by stan » Mon Jun 27, 2016 8:43 am
by bennymacca » Mon Jun 27, 2016 8:50 am
Psyber wrote:This seems to me to be a reasonable and balanced position:
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/319 ... lebiscite/Campaigning in Tasmania, Mr Turnbull signalled MPs would still have a conscience vote when asked whether Cabinet solidarity would bound front benchers to support same sex marriage even if it went against their personal views.
Mr Turnbull said the “tradition” in the Liberal Party was for a conscience vote but he expected that opponents such as Treasurer Scott Morrison would “abide” by the wishes of the Australian people.
“I have no doubt that if the plebiscite is carried, as I believe it will be, that you will see an overwhelming majority of MPs and senators voting for it,” he said.
by Psyber » Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:15 am
bennymacca wrote:Psyber wrote:This seems to me to be a reasonable and balanced position:
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/319 ... lebiscite/Campaigning in Tasmania, Mr Turnbull signalled MPs would still have a conscience vote when asked whether Cabinet solidarity would bound front benchers to support same sex marriage even if it went against their personal views.
Mr Turnbull said the “tradition” in the Liberal Party was for a conscience vote but he expected that opponents such as Treasurer Scott Morrison would “abide” by the wishes of the Australian people.
“I have no doubt that if the plebiscite is carried, as I believe it will be, that you will see an overwhelming majority of MPs and senators voting for it,” he said.
So why do we need a plebiscite then? Why not allow them a conscience vote months ago? The whole thing would have been over and done with
by bennymacca » Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:18 am
by Psyber » Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:32 am
bennymacca wrote:But if he allowed a conscience vote right now there is enough support for it to proceed isn't there?
by bennymacca » Mon Jun 27, 2016 12:13 pm
by Jimmy_041 » Mon Jun 27, 2016 12:37 pm
bennymacca wrote:According to this (which is a bit old now) 55% of total politicians in the lower house and 56% in the upper house that have voiced their views support it.
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/interactive/ ... parliament
That is a already an absolute majority in the senate, and the lower house would need 5 of the current 21 undeclared/undecided MPs to vote yes to make it a majority there too
by Psyber » Mon Jun 27, 2016 2:47 pm
by bennymacca » Mon Jun 27, 2016 2:54 pm
Psyber wrote:And if you factor the "undecided" from that article it getting through the lower house looks unlikely.
I suspect those who have declared themselves "undecided" may be less likely to be pro marriage equality, and those pro it more likely to declare themselves in advance. (Jamie Briggs in MAYO is one example of the undecided or undeclared.)
So, the key is persuading, by demonstrating public sentiment in a plbiscite, those potential swinging voters, or just nervous, among MPs just not game to declare themselves yet.
by Jimmy_041 » Mon Jun 27, 2016 4:29 pm
by Psyber » Mon Jun 27, 2016 7:50 pm
Jimmy_041 wrote:and if Don Farrell gets back in, there's another "God's soldier" that will vote no
Interesting story on the radio this morning how the Catholic bishops are interfering in the election
Asylum seekers - they have given out cards rating each party - Greens 5/5, Labor 4/5, NXT 1/5 Coalition 0/5 but, according to them, they aren't how to vote cards
SSM - no rating or HTV cards - they just hate everyone: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/ ... ovgcl.html
Time for churches to have their billions of billions taxed
by Grahaml » Tue Jun 28, 2016 1:11 am
by Leaping Lindner » Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:38 pm
by shoe boy » Thu Jun 30, 2016 8:40 am
shoe boy wrote:shoe boy wrote:Away interstate and met up with some interesting character's with interesting views ,Abott/Heffernan/Bernardi/Coonin/Clarke/Cormann/Abetz/Andrews/ just to name a few but was disappointed I didn't get to meet our great deputy leader of our great country Barnaby Joyce .
With the subject of same sex marriage we have the "coalition" religious nuts at odds , and the old far right nuts Bernardi/Cormann/Abbot/ front and centre.
We also have Turnbull making comment ,and I quote "plebiscite will be conducted in a respectful manner" I have said it before YOU CAN PUT LIPSTICK ON A PIG BUT IT IS STILL A PIG.
by shoe boy » Thu Jun 30, 2016 9:06 am
by bennymacca » Thu Jun 30, 2016 10:57 am
shoe boy wrote:When voting on Saturday is there such a box as coalition? or do you tick Liberal and then second the Nationals?
by Booney » Thu Jun 30, 2016 12:52 pm
bennymacca wrote:shoe boy wrote:When voting on Saturday is there such a box as coalition? or do you tick Liberal and then second the Nationals?
Libs and Nats very rarely, if ever, run candidates in the same seats. They might in some parts but not around here.
by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 30, 2016 1:07 pm
shoe boy wrote:When voting on Saturday is there such a box as coalition? or do you tick Liberal and then second the Nationals?
by Pseudo » Thu Jun 30, 2016 2:04 pm
Booney wrote:bennymacca wrote:shoe boy wrote:When voting on Saturday is there such a box as coalition? or do you tick Liberal and then second the Nationals?
Libs and Nats very rarely, if ever, run candidates in the same seats. They might in some parts but not around here.
Correct.
In my seat, Port Adelaide, I don't even see reason to vote at all! We all know how safe the seat is.
by Gozu » Thu Jun 30, 2016 2:07 pm
bennymacca wrote:shoe boy wrote:When voting on Saturday is there such a box as coalition? or do you tick Liberal and then second the Nationals?
Libs and Nats very rarely, if ever, run candidates in the same seats. They might in some parts but not around here.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |