What influences your vote...?

DISCLAIMER: I understand politics is not to be discussed and I'm not asking for political preferences just what influences the way people vote which is more of a human nature question.


I just read this in the SMH and I thought it was interesting and wondered what influenced the way people vote.

Quote:

---

"Voters don't experience the economy in terms of national indicators or treasury statistics," he says.
Good point. The figures politicians, economists and commentators quote to summarise the state of the macro economy - figures for economic growth, unemployment, inflation and real wage growth - don't mean much to most people. They judge the state of the economy by the state of their own affairs.
And here's another good point. Luntz says voters "see the economy through the lens of cost of living: how much it costs to own a home, rent an apartment, buy groceries and fill up at the petrol station".

---

I must admit that for me it has generally been whats likely to be in my best interest financially, lower income tax, employment opportunities. Since moving to the country my perspective hasn't changed but my focus is less on having more and more on the security of what I have due to living in a smaller community with less opportunities than the big smoke.

HH.

My years spent being an exploited dole buldger.

Kevin07 knows only too well.

That's how he's going to reduce greenhouse gases by reducing the amount of fossil fuel we use, AND make petrol cheaper!

I'll vote for whoever Mel and Kochie reckon are OK.

P
:wink:

I'll vote along party lines for the one who best provide for the future of our past and serving veterans.

Strange how the second major party has now committed to index T&PI and other veteran 'entitlements' to the higher of CPI or MTAWE after the first party committed to doing it.

Up until now they would not have a bar of it - I guess they need our vote after all!!!

I'll vote for the one that is going to do the least damage. The one that will use the military responsibly (not for an oil grab), that will look after environment and endangered species, that looks further out than one electoral cycle and doesnt rely on spin but responsible policy.

When I find a party like that I'll let you know, until then "expletive deleted" will appear on my ballot

There's only two things that are certain (death and taxes), and there are only two things that you have to do in this country. Vote, and fill out a census. You don't even have to pay taxes if you live as a hermit in a cave eating witchetty grubs.

I can see the reasoning behind a census, but you shouldn't have to vote if you don't want to. If you don't care enough to, then the people who do care carry more influence which is the way that it should be.

It's true, especially in my case, that your vote makes no difference. I'm in a blue ribbon Liberal seat and I'm damned if I'm going to waste my time going to the polls. I'm tempted to write on my letter of explanation that I just couldn't be bothered, but I don't want a fine, so I'll just make up some BS like I always do.

Call me a deadbeat if you want. :q

I suspect that this will be a long thread.

someone that will keep us out of wars
spend real money teaching our kid and looking after our old

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebastiaan56

I'll vote for the one that is going to do the least damage. The one that will use the military responsibly (not for an oil grab), that will look after environment and endangered species, that looks further out than one electoral cycle and doesnt rely on spin but responsible policy.

When I find a party like that I'll let you know, until then "expletive deleted" will appear on my ballot

---

Sebastiaan, I want what you're smoking. I agree, but we are stuck with a two party system, so you should maybe look to the Greens and then trust that they'll send the preferences the right way.

What I'm influenced by, in addition to what Sebastiaan said, is that the party I'm voting for doesn't have the "born to rule" private school boys club mentality. (damn, now I've gone too far, sorry):wink:.You did.

I'll vote for the one without a proven track record of lying, deceit, broken promises and general political manouvering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Mac

I'll vote for the one without a proven track record of lying, deceit, broken promises and general political manouvering.

---

I'm not a member of the CWA, so I don't have to vote.

P
:D:D:D

first party to hand me some polictical carp, dosen't get my vote
it then goes in decending order till I get in the door!
whoevers left......wins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Mac

I'll vote for the one without a proven track record of lying, deceit, broken promises and general political manouvering.

---

So you're not voting this year then?:no:

Don't vote! it only encourages the bastards.
Cheers
Barry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Shed

So you're not voting this year then?:no:

---

Prolly right there, just some folk just seem to think they can do it all so blatantly and we don't realise or care or something. ...

Quote:

---

It's true, especially in my case, that your vote makes no difference. I'm in a blue ribbon Liberal seat and I'm damned if I'm going to waste my time going to the polls.

---

Im in the same situation as Pawnhead....my vote means stuff all. I live in a seat that requires one of the largest swings in the state to change the sitting member.

But seeing as I have to vote...I always follow a piece of advice my old man (who worked with politicians face to face every day until he retired) gave me.....always vote for the party in opposition :D.

cheers
BD:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pawnhead

There's only two things that are certain (death and taxes), and there are only two things that you have to do in this country. Vote, and fill out a census. You don't even have to pay taxes if you live as a hermit in a cave eating witchetty grubs.

I can see the reasoning behind a census, but you shouldn't have to vote if you don't want to. If you don't care enough to, then the people who do care carry more influence which is the way that it should be.

It's true, especially in my case, that your vote makes no difference. I'm in a blue ribbon Liberal seat and I'm damned if I'm going to waste my time going to the polls. I'm tempted to write on my letter of explanation that I just couldn't be bothered, but I don't want a fine, so I'll just make up some BS like I always do.

Call me a deadbeat if you want. :q

I suspect that this will be a long thread.

---

For me there's only one thing I have to do - I'm not allowed to vote.

Who ever I think will do the least damage. :~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brown Dog

Im in the same situation as Pawnhead....my vote means stuff all. I live in a seat that requires one of the largest swings in the state to change the sitting member.

But seeing as I have to vote...I always follow a piece of advice my old man (who worked with politicians face to face every day until he retired) gave me.....always vote for the party in opposition :D.

cheers
BD:rolleyes:

---

Ive had similar advice in the past, if you are in a marginal seat vote for whomever you want, if you are in a safe seat vote against the sitting member. That way more seats will become marginal and hopefully we will get their attention.

Not to stir a possum, but I simply cannot understand mandatory voting. It strikes me as absolutely ludicrous. At least here the people who don't give a toss don't influence the outcome. :?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Honorary Bloke

Not to stir a possum, but I simply cannot understand mandatory voting. It strikes me as absolutely ludicrous. At least here the people who don't give a toss don't influence the outcome. :?

---

I think it's good 'cause no-one can bitch and moan they didn't have thier say at the ballot box. It also makes some, not all, think about it rather than sit on their fat butts and do nothing.

I think a compulsory vote in the US would throw up some interesting outcomes like a female or black president.

HH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Honorary Bloke

Not to stir a possum, but I simply cannot understand mandatory voting. It strikes me as absolutely ludicrous. At least here the people who don't give a toss don't influence the outcome. :?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HappyHammer

I think it's good 'cause no-one can bitch and moan they didn't have thier say at the ballot box. It also makes some, not all, think about it rather than sit on their fat butts and do nothing.

I think a compulsory vote in the US would throw up some interesting outcomes like a female or black president.

HH.

---

Not voting is their say at the ballot box, Though I will say it isnt compulsory voting. It is compulsory attendance to a polling booth. once you have had your name marked off the roll you can legally proceed to the ballot boxes and insert the blank voting sheet into the ballot box.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Honorary Bloke

Not to stir a possum, but I simply cannot understand mandatory voting. It strikes me as absolutely ludicrous. At least here the people who don't give a toss don't influence the outcome. :?

---

It also does away with the "ferrying" system, here the parties don't have to transport reluctant and/or unwilling voters to the polling booth.

Having only willing/interested voters doesn't necessarily ensure that an intelligent leader is elected, your fearless leader just attended an OPEC meeting in Austria:2tsup:

G'day,

A strong history of economic management - only only party offers that :2tsup: , the other yobbos had my folks paying 19% on their home loan. :((

If the economy is in the right hands everything else follows after that.

I live in proberly the only seat to have always voted labour, :(( we have never had any other federal member and as such get stuff all , one mob know they are going to get in and the other mob know they wont .
So in the house of reps always vote against them hoping one day we will be a swinging seat :cool:
In the senate I go for who I feel will do the best job for Australia :2tsup:

We are similar to ashore in a rock solid NP/Lib electorate with the NP holding the federal seat for decades. You've got to wonder if we put a labor bloke in for a term how it would effect funding of the region next time round.

Waldo don't get to excited about interest rates they ended up being broken as a result of the 19% cracking the inflation nut, not by anything the current lot did. We also have a massive current account deficit and have undergone a period of housing inflation both of which put structural weaknesses into the economy. These can't be slated to one party and are not really on the radar at the moment, and wont be while we remain in a resources boom.

My vote will be to the party with some vision to the future on global warming and some plan to reduce our current account problems which means less consumption of overseas goods and more home grown production. A bit more honesty and a lot less spin would go down well also.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnc

A bit more honesty and a lot less spin would go down well also.

John

---

From politions " tell him he dreaming"
:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnc

We also have a massive current account deficit and have undergone a period of housing inflation both of which put structural weaknesses into the economy. John

---

G'day John,

But we've paid off the inherited national debt from business reports that I've seen, it's the states that still have us in debt - Victoria being the worst. Housing, well that's not a political responsibility of either of the two major parties - unless you include stamp duty - which is a state thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waldo

Housing, well that's not a political responsibility of either of the two major parties - unless you include stamp duty - which is a state thing.

---

Unless their policies have caused the housing inflation, then it is their responsibility. The problem is the solution would be political suicide, so no-one will ever do it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnc

some vision to the future on global warming and
some plan to reduce our current account problems which means
less consumption of overseas goods and more home grown production.
A bit more honesty and a lot less spin would go down well also.
John

---

Well, you won't be voting for either of the major parties then!

Hate to say it, but I vote for the party I hate the least, and I often vote for an outsider who might be prepared to make a stand, but they hardly ever get up.

woodbe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waldo

the other yobbos had my folks paying 19% on their home loan. :((

---

Is that actually better or worse now? You need to remember that back then, the average loan was a lot less money - so to achieve the same effect, then interest rates had to be higher. They don't need to rise that high any more to have quite massive impacts on repayments.

To illustrate - 19% of $100,000 is $19,000

7.8% of $250,000 is $19,500

Yes, inflation and wage growth complicates things a bit, but you'd have to agree, focusing on the rate alone is rather pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waldo

G'day John,

But we've paid off the inherited national debt from business reports that I've seen, it's the states that still have us in debt - Victoria being the worst. Housing, well that's not a political responsibility of either of the two major parties - unless you include stamp duty - which is a state thing.

---

And the States are down on revenue, 8% PA from memory, ANU did a study. Makes them all the more vunerable and reliant on gaming taxes. Also sitting on a 13bil surplus is theft as far as I can tell. The Aus economy is only strong because of commodity prices, any government could manage that.

The national debt has been transferred into personal debt, while the surplus grows to embarrassing proportions, go figure.... nah these guys are crooks. Their super is OK, but ask any pensioner or war vet about the economy.

There are three main issues that are influencing my vote this year:

1. Iraq. Can't cop the fawning attitude that we've adopted to the US in this war. I hate it, awful. Really affects me.

2. Work Choices. I believe that small businesses needed some changes to legislation, but I believe that the Work Choices legislation is several steps too far, and will lead to (has lead to) the abuse of workers by employers and a surge in the strength of unions as the workers realise that this legislation leaves them so exposed.

3. The tax system. Costello has been in charge of the tax system for a long time now, and it is steadily getting more complicated and convoluted rather than less. Some of the changes to the super laws are a big step in the right direction, but way too little and way too late for my money.

So guess which way I'm not voting!

The ABC's Boyer lectures might help in understanding "the recession we had to have", and in particular to put it into perspective and to see the the 'mechanics' of both the recession and the responses to it.

There's a lot more to it than Labour getting us into it and the Liberals getting us out.... in fact my statement is simplistic and just plain wrong, as wrong as suggesting that the Libs are responsible for the current strength in the Australian economy.

What influences my vote? I mostly give a kickin the ????? dependant on who deserves it most, as there seems very little to reward.

My choice is very simple. My local member is Kevin Andrews.

I hate what he has done in overturning NT laws on euthanasia, what he has done to Centrelink whilst he was minister for that portfolio, the creation of workchoices and how that has destroyed many safeguards workers had and the latest debacle as immigration minister.

Hence my vote is against him. If that means the Howard government goes so much the better.


Peter.

Well said by Peter couldn't agree more. The argument over who has the most debt is a political one. Canberra has indeed paid off all debt, in part no doubt helped by flogging off assets and strong tax revenues. As a share of total tax take Canberra has been increasing its percentage over the states. It should not be forgotten that the states handed over their right to the feds to levy income taxes in the 1940's and in return received a share of the total tax take. In the years before GST this led to some states subsidising others, allowing smaller states to survive. Come GST Canberra cunningly decided the states would pick up GST revenues and this now means Canberra is sitting on a higher percentage of the tax take and effectively starving the states. Part of the GST deal was for the states to abolish some taxes, although the ones sent to the bin was for the greater good it has left the states with a smaller tax base.

In one way debt is not a bad thing if it is used on infrastructure projects building up the country and it could be argued that at a Federal level we have become lazy and are not investing in the country.

However we have borrowed heavily from overseas to fund our ballooning housing prices and economic growth, but it is the private sector that has taken on the debt. If we have a period of housing deflation and higher interest rates we will find our wonderfully managed economy has developed some major structural weaknesses in terms of household exposure to debt and interest rates and that has a direct effect on economic growth. A certain amount of our growth is coming from the metals boom and some from heavy borrowings it would be wrong to think however we are being well managed on the basis that the current ratbags can balance the books. Anyone should be able to do that in times like these.

John.

Eyebrows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnc

In one way debt is not a bad thing if it is used on infrastructure projects building up the country .

---

Just remember Gough , and who gets the commission on the loan :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashore

Just remember Gough , and who gets the commission on the loan :cool:

---

Remember Menzies, remember Fraser. These parties bear little resemblance to their political forebears. They turn members and policies continuously in the battle to get in or stay in. The liberalism of Fraser is very different to that of Howard. Im sure that applies to the other mob as well. They will do what the polling tels them will win the most votes, just watch the backflips on both sides. Neither has an idealogical base anymore.

Makes smaller perties much more appealling as at least you know what you are voting for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashore

Just remember Gough , and who gets the commission on the loan :cool:

---

Also remember no one got the commission because the loan did not go ahead, and Gough ended up with egg all over his face.

What influences my vote?

Track record, and a good memory of the past with either in power.