OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[TheRam]

What does ‘getting our country back’ look like? How long will that take?

Oh stop it Baiter Jackson. I don't dance.

 

[TheRam]

Lol, so much to unpack there... sounds like some deluded shit I heard Angry Anderson

Unfortunately you're discussion here is possibly damaging your credibility when it comes to your football observations and discussion elsewhere.

You actually think you have credibility?

Hahahahahahahhahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha..........

 

[TheRam]

Exactly. Let’s give people control and self-determination but only if they are people we trust. Seems hypocritical.

OK lets give a rapist the keys to your home while you are away at work and the wife is doing the laundry.

What could go wrong?

Dinner at 6 seems plausible.

 

[the phantom menace]

You actually think you have credibility?

Hahahahahahahhahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha..........

My post was some friendly advice for you, nothing to do with me.

And that's still not what the referendum on Constitution recognition and the Voice advisory body is about .

 

[the phantom menace]

OK lets give a rapist the keys to your home while you are away at work and the wife is doing the laundry.

Is that an analogy about corporate Australia and their disregard for connection to sacred land?

 

[the phantom menace]

Oh stop it Baiter Jackson. I don't dance.

And you don't make a lot of sense on this topic either.

 

[strider]

Uncle Clive is in the Federal Court right now before that globalist Justice Rares, doing Dutton's merkining over whether an X is a s good as a No, even though in the past eleventy referendums you have been traditionally asked to write YES or NO as well.

He knows it will fail, but it's fodder for the NO campaign to cry unfair for something else. IIRC Uncle Clive foreshadowed that past elections have been rigged. How Trump of him.

Recount no good, result is rigged: Palmer - 9News

Clive Palmer says he doesn't know whether he'll seek a recount in Fairfax, repeating claims Australia's ele...

www.9news.com.au

Is he arguing this because they decided a tick means YES? ... or did they back away from that?

 

[TheRam]

My post was some friendly advice for you, nothing to do with me.

And that's still not what the referendum on Constitution recognition and the Voice advisory body is about .

Oh please...

Oh and so is mine, friendly advise that is. We are all friends here after all.

 

[TheRam]

Is that an analogy about corporate Australia and their disregard for connection to sacred land?

My home is sacred to me as I'm sure your home is sacred to you.

If we listen to every aboriginal group with their hand out the whole of Australia is their sacred land and you and I are just invaders.

 

[Gronk]

Is he arguing this because they decided a tick means YES? ... or did they back away from that?

It's over. Ticks are not in question because they are settled in law.

Crosses however, well he wanted them to be accepted as an alternative to NO, however the judged found that it led to ambiguity based on eleventy cases in AU and NZ. The Act that the AEC operates is clear and is based on the intentions of the voter. A cross can mean lots of things, so write NO.

Remembering that we normally require voters to have the mental agility to insert numerals, sometimes as challenging as 1 through to 10 or even 1 to 28. A cross in those boxes would invalidate the vote (informal) .So I am sure they can write YES or NO.

 

[strider]

It's over. Ticks are not in question because they are settled in law.

Crosses however, well he wanted them to be accepted as an alternative to NO, however the judged found that it led to ambiguity based on eleventy cases in AU and NZ. The Act that the AEC operates is clear and is based on the intentions of the voter. A cross can mean lots of things, so write NO.

Remembering that we normally require voters to have the mental agility to insert numerals, sometimes as challenging as 1 through to 10 or even 1 to 28. A cross in those boxes would invalidate the vote (informal) .So I am sure they can write YES or NO.

Lol ... cool we agree its rigged in favour of yes.

Always make the question have yes as the answer you want, then include everything thats not a no as a yes ...lol

The obviously fair thing is to just reject em all. And only count yes and no.

 

[Gary Gutful]

OK lets give a rapist the keys to your home while you are away at work and the wife is doing the laundry.

What could go wrong?

Dinner at 6 seems plausible.

This is getting ridiculous.

Watching sumo wrestling in Tokyo. Will be sure to snap plenty of photos of man boobs for you.

 

[Gary Gutful]

This is getting ridiculous.

Watching sumo wrestling in Tokyo. Will be sure to snap plenty of photos of man boobs for you.

Ping @TheRam

 

[Gary Gutful]

Ping @TheRam

 

[Gronk]

Lol ... cool we agree its rigged in favour of yes.

Always make the question have yes as the answer you want, then include everything thats not a no as a yes ...lol

The obviously fair thing is to just reject em all. And only count yes and no.

Is that you Clive? It's been to federal court today and Justice Whathisface said that your take is bullcrap. Even Clive didn't dispute ticks.

It's on YouTube. EDIT No it was just streamed live.

Court dismisses United Australia party push to count crosses as valid votes in voice referendum

Ralph Babet and Clive Palmer lose case against AEC, which is following precedent by counting ticks but disregarding crosses in upcoming vote

www.theguardian.com

 

[strider]

Yeah fine, courts and judges are always right.

I think its perfectly legit to question why something other than the 2 allowed options are allowed. But hey, its clive, so lets snigger and joke like a bunch of 12 year olds about it.

I would hope its not a significant number of votes anyway. But if they were fair dinkum they would make an effort to ensure there is no ambiguity .... but reality is, that they are fine to word it and be flexible in favour of the outcome they want.

 

[Suitman]

Lol ... cool we agree its rigged in favour of yes.

Always make the question have yes as the answer you want, then include everything thats not a no as a yes ...lol

The obviously fair thing is to just reject em all. And only count yes and no.

Oh dear. No it isn't.
It's quite simple really. A cross can be conceived both ways. A tick cannot be.
Just use a Yes, a No, or a tick in either box.
But of course, disallowing a cross on the paper means this referendum is rigged to the Yes vote. I've heard it all now.
FMD.

 

[Delboy]

To clarify, there is one box where you elect to write YES or NO, if there is a tick in the box it counts as a YES vote, a X is void.
Think if there is either in a box intended for a commitment word, they should both count as an ineligible vote. That seems to settle what is going on.

 

[eels_fan]

Just use a Yes, a No, or a tick in either box

There is only one box

you are instructed to write “yes” or “no”

Despite being instructed to write your response, if you place a tick in the box without writing any word, it is considered a legal “yes” vote

however, if you place a cross in the box without writing any word, it is considered an informal vote and binned.

i wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s rigged, but it’s certainly a situation which there is a marginal tipping of the scales.

anything other than “yes” or “no” should be informal and not counted

 

[strider]

Oh dear. No it isn't.
It's quite simple really. A cross can be conceived both ways. A tick cannot be.
Just use a Yes, a No, or a tick in either box.
But of course, disallowing a cross on the paper means this referendum is rigged to the Yes vote. I've heard it all now.
FMD.

FMD indeed ... some people think there's more than one box