tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post5847487660352054176..comments2023-10-20T21:32:41.646+11:00Comments on Truth Seeker: Senate results - Consolidated - 8-9-2013 10amUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-55562843945249427172013-09-10T11:14:48.873+10:002013-09-10T11:14:48.873+10:00this actually could be seen as a constitutional ba...this actually could be seen as a constitutional barrier to STV...in Germany, negative vote weight has been ruled to be unconstitutional. If directing preferences to a party can cause them to lose an election, it raises serious constitutional issues.<br /><br />Does this happen as it means that a different party would have been excluded and preferences flowed a different way?Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17427428602391891510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-51816068132728014932013-09-08T18:04:08.037+10:002013-09-08T18:04:08.037+10:00Weird fact. The Sex party preferenced NCT ahead of...Weird fact. The Sex party preferenced NCT ahead of Lib Dems in SA. If they had gone the other way - ranking NCT LOWER - it would have resulted in NCT getting elected instead of Family First. What a perverse system.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13974560377161740471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-79838012085723884042013-09-08T15:07:17.661+10:002013-09-08T15:07:17.661+10:00Replace the senate with a large randomly selected ...Replace the senate with a large randomly selected jury for each bill. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-33017628630173980982013-09-08T14:32:08.208+10:002013-09-08T14:32:08.208+10:00I have just written up a proposal for a new electo...I have just written up a proposal for a new electoral system to deal with the problems in the house of reps (http://www.abetz-rouse.com.au/new_election_system_for_house_of_reps.pdf), however it is clear the senate is problematic for different reasons.<br /><br />There seems to be one easy option for senate reform - allowing sequential voting above the line, however I suspect this won't solve the problem hugely, with voters having absolutely no idea how to deal with a multitude of minor parties they have never heard of.<br /><br />The senate's issues begin with the fact that every state gets 12 reps regardless of size. This might be a safeguard design to protect the smaller states, but I am not sure if this argument holds any merit any more?<br /><br />I am thinking that the best electoral reform would be to make the house of reps more representative according to the proposal I have made, then replace the senate with some sort of "right to veto" system, in which all voters can submit an objection to any law passed by the house of reps at their electoral office or website (using some encrypted signature model). A sufficient number of vetos would bring the bill down. <br /><br />New Zealand does not have an upper house, but a proportionally represented lower house. I would say their system has so far created good governments.<br /><br />Gordon Rousehttp://www.abetz-rouse.com.aunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-46661569096888462592013-09-08T13:33:33.050+10:002013-09-08T13:33:33.050+10:00Tom, No numerical analysis. But it's very unli...Tom, No numerical analysis. But it's very unlikely. My model becomes a bit redundant by common sense for the ACT and NT - the question is will the LNP + RUA + AJP + a share of SPP drop below 33%? It is more guesswork than modelling, but I will try to look at previous ACT flows to gain evidence for my conclusion. Also, there will be a large % of BTL in ACT, and a much lower % of BTL in NT.Truth Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05272077261033925542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-77060605395863201132013-09-08T13:09:54.526+10:002013-09-08T13:09:54.526+10:00Corrected. It didn't change the overall relati...Corrected. It didn't change the overall relativities as it was 2 to ALP and 2 to NTTruth Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05272077261033925542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-34026925707526711862013-09-08T11:26:49.436+10:002013-09-08T11:26:49.436+10:00Do you have a more detailed analysis for the ACT? ...Do you have a more detailed analysis for the ACT? I gather the sitting Liberal Senator was dumped at preselection so is there any likelihood of the Greens taking the seat?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13290656996146943408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-23557430857241509762013-09-08T11:26:09.163+10:002013-09-08T11:26:09.163+10:00The Grand Total adds up to 80, not 76. Territory s...The Grand Total adds up to 80, not 76. Territory senators from 2010 being counted?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-19997332664709171872013-09-08T11:12:37.169+10:002013-09-08T11:12:37.169+10:00Yes - I would like to. The absence of precise poll...Yes - I would like to. The absence of precise polling data would make things tricky... But it might be logistically easier for a state like Vic.Truth Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05272077261033925542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-43867714255646713122013-09-08T11:10:16.447+10:002013-09-08T11:10:16.447+10:00We all appreciate your work during this election.
...We all appreciate your work during this election.<br /><br />Will you repeat this for state upper house elections?<br />Grahamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01320298282537834217noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-51326395299881071722013-09-08T11:05:32.905+10:002013-09-08T11:05:32.905+10:00Much narrower spreads. Range is from +/-20% for mi...Much narrower spreads. Range is from +/-20% for micros (polling <0.2%) to +/-4% for parties polling 30%+.<br /><br />In my experience, these spreads are still wider than what is likely - so it shows that:<br />-If a party has 100% likelihood, it is near impossible to lose; and<br />-If a party has 0% likelihood it is near impossible to win.<br /><br />Truth Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05272077261033925542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398321532435953524.post-69850293506685545242013-09-08T10:29:43.074+10:002013-09-08T10:29:43.074+10:00How have you varied your spreads now 60-80% of the...How have you varied your spreads now 60-80% of the votes are in? intuitivereasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15444634755480881972noreply@blogger.com