And they are a long way away from that position today.

[kraka]

4.

Smutsie-I think the Liberals would have a problem with non compulsory voting due to the likes of crikey and get-up (government funded)being able to energize the dole bludgers and grants receivees much more effectively than business could energize the workers and the majority. There are simply too many minority groups with vested interests and unfortunattely they nearly all fall on the left side of the political spectrum.
The culture of what can government do for me has been ingrained in the current generation thanks mainly to 30 years of PC in our education system (see results in todays papers of THAT little social engineering project)
The ticks and leeches on society would be out in droves to protect their non working lifestyle while ever the workers of this country are so blaise and ill-informed (courtesy of the MSM)about politics.
I use to believe non compusory would favor the Libs but now I am not so sure. The only way to make non compulsory viable,IMHO, is to either raise the age of voting back to 21 (along with drinking)or take back the education system from the lefists and have our kids leave school with the ability to critically analyze. As it stands now they are force fed propoganda, rather than be trusted to make up their own minds by being given both sides of the story.

[Brian Richard Allen]

5.

In America the fascist, Zero, is in our office for another four years, because voters are not paying attention.

Astute, Nona Florat!

And that's why, in America anyway, the End of the World didn't happen yestoday. It already happened. On November 6. At least for America but likely also for the rest of Judeo-Christian/Western/Human Civilization we vanguard.

America committed suicide on November 4 2008 -- but on November 6 2012, its carcass was interred!

What ended in America on November 6 is any pretense at adherence to genuine democracy. To fair and honest elections. On November 6, Zero's America became a "democracy" only if measured on a par with Chavez's Venezuela and Putin's Russia.

Massive vote fraud was committed in plain view - 456,000 stolen votes in just four states: Florida 74,000 "votes;" Virginia 149,000; Ohio 166,000 and Nevada 67,000 for a total of 66 stolen Electoral College votes gave President-elect Romney 272 Electoral College votes -- and the presidency.

On Monday December 17 the Electoral College convened and endorsed Zero's fraud. No one paid any attention. Not even a whimper was heard through the land. As the lights went out on America's democracy.

Just as surely as Australia's lights were extinguished on December 2 1972. The date that will live in infamy and mark the dreadful day on which the Fabian-Fascist/Maoist traitor, Whitlam, was elected to government.

[Derek]

6.

The problem is that once you drop compulsory voting, it becomes far more expensive for candidates to campaign and actually motivate voters, not just to vote for their party, but to vote at all.
And with this extra expense, political parties would be more willing to accept more donations, which of course has more strings attached.
Just look at the US style rallies and public donations from tobacco groups, arms manufacturers and media organisations and retrospective ideologies and legislation.
Do you really want Australia to go down that path?

[Derek]

7.

Do you have any sort of proof of what you say, or is this all conjecture?
Also, I like your website link.
If only it pointed to something that was functional.

[Despaxious]

8.

The only way to stop self interest voting is to stop making government so important. If the Feds stayed to their section 51 responsibilities, and got out of the wealth redistribution game, then most people wouldn't even know who the federal pollies were, and wouldn't care as much. Unfortunately the Libs don't stop dependence on government, they perpetuate it and expand it. The solution is to change the culture within the Libs first, then change the culture more broadly.

[Jason Kent]

9.

Derek when you say 'that path' remember that 'that path' is shared by Sweden, Denmark, Germany, France, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand and most other democracies. Only ten nations enforce compulsory voting.

Actually it could cost a lot less to motivate support under voluntary voting because the party's messages will have better cut through because the parties will be better differentiated and their targets easier to define and reach. The costs of political campaigns could fall under voluntary voting.

But even still, you can't blame all of America's problems on freedom or capitalism. Money can buy power but the alternative is not democracy, it's communism or fascism. That's not a path we should go down.

[Derek]

10.

Actually it could cost a lot less to motivate support under voluntary voting because the party's messages will have better cut through because the parties will be better differentiated and their targets easier to define and reach.
Not the case. Even in countries that don't have compulsory voting, many countries with two major political parties are experiencing the same problem of voter disconnect.
That isn't a 'feature' of compulsory voting, it's a feature of having a parliamentary model that is based around political parties regardless of the voting system.
And the 'everyone else is doing it' argument is getting old. Back in the day, the Imperial system was in use throughout the world. In a more political example, most of the world uses a first past the post voting model.
Should we have stayed with these flawed systems because everyone else was doing it?

And how would you suggest that non-compulsory voting would bring down the cost of campaigns?
Many countries with voluntary voting have to spend more money on their campaigns to even begin to have the same effect.

And it's true that money can buy power, so how about we get the money out of the equation in relation to political parties?
They should be non-for-profit and should only be able to make money off the membership fees.
If that's not enough, get rid of the management that's eating up that funding. It's pretty simple really.

[Jason Kent]

11.

Sometimes the "everyone is doing it" is a good argument, after all, that's the basis for democracy. But you're right, often people do get it wrong on mass. But still, not only is compulsory voting massively unpopular, but the trend is away from it. Many nations have abolished it in recent decades because it can drive down voter participation. People become apathetic and disengaged. That's why voter turnouts in Australia are lower than many countries with voluntary voting.

What if I have a lot of money and want to run for election? Are you saying that I should not be allowed to spend money on advertising? How am I ever supposed to get membership if I can't promote myself... word of mouth? Your system would protect the existing parties and make it a lot easier for the major parties to maintain their duopoly.

[Smutsie]

12.

Hi Kraka

This is the line that the looser Republicans are running.

Confirmed in advance by Mother Jones website of Willard Romney's private speech about the "47% who will never support us.. ".

With over 40 million people in the USofA on SNAP (= supplementary nutrition assistance program = food stamps), who could argue against?

I think however that you claims are not completely spurious for Australia.

[Smutsie]

13.

Hi Brian

I take it that "Zero" is code for Obama.

Not sure that I get the connection?

[kraka]

14.

your reply makes no sense and does not contribute one iota to the blog. Which part of my reply do you dispute and why-something with more meat in it than the garbage you just posted would be nice. Besides-if you had a comprehension that reached somewhere beyond your nose you would have read I basically agreed with you on the premise that the left had a better ground game.
How about readinh the whole post before spouting irrelevant shite.

[liinda]

15.

This site is the best comedy gold. The comments make my head explode with mirth. You're all brilliant.

[Derek]

16.

But still, not only is compulsory voting massively unpopular, but the trend is away from it. Many nations have abolished it in recent decades because it can drive down voter participation. People become apathetic and disengaged. That's why voter turnouts in Australia are lower than many countries with voluntary voting.
Voter turnout in Australia is still higher than many countries that lack compulsory voting, with the exception of by-elections that lack candidates from one of the major parties but that's very rare.

And the fact of the matter is that forcing parties to put more effort and money into their campaign would just waste money that could be put to better use elsewhere.

And if you have a lot of money, well, I suppose that the membership fee would be limiting to smaller parties, but unless you could give assurance that the donation has 'no strings attached' and isn't dependant on changing that party's policy, how can that process ever be truly fair and transparent?

[Jason Kent]

17.

Derek you assume more campaign money will magically appear. I think the costs of campaigning could actually fall with voluntary voting, for the reasons I outlined above.

Sweden, Denmark, Iceland and many others have higher voter turnouts than we do with voluntary voting. And in those countries 100% of the people are free to vote and those who do choose to vote, do so for the right reasons. They are engaged and informed, they're not just mindlessly avoiding fines. Are the costs of election campaigns higher there? I doubt it.

Of course there are countries with voluntary voting with lower turnouts, after all, there are only 10 countries in the world with compulsory voting.

'no strings attached' donations relies on honourable politicians. Politicians with principles like Ron Paul. But just because they rely on donations it does not necessarily mean they will be corrupt. There are some things that the might and force of government just can't solve. We can't expect government to force everyone to be good. It doesn't work like that. If we're worried about them being corrupt we need to limit the powers of government not increase them as you suggest.

What certainly does corrupt our politicians is the centralising affect of compulsory voting, because they hide behind the facade of centrality to win votes. Better if they need to motivate their base and show us what they truly stand for. If they need to motivate people to vote, it holds the politicians to a higher standard. They need to LEAD.

It's better if they educate, inform, inspire, motivate and empower us using peaceful means rather than fines enforceable with violence. Fining and penalising people for not voting is just fascist. That's why it's so rare.

Our decision to vote should be completely democratic, free from any government coercion. We should all have the same free and equal right to vote.

[Derek]

18.

Sweden, Denmark and Iceland are very poor examples of this sort of discussion as they have very different roles of the state in those countries. In fact, they're quite socialist in nature with the government handouts and motivating those voters would be easily done because of that.
There is no intrigue, only motivation to get more from the government.

In more capitalist societies like ours and the USA, there is less of this reliance on the government (I know what you are thinking, but in regards to those European countries we have a far smaller government), it would require more campaigning to motivate those voters in the same way, which means more money, which means more money wasted.

Why can't you get your head around this very simple fact?

[Anton]

19.

A cap on election expenditure would control costs. It would also help to weaken the duopoly the 2 largest parties enjoy

[Dan Gulberry]

20.

With non-compulsory voting, all the incumbent government (of any stripe) would have to do is hold the election on Grand Final day, or Melbourne Cup day, and turnout would be so weak that the incumbents get to stay in power forever.

Leave it the way it is.

[Sean Carroll]

21.

Wow! Talk about being self-deluded!

Get your head out of your backside and live in the real world. Stop being a spoily brat and an eltist.

How dare you say that voters are stupid. Why doesn't your side of politics come up with a vision for the future instead of focusing on smut and smear....but then perhaps for the country's sake.....we should leave you to your fool's paradise.