Liberal democratic Party and Victorian elections 2015

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by mmm....shiney!, Oct 18, 2014.

  1. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    So you aren't going to my answer my question? Just a simple yes or no is all that is required.

    You're right. It is very basic. Which is why I'm surprised you are getting it wrong. The trick is to forget about labels. ie. taxation is just a label for forcible taking of property (ie. theft). Forget about the outcome for a second and just focus on the means.
     
  2. SovereignBuyerMelbourne

    SovereignBuyerMelbourne Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2014
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    What are these things?
     
  3. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    Technically that was your last point not your first point ;)

    In anticipation of the magic words "Social contract":

     
  4. boyd_05

    boyd_05 Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    644
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Australia
    I find it funny (read: frustrating) when someone refuses to engage in a simple thought experiment out of fear it might actually force them to confront their beliefs and how they view reality. You can actually see their discomfort coming through in their words and how they respond.

    See a question you anticipate may have an inconvenient answer that contradicts your narrative? Shut it down and put up your defence mechanism.

    We're not going to move forward as a society if we can't be honest to ourselves, let alone be honest with each other.
     
  5. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    Murray Rothbard. Larkin Rose. For someone who is small government you seem to be flirting with anarchists a lot. You probably should be more careful. Rose's videos in particular are very subversive and you are in danger of dropping your minarchist ideas. :p

    But since you mentioned his name, one of my favourite videos ever. Don't watch it NewToSilver, it's too subversive for someone like you.

    [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngpsJKQR_ZE[/youtube]
     
  6. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    I am amazed (actually I am not) how I post something in regards to:

    "The LDP's Senate team in NSW had won just 7772 votes, 0.19 per cent. But a few months later, the party applied to change its name to the Liberal Democratic Party. The Liberal party objected strongly, warning that the new name could confuse intending Liberal voters. But on legal advice, the Australian Electoral Commission allowed the change.
    In 2013, the Liberal Democrats, headed by Leyonhjelm, drew first place in the 45 columns on the NSW ballot paper. Hundreds of thousands of voters saw the size of the ballot paper, saw the word ''Liberal'' in the first box, and just put a 1 against it. The LDP won 434,002 votes, or 9.5 per cent - 50 times the vote it won in 2007 before it adopted the name ''Liberal Democrats''.
    Leyonhjelm, an articulate 62-year-old who has previously been a member of the Labor Party, the Liberal Party and the Shooters and Fishers - and is also the registered officer for the Outdoor Recreation Party - will now have a seat in the Senate, a platform to spread his views, a salary of $190,000 a year, and, as Fairfax Media reported this week, a $1 million payout from the Electoral Commission to assist with his (minimal) campaign costs."

    And it becomes "The Govt are thieves and are stealing from me"

    Ok it is clearly deceptive and underhanded but let's ignore it, let's ignore it because it is a libertarian party and does not support what we are pushing.

    It is plainly obvious if "Liberal" was not the first name of the party and it was not at the top of the ballot paper he would not have been elected. The only thing that has gotten them any votes is to change the name of the a Party so it is mistaken for the Liberal party.
     
  7. SpacePete

    SpacePete Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2014
    Messages:
    12,967
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Sir, you have overstepped the mark here. That attitude is just un-Australian. Without an extensive property portfolio like other politicians then how can the Australian public trust you to maintain policies that will protect their real estate investments? I bet you wouldn't even accept brown paper bags of cash from property developers for favourable treatment. And how many bottles of Grange do you drink in a week? This is an important question!
     
  8. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    The use of the LDP name wasn't an issue with the 2001 ACT elections so perhaps NSW voters are just dumber (or way smarter) than the average. Further, to label it as deception would implicate the AEC as they had to explicitly rule that the Party could use the name they were founded under and had previously run for election under was not deceptive and therefore allowed. I don't know the AEC's processes but you would hope that the submissions and decisions from the case are publically available for sensationalist reporters to go read.

    In terms of going "off-topic", it was in relation to your comment:

    So now perhaps you can address Hawkeye's question or concede?
     
  9. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,539
    Likes Received:
    1,873
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    From last week:

    www.theage.com.au/victoria/liberals-oppose-liberal-democratic-partys-bid-to-register-for-victorian-election-20141021-119e9q.html

    Maybe Victorians should write to the VEC objecting that the use of the word "liberal" in Liberal Party circumvents the democratic process by deliberately adopting a name that implies that the party is one that holds to the principles of free-trade, civil rights and private property.

    The Socialist Conservative Party of Australia* would be a more appropriate name for the ratbags.

    :/













    *A subsidiary of the New World Order Inc.
     
  10. SpacePete

    SpacePete Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2014
    Messages:
    12,967
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You beat me too it.
     
  11. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,539
    Likes Received:
    1,873
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Basically the AEC said there was no empirical evidence to support the claims that voter confusion occurred, therefore the application for a name change was approved.

    Tim Pickering
    A/g Deputy Electoral Commissioner
    Delegate of the Australian Electoral Commission
    17 December 2008

    http://www.aec.gov.au/parties_and_r...tration_Decisions/2008/liberal_democratic.htm
     
  12. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    I think you have a reasonable theory. Or at least it sounds reasonable to me. However, you haven't put forth enough supporting evidence at the moment.

    Being on the top of the ballot is well known to garner you a certain number of votes that you wouldn't otherwise get. Which says more about your entire democratic process than anything else.

    For someone who thinks that your entire system is one giant fraud, do you think I'm honestly going to care too much about one possible minor unproven fraud within that? Especially one that works against the giant fraud. I'm not sure yet what to think of him or the LDP yet. They have said a lot of good things but there's also things I disagree with. But to use an admittedly bad analogy (since I'm against drug prohibition) I'm more interested in the big drug lords not the guy that someone says might be selling a few drugs on the street corner.
     
  13. SilverSanchez

    SilverSanchez Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    Messages:
    2,679
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Any government that refuse to restrict their own authority to protecting life, liberty and property is an illegitimate government (as I see it).
    The abortion/euthanasia issue, the tax issue and the (so called) discrimination legislation/issues show me that all government candidates I know about assume their authority is above the law - in that they assume to have the authority to define life, liberty and property, rather than simply assuming a responsibility to defend it.

    So I don't see any reason to vote for anyone, including the 'christian' or 'conservative' parties. (because I am certainly not a socialist, anarchist, maxist or globalist). So that doesn't really leave a lot of options for me.
     
  14. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    Going back to the theory as to why he got in, one idea to collect evidence would be to poll the community. Come up with some kind of test where you asked people "did you vote liberal?". If they say yes, ask them if they can remember the name of the candidate. Or if they remember roughly which position the box they ticked was in. Something like that. Gather a large sample size.

    My guess is that the people making the complaint didn't bother to actually do any research. They just came up with their hypothesis, got together and told each other it was true and that was that. Because why bother with the truth or evidence when you are in politics? They are inconveniences to "good governance".
     
  15. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    They get less that 1/5 of 1 percent (less than 1 in 500 people voted for them) then they change the name to Liberal and get nearly 10% of the vote which is a 50 times the number of people voting for them before the name change.

    The percentage of Liberal a Party votes decreased by the same percentage as what the LDP increased.

    You do not have to be a genius to work it out.
     
  16. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    Answer Hawkeyes question or concede?

    I think a quote I read sums it up better than I could.

    The protean nature of libertarianism causes problems for critics in open debate. There is no single basis which can be argued: you need to rebut a half dozen or more sets of assumptions, which pseudo-intellectual libertarians mix and match with a delightfully inconsistent abandonment of rationality.
    Mike Huben
     
  17. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    Well then, evidence should not be hard to gather. You have a hypothesis. Now you need to gather the evidence to test it. Because there are other possible explanations, like that there are a whole lot of people fed up with the major parties and they chose the first non-major party candidate in the list.

    You have a hypothesis, not proof.

    It's obvious to me that the sun goes round the Earth. If I sit outside all day I can watch it move across the sky. Turns out the evidence says otherwise. There are a lot of counter-intuitive things in our world.
     
  18. boyd_05

    boyd_05 Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    644
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Australia
    I think that means concede then?
     
  19. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    A Hypothesis not proof? Are you talking about Libertarianism?
     
  20. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    Talking about Libertarianism is like talking about orcs, elves and dragons. "You concede?" I concede that trying to argue about orcs, elves, dragons or Libertarianism is a waste of time. With Communism people can show it did not work because it has been put into practice in reality. Libertarianism is like orcs and elves..... There are books written about it and people talk about it but I want to see it before I believe it.

    It is a fringe ideology which will remain that way.
     

Share This Page