tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post8148371141952900659..comments2024-02-11T19:28:27.997+11:00Comments on Personal Reflections: Sunday snippets - the importance of PEFO in an economic policy free zoneJim Belshawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10075614280789984767noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-85705541779888303682013-08-21T06:15:37.531+10:002013-08-21T06:15:37.531+10:00Ah, but you are not voting for them, just against,...Ah, but you are not voting for them, just against, and then you main vote goes to the least worst main.Jim Belshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10075614280789984767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-24202314709356311242013-08-20T20:40:31.417+10:002013-08-20T20:40:31.417+10:00Jim if I'm reading the AEC website correctly i...Jim if I'm reading the AEC website correctly it says a figure of 2.48 per first pref votes recorded by any lower house candidate getting more than 4% of votes cast, and same for any group in the Senate.<br /><br />Can't bring myself to make my mark for Messrs Palmer or Nile.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-77569566038655635522013-08-20T16:10:19.739+10:002013-08-20T16:10:19.739+10:00If my electoral analysis is right, you are in Gilm...If my electoral analysis is right, you are in Gilmore. Looking at the candidates, I see your problem. Still, I fear that you will have to give Lyndal Harris (Palmer Uniting Party) a go. That way the Lib candidate still gets in, but you have saved the taxpayer a bit under $2. That is assuming that PUP doesn't get over the minimum vote margin to collect it instead. If it does, what the hell? Jim Belshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10075614280789984767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-71484311296906947982013-08-20T06:47:08.133+10:002013-08-20T06:47:08.133+10:00Jim, if I voted as you suggest I'd be voting f...Jim, if I voted as you suggest I'd be voting for one of a variety of single-issue candidates. I consider them a blight on national political discussion.<br /><br />I object to that on principle, and for me this very much outweighs the quite valid point you are making.<br /><br />kvdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-68096787642587692362013-08-20T06:39:20.419+10:002013-08-20T06:39:20.419+10:00Please don't do that, kvd. Think of tactical v...Please don't do that, kvd. Think of tactical voting. Exclude Libs, Labor and Greens, and then vote for the least worst of the rest with Libs as second preference.That way at least you deny the Libs the small sum of public funding that they might get from your first preference vote while still giving them your reluctant vote in the end! Jim Belshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10075614280789984767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-22089644815476412772013-08-20T06:17:09.369+10:002013-08-20T06:17:09.369+10:00To continue your digression, I had exactly the sam...To continue your digression, I had exactly the same thought about the Democrats when I read Neil's comment that he couldn't see himself voting for either major party (back a couple of posts). I've continued thinking about which party to place a vote for, and have reached a sort of decision to hold my nose, and vote Liberal.<br /><br />This will continue a long (Liberal voting) tradition, but I do it with no little disgust and disillusionment at where the Liberal Party finds itself today.<br /><br />The things I 'hold my nose' about (not in any particular order) are:<br /><br />NBN; parental leave scheme; border protection; SSM; threatened severe cuts to services; refusal to release costings; lack of 'talent depth' in probable ministry.<br /><br />This is not to suggest that Mr Rudd's crew has 'better solutions' in each of these areas. More it's a case of recognising the lack of marked 'positive differences', so I turned to 'least worst'. <br /><br />But I just hate that I'm forced to make my vote on that desultory sort of analysis.<br /><br />kvdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com