It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Australian Democracy Is A Farce. Kate Ellis For PM.

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:08 AM
link   












God Kate Ellis would make an awesome Prime Minister. The Labor Party has made a mockery of democracy here in Australia. We all know now that the person that we elect can be removed by their own party and replaced. We all know that our votes are worthless if we vote labor. Since another switcharoo is being attempted tomorrow in which Rudd will lose I think the labor party should think out of the box. Even if Rudd could convince enough MPs to vote for him tomorrow he would lose the election. They might like him in Brisbane but most of us would prefer that they kept the smug,sneaky,dispicable snake. Gillard will lie straight to your face,we all know that. She cannot win next year. Its pathetic since they only have to beat Tony Abbott. (and Im hoping Katter is a force by then).

Anyway,since labour is such a joke they must be thinking about going with Bill Shorten or Wayne Swan as leader. I think a better option would be to go with Kate Ellis. Id vote for her. Surely she would secure a good chunk of the male vote. Politics is an insulting joke here anyway. If someone has to insult us Id prefer it was Kate Ellis. If we saw Kate Ellis as much as we see Gillard it would be awesome. If Katter cant win we should all push for labor to nominate Kate Ellis as their leader.
edit on 26-2-2012 by theubermensch because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by theubermensch
The Labor Party has made a mockery of democracy here in Australia.
We all know now that the person that we elect can be removed by their own party and replaced.



You've misunderstoof the rules.
You dont vote for Prime Minister. You vote for your local MP.
The leader of any party is purely an internal function of that party.
The Australian Constitution doesnt even setup the office of the Prime Minister.



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Got my vote!

That was easy!

(That was purely based on her credentials.... of pouring herself into shiny black plastic and heels)



Also, Katter is a complete lunatic! Swan is a Mr. Magoo, Shorten is about the only chance in reality. Mind you, I'd prefer Rudd back over Gillard.
edit on 26-2-2012 by Qumulys because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by theubermensch
The Labor Party has made a mockery of democracy here in Australia.
We all know now that the person that we elect can be removed by their own party and replaced.



You've misunderstoof the rules.
You dont vote for Prime Minister. You vote for your local MP.
The leader of any party is purely an internal function of that party.
The Australian Constitution doesnt even setup the office of the Prime Minister.


Thats semantics.

We elect the leader of the party.

It is an insult to the public for the party to change the leader of the party that was elected. You change leaders when you are in opposition not in power.



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Qumulys
 


Ha!

Im going with Katter. Limiting the market share of Coles and Woolies is an awesome idea. So is protecting public utilities. I think a crazy old farmer is more for the people than any of the corporatist jerks in labor or liberal. Except Kate Ellis,Id vote for her



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by theubermensch
 


I'd vote all over her!!!

Oh man... OOOHHH man!!!




posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by theubermensch
 


It's not semantics.

Prime Minister is a leader chosen by the party to represent them, if it were decided by the people, then it would be us voting tomorrow, not the Labor ministers.




edit on 26/2/12 by Chadwickus because: speeling



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:36 AM
link   
hahaha to be brutally honest, i was about to come in here guns-blazing seeing she is the member for the status of women, and given another post i saw on ATS just a few moments ago about masculinity being damaging to society, i wasn't going to make the most politically correct of posts....

But f*ck. She's alright.

Nahh, democracy (i accidently typed "democrazy", how ironic) in this country is a joke. I understand that the political party system in place here doesn't allow for us voters to vote for a particular leader, but we DID vote for labour's policies which were disregarded and abolished by the new leadership.
The system in place is the joke - not the current prime minister (well, her too, but mainly the system)

I mean, this whole vote thing on monday is a massive waste of time, and it just showcases the stupidity of politics here in australia. It makes us a joke really, and sort of makes me a bit ashamed.



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by theubermensch

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by theubermensch
The Labor Party has made a mockery of democracy here in Australia.
We all know now that the person that we elect can be removed by their own party and replaced.



You've misunderstoof the rules.
You dont vote for Prime Minister. You vote for your local MP.
The leader of any party is purely an internal function of that party.
The Australian Constitution doesnt even setup the office of the Prime Minister.


Thats semantics.

We elect the leader of the party.

It is an insult to the public for the party to change the leader of the party that was elected. You change leaders when you are in opposition not in power.


No, we dont select the leader of the party , unless a party member and it goes to vote internally, you dont vote for a pm as such , as pointed out before.The leader can be changed at any time, what you refer to is etiquette not law..

Thats etiquette.



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:37 AM
link   
IMHO Kate Ellis is another ALP moron who cares more about herself than the country she works for.

Bring on an election so we can oust this incompetent government.

I hated Howard with a passion when he held office.....solely due to his war policies on Iraq & Afghanistan.

How I wish we had him back now.

Hindsight has 20/20 vision.



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by theubermensch
 


It's not semantics.

Prime Minister is a leader chosen by the party to represent them, if it were decided by the people, then it would be us voting tomorrow, not the Labour ministers.





The leader is what we vote for. We vote based on the promises of that individual. Not the party. It is an insult for them to change leader whilst in power and should be unthinkable. The whole election is centred around that individual. We should have had the right to vote Rudd out last election.
edit on 26-2-2012 by theubermensch because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:43 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by gambon

Originally posted by theubermensch

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by theubermensch
The Labor Party has made a mockery of democracy here in Australia.
We all know now that the person that we elect can be removed by their own party and replaced.



You've misunderstoof the rules.
You dont vote for Prime Minister. You vote for your local MP.
The leader of any party is purely an internal function of that party.
The Australian Constitution doesnt even setup the office of the Prime Minister.


Thats semantics.

We elect the leader of the party.

It is an insult to the public for the party to change the leader of the party that was elected. You change leaders when you are in opposition not in power.


No, we dont select the leader of the party , unless a party member and it goes to vote internally, you dont vote for a pm as such , as pointed out before.The leader can be changed at any time, what you refer to is etiquette not law..

Thats etiquette.


Do you *snip* honestly think I dont know that?

Clap clap for you too.

And its more than etiquette. They break our trust by switching leaders. They make a farce of the election process


 
Mod Note: ALL MEMBERS: We expect civility and decorum within all topics - Please Review This Link.
edit on Sun Feb 26 2012 by Jbird because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:46 AM
link   
reply to post by theubermensch
 




Do you morons honestly think I dont know that?


Well you did type it.

It's a little hard for people not to point out your obvious intellectual flaws when you hand out ammo so readily.



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:48 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamAssassin
reply to post by theubermensch
 




Do you morons honestly think I dont know that?


Well you did type it.

It's a little hard for people not to point out your obvious intellectual flaws when you hand out ammo so readily.


What did I type???

And this from a guy that wishes Howard back?

edit on 26-2-2012 by theubermensch because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by OccamAssassin
 


I agree with bringing on an election as this so-called Labour Government has turned into the best Liberal Government we have ever had.
What do "McDonald's" and the Labour Government have in common? They are both led by Red-headed clowns.
"Little" Johnny Howard much preferred strutting the World Stage than looking after his '"fellow Australians" except when it came to election time. So full of his own self-importance he thought he was a shoo-in to become the head of Cricket but got a boot in the @rse for his troubles.
The "faceless" 'suits' triumph again and will, on Monday morning, consign the Australian Labour Party to the political wilderness after the next election.

edit on 26-2-2012 by OzTiger because: spelling



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by theubermensch

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by theubermensch
 


It's not semantics.

Prime Minister is a leader chosen by the party to represent them, if it were decided by the people, then it would be us voting tomorrow, not the Labour ministers.



Der genius. Clap clap.

The leader is what we vote for. We vote based on the promises of that individual. Not the party. It is an insult for them to change leader whilst in power and should be unthinkable. The whole election is centred around that individual. We should have had the right to vote Rudd out last election.



You dont seem to be grasping that you DONT vote for the leader , if you do well....



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by theubermensch
 


Can't we discuss this without the name calling??

The leader's promises and policies are nothing without the support of the (majority) party members.

But promises and policies change all the time, it doesn't take a leadership change to make it happen and sometimes it's the reason for a leadership change...

Would you have a problem with a change in leadership if it was caused by the leader changing a promise and the party disagreeing with it?



posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 





Would you have a problem with a change in leadership if it was caused by the leader changing a promise and the party disagreeing with it?


I have a problem yes. We elect based on the leaders campaign. We decide our vote on that person. If we vote for a Rudd labor government,we should get one. If the leader cannot perform we should have the right to vote the Rudd government out.

They should not be able to improve their re-election chances by switching leaders on us. People should not stand for it. Keating should not have done it to Hawke. Gillard should not have done it to Rudd.

And the Carbon Credits thing is a good example to use to answer your question. Gillard lied to us. We should be able to vote her out for that. They should not be able to do an internal switcheroo just to fool morons and get a bump in opinion polls.

If the party disagree's with a broken promise then early elections should be held and they should put their new leader to the people. Abbott is calling for that. I agree with him.


RAMPING up calls for an early election, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott yesterday gave NSW independents Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor both barrels for delivering power to Labor. Read more: www.news.com.au...


"I am offering a new start to the Australian people and that is an election where they can choose the Government." Read more: www.news.com.au...

www.news.com.au...
edit on 26-2-2012 by theubermensch because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join