Australian Politics Forum - SA Gerrymander must end

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #60 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:25am

Bam wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 10:24pm:

Setanta wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 8:15pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 8:01pm:

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 7:57pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 7:47pm:

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 7:03pm:

Well, Labor in SA got 1 more seat than the Libs.

as discussed at length, the entire point of the thread which you, as usual, didn't get.

Not only that, it is only a gerrymander if seat boundaries were drawn up by the govt to deliberately affect the outcome of the election unfairly.

It is the independent AEC that draws the boundary. No gerrymander.

gerrymanders don't have to be deliberate. a gerrymander is by definition a system that denies government to the party that wins a significant majority REGARDLESS of who put it in place.

No, a gerrymander is deliberate and is by definition:
Quote:

In the process of setting electoral districts, gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries to create partisan advantaged districts.

And that is an important point. Gerrymanders are intentionally engineered, by definition.

Meet the first Gerrymander. This is the map of an American electoral district that was created in 1812, drawn as a winged monster in a political cartoon:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/The_Gerry-Mander_Edit....

Here is a particularly infamous example - a congressional district shaped like a pair of earmuffs.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Illinois_District_4_2004.png

These were not created accidentally.

The Playmander and Bjelkemander both had a massive overweight of rural electorates. Neither was created accidentally.

There is no such thing as an "accidental" gerrymander.

what arrogant nonsense is that? if a gerrymander is a system that denies govt to the rightful and significant winner of an election and it has occurred without any party's deliberate efforts then it is accidental by definition.

you will note that I have not blamed labor for this Gerrymander. I have criticised them soley for refusing to admit that it exists or that it is wrong. but they did not put it in place and yet it still exists.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

St George of the Garden Gold Member Offline http://tinyurl.com/n 3o8m2x Posts: 9809 Gender:	Re: SA Gerrymander must end Reply #61 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:27am Longweakened, the LCL was a union of Lib & Nat parties in SA that ruled for decades as a result of the Playford gerrymander.
Back to top	I want Muso as GMod. Bring back Muso! IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #62 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:29am

Dsmithy70 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 11:00pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 1:06pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 10:08am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 7:38am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Mar 20^th, 2014 at 7:57pm:

•In the 1998 federal election John Howard of the Liberal Party ran against the Labor Party’s Kim Beazley.

Loser Kim Beazley
received

5,630,409

votes while the winner
John Howard
, owing to the gerrymander effect, lead his party to victory and government with the grand total of

5,413,431

This was also election Howard claimed his "mandate" - or "referendum" - on his

GST

Even though MORE people voted AGAINST it - than FOR it

WHERE was the "outrage" THEN ?

( ... and bear in mind, this was a "fork in the road" FEDERAL ELECTION - and "referendum" if you like - on ANOTHER new way to tax us all
As opposed to who will lead the"state of insignificance")

and like every other hypocritical leftie you consider that any time 'you' were denied power by a SLIGHT 2PP discrepancy that makes every other event - even a massive gerrymander - okay.

do you even have a principle bone in your body? All you do is beg the question of why every liberal govt doesn't immediately institute a massive gerrymander in their own favour. AFter all, you don't seem to have any trouble with the concept.

A principle stands whether its 1 vote or a million votes.

Its not a "well only if you get over x amount"

Do you believe it or you don't.

And just as you accuse everyone else of, you believe when it is in your favour & pull out every excuse when it doesn't

well if that is your stand then I guess there really isn't any point in debating it with you, is it? I suppose you think Hawke stole the election in 1990 too?

The more you post the more I realise that you don't actually understand principle at all. 2PP is an APPROXIMATION of the votes not actual votes as pretty much most people understand. The worst part is that there is simply no way you will ever admit that the SA Libs have been ripped off. They could get get 60/40 or even 80/20 and stay in opposition and your position wouldn't change. As long as howard has won in 1998 with a sliver more of the 2PP then you will excuse any result.

I REALLY GENUINELY HOPE that the current liberal govts Australia-wide impose a gerrymander that denies labor its rightful right to govt in the future just so I can laugh at your 'unfair' arguments in the future.

Suppose not because frankly I don't care.

The current system works great when it falls your way and a travesty of justice when it doesn't.

It's boring wheres the discussion of policies, every thread disolves into this blah blah blah

that's a bit presumptive, don't you think? can you find a single example of my supporting a liberal win in a gerrymandered election? any? For the record I support Labor in QLD during the Joh years and I am a little young for Playford. I don't consider the Hawke win in 1990 or the Howard in in 1998 a gerrymander given the once-off nature of the event and the narrowness of the margin.

I just wonder why you cant call the SA election result a travesty. Is it that hard to be unbiased where it really counts - the core of our democratic system.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #63 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:31am

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:27am:

Longweakened, the LCL was a union of Lib & Nat parties in SA that ruled for decades as a result of the Playford gerrymander.

your point is what? you think I am unaware of this or that I was even alive during that time?? Is your only argument that of a schoolgirl? use some logic and some integrity. Your attitude only justifies the liberals reimposing a gerrymander when they get the chance.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

St George of the Garden

Gold Member

Offline

http://tinyurl.com/n
3o8m2x

Posts: 9809
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #64 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:32am

I deny it is a deliberate gerrymander.

The way Lib votes are clumped single member seats mean they do need to get a whole lot of votes.

The Indies won’t support them because:

1. After allowing for a speaker there will be 23 on each side of the chamber—unworkable

2. The Libs have a nasty habit of attacking Indies. Tell them to stop—very counterproductive

If you add the Indies votes to the Labor vote—does that give the ALP-Indie “coalition” a majority of votes?

If you want to change things single member seats are the stumbling block. What mechanism do you propose to put in its place? The AEC will not draw boundaries to give Libs a win.

Back to top

I want Muso as GMod. Bring back Muso!

Friends of the National Broadband Network

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #65 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:04am

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:32am:

I deny it is a deliberate gerrymander.

The way Lib votes are clumped single member seats mean they do need to get a whole lot of votes.

The Indies won’t support them because:

1. After allowing for a speaker there will be 23 on each side of the chamber—unworkable

2. The Libs have a nasty habit of attacking Indies. Tell them to stop—very counterproductive

If you add the Indies votes to the Labor vote—does that give the ALP-Indie “coalition” a majority of votes?

If you want to change things single member seats are the stumbling block. What mechanism do you propose to put in its place? The AEC will not draw boundaries to give Libs a win.

which is precisely what ive been saying!!!

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #66 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:07am

[quote author=GeorgeH link=1395306054/64#64 date=1395441140]I deny it is a deliberate gerrymander.

The way Lib votes are clumped single member seats mean they do need to get a whole lot of votes.

The Indies won’t support them because:

1. After allowing for a speaker there will be 23 on each side of the chamber—unworkable

2. The Libs have a nasty habit of attacking Indies. Tell them to stop—very counterproductive

If you add the Indies votes to the Labor vote—does that give the ALP-Indie “coalition” a majority of votes?

If you want to change things single member seats are the stumbling block. What mechanism do you propose to put in its place? The AEC will not draw boundaries to give Libs a win.[/quote]

the AEC is responsible for drawing boundaries that allow the number of seats the match the number of votes. it is that simple and yes, in this case that would mean boundaries that would ensure a liberal win which seems fair since the electorate wants that as well.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

St George of the Garden

Gold Member

Offline

http://tinyurl.com/n
3o8m2x

Posts: 9809
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #67 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:07am

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:31am:

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:27am:

Longweakened, the LCL was a union of Lib & Nat parties in SA that ruled for decades as a result of the Playford gerrymander.

your point is what? you think I am unaware of this or that I was even alive during that time?? Is your only argument that of a schoolgirl? use some logic and some integrity. Your attitude only justifies the liberals reimposing a gerrymander when they get the chance.

You seemed to think the LCL is the current Lib party. As an Adelaidean I am aware of that and shared that knowledge. Last time I will do so.

Back to top

I want Muso as GMod. Bring back Muso!

IP Logged

St George of the Garden

Gold Member

Offline

http://tinyurl.com/n
3o8m2x

Posts: 9809
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #68 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:09am

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:07am:

[quote author=GeorgeH link=1395306054/64#64 date=1395441140]I deny it is a deliberate gerrymander.

The way Lib votes are clumped single member seats mean they do need to get a whole lot of votes.

The Indies won’t support them because:

1. After allowing for a speaker there will be 23 on each side of the chamber—unworkable

2. The Libs have a nasty habit of attacking Indies. Tell them to stop—very counterproductive

If you add the Indies votes to the Labor vote—does that give the ALP-Indie “coalition” a majority of votes?

If you want to change things single member seats are the stumbling block. What mechanism do you propose to put in its place? The AEC will not draw boundaries to give Libs a win.[/quote]

the AEC is responsible for drawing boundaries that allow the number of seats the match the number of votes. it is that simple and yes, in this case that would mean boundaries that would ensure a liberal win which seems fair since the electorate wants that as well.

Oh man, you STILL don’t get it!

The Lib support is so clumped that with single member seats they will find it very hard to win. So to make things fair we would have to move from single member seats to a more proportional type of voting.

Back to top

I want Muso as GMod. Bring back Muso!

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #69 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:24am

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:09am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:07am:

[quote author=GeorgeH link=1395306054/64#64 date=1395441140]I deny it is a deliberate gerrymander.

The way Lib votes are clumped single member seats mean they do need to get a whole lot of votes.

The Indies won’t support them because:

1. After allowing for a speaker there will be 23 on each side of the chamber—unworkable

2. The Libs have a nasty habit of attacking Indies. Tell them to stop—very counterproductive

If you add the Indies votes to the Labor vote—does that give the ALP-Indie “coalition” a majority of votes?

If you want to change things single member seats are the stumbling block. What mechanism do you propose to put in its place? The AEC will not draw boundaries to give Libs a win.[/quote]

the AEC is responsible for drawing boundaries that allow the number of seats the match the number of votes. it is that simple and yes, in this case that would mean boundaries that would ensure a liberal win which seems fair since the electorate wants that as well.

Oh man, you STILL don’t get it!

The Lib support is so clumped that with single member seats they will find it very hard to win. So to make things fair we would have to move from single member seats to a more proportional type of voting.

so you are finally saying the current system is unfair??

and btw the way, the LCL and the Liberal-national coalition are the same body with a different name.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #70 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:38am

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:23am:

Bam wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 10:11pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 5:33pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 5:25pm:

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 20^th, 2014 at 9:08pm:

Love the rightarded outrage tho.

Govts don’t draw the seat boundaries, the AEC do, unlike in Joh’s day. Govt on 19% of the vote?

29%.

Labor in SA didn't get a whole lot more.

Liberal and Country League in SA didn't get a whole lot more.

Fixed it for you.

44% isn't a lot more than 29%???

only in your intellectually dim world perhaps.

Are you claiming that the ALP 2PP vote in the 2014 SA election was 44%? If so, prove it.

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #71 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:42am

Bam wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:38am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:23am:

Bam wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 10:11pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 5:33pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 5:25pm:

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 20^th, 2014 at 9:08pm:

Love the rightarded outrage tho.

Govts don’t draw the seat boundaries, the AEC do, unlike in Joh’s day. Govt on 19% of the vote?

29%.

Labor in SA didn't get a whole lot more.

Liberal and Country League in SA didn't get a whole lot more.

Fixed it for you.

44% isn't a lot more than 29%???

only in your intellectually dim world perhaps.

Are you claiming that the ALP 2PP vote in the 2014 SA election was 44%? If so, prove it.

anger is getting the best of your intelligence. I am on record about a thousand times as saying the 2PP result was 53/47. now think again and try and work out what 44 was

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #72 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:51am

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:25am:

Bam wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 10:24pm:

Setanta wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 8:15pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 8:01pm:

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 7:57pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 7:47pm:

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 7:03pm:

Well, Labor in SA got 1 more seat than the Libs.

as discussed at length, the entire point of the thread which you, as usual, didn't get.

Not only that, it is only a gerrymander if seat boundaries were drawn up by the govt to deliberately affect the outcome of the election unfairly.

It is the independent AEC that draws the boundary. No gerrymander.

gerrymanders don't have to be deliberate. a gerrymander is by definition a system that denies government to the party that wins a significant majority REGARDLESS of who put it in place.

No, a gerrymander is deliberate and is by definition:
Quote:

In the process of setting electoral districts, gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries to create partisan advantaged districts.

And that is an important point. Gerrymanders are intentionally engineered, by definition.

Meet the first Gerrymander. This is the map of an American electoral district that was created in 1812, drawn as a winged monster in a political cartoon:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/The_Gerry-Mander_Edit....

Here is a particularly infamous example - a congressional district shaped like a pair of earmuffs.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Illinois_District_4_2004.png

These were not created accidentally.

The Playmander and Bjelkemander both had a massive overweight of rural electorates. Neither was created accidentally.

There is no such thing as an "accidental" gerrymander.

what arrogant nonsense is that? if a gerrymander is a system that denies govt to the rightful and significant winner of an election and it has occurred without any party's deliberate efforts then it is accidental by definition.

A gerrymander is NOT this. Stop making up crap.

A gerrymander - BY DEFINITION - is a DELIBERATE attempt to manipulate the electoral system to produce a particular outcome. There is no such thing as an accidental gerrymander.

From Wikipedia:
Quote:

Gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries to create partisan advantaged districts.

For it to be a gerrymander, there has to be wilful manipulation. If there's no wilful manipulation, it is not a gerrymander.

Quote:

you will note that I have not blamed labor for this Gerrymander. I have criticised them soley for refusing to admit that it exists or that it is wrong. but they did not put it in place and yet it still exists.

They can't admit it exists because IT IS NOT A GERRYMANDER!

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #73 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:56am

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:42am:

Bam wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:38am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 8:23am:

Bam wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 10:11pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 5:33pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 5:25pm:

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 20^th, 2014 at 9:08pm:

Love the rightarded outrage tho.

Govts don’t draw the seat boundaries, the AEC do, unlike in Joh’s day. Govt on 19% of the vote?

29%.

Labor in SA didn't get a whole lot more.

Liberal and Country League in SA didn't get a whole lot more.

Fixed it for you.

44% isn't a lot more than 29%???

only in your intellectually dim world perhaps.

Are you claiming that the ALP 2PP vote in the 2014 SA election was 44%? If so, prove it.

anger is getting the best of your intelligence.

Another personal attack from the resident forum liar.

Quote:

I am on record about a thousand times as saying the 2PP result was 53/47.

You are not on record anywhere actually proving it.

Quote:

now think again and try and work out what 44 was

No, the onus is on YOU to state it. We are not mind readers.

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

St George of the Garden

Gold Member

Offline

http://tinyurl.com/n
3o8m2x

Posts: 9809
Gender: male

Re: SA Gerrymander must end
Reply #74 - Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 10:17am

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2014 at 9:07am:

[quote author=GeorgeH link=1395306054/64#64 date=1395441140]I deny it is a deliberate gerrymander.

The way Lib votes are clumped single member seats mean they do need to get a whole lot of votes.

The Indies won’t support them because:

1. After allowing for a speaker there will be 23 on each side of the chamber—unworkable

2. The Libs have a nasty habit of attacking Indies. Tell them to stop—very counterproductive

If you add the Indies votes to the Labor vote—does that give the ALP-Indie “coalition” a majority of votes?

If you want to change things single member seats are the stumbling block. What mechanism do you propose to put in its place? The AEC will not draw boundaries to give Libs a win.[/quote]

the AEC is responsible for drawing boundaries that allow the number of seats the match the number of votes. it is that simple and yes, in this case that would mean boundaries that would ensure a liberal win which seems fair since the electorate wants that as well.

There are restrictions on what the AEC can do, like state seats fitting within boundaries of federal seats.

No—to get a more proportionate result you need a more proportionate type of voting, like Hare Clarke?

Back to top

I want Muso as GMod. Bring back Muso!

IP Logged