By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Australia up next: Federal election tomorrow

EricHiggin said:

As to "validity", I agree, but this then also opens the door to things like a minimum age change.

Who really believes an 18 year old is wise enough and well informed enough to vote? They aren't now, and we weren't back then either. "Old enough to fight, old enough to vote", only really makes sense if you're forced to fight. If you've chosen to fight, that's simply your choice. There was good reason why min voting ages were higher in the past, or not even based on age, and while people may argue that, today, we're more educated and have more info at our fingertips, that doesn't necessarily make you more intelligent overall or less prone to being fooled in a world of free, instant social media, where reasonable consequences for those trying to fool you don't really exist.

I'm not for being forced to vote either, but I don't necessarily see any of these rules as black and white, right or wrong. As long as the majority decides and agrees on them then that's acceptable since it would be their choice, assuming they're free to leave as well if they disagree.

Depends on the education. I was far more informed about politics and aware of the political process at age 18. I grew up in The Netherlands and political science was part of the curriculum. Schools also did mock votes (at least in my time) and then compared the school's results to the nation wide results.

So yeah I believe I was far more qualified to cast a vote at age 18 than now with the way the media distorts everything. 

Sorry to say, but today we are less educated :( The quality of education my kids receive here in Canada is woeful to what I got in high school in The Netherlands. Since Covid education is a joke. My kid (currently in high school) only has 8 subjects a year. Two semesters with 4 subjects a day, the same 4 every day. I never see him do much homework either, gets it all done in school.

I had 6 or 7 different subjects a day, different every day, 3 trimesters. (Of course as a tiny country, French, German and English were all mandatory subjects) No time to do homework in school, 1-3 hours a day after getting home.

And of course nowadays kids all use chatgtp, google, copy-paste, you tube. We had to read books, write on paper without a backspace button and go to the library for information! I don't understand now how I had the time for all that and still go over to friend's houses to play video games lol.


But sure, validity is questionable with any system. It's far too easy to manipulate people with shady ads. At least with a compulsory vote you have everyone show up, not just the ones that want the immigrants out or whatever negative voting point politicians are pushing.



Around the Network

Just put my vote in; there wasn't even a line, I was in and out in 2 minutes.

Polling seems to suggest that much like in Canada, Trump's disastrous first few months in office have turned a lot of voters here against right wing parties/politicians, with the Liberal party having led polls months ago, only to now be trailing behind Labor in almost every poll.



EricHiggin said:
SvennoJ said:

I guess not, or it wouldn't have been for this stunt.


https://web.archive.org/web/20110218052948/http://noneoftheabove.com.au/about.htm

I changed my name from Geoff Richardson to Of The Above None on March 16, 2007. I did so because I wanted to emphasise at this election the fact that the two party system does not provide for the plurality of views which represents the Australian community.

I believe that a Parliament which contains its fair share of committed Independents can more adequately canvas all the issues from a non ideology-based perspective.

I have strong views on a wide range of issues but if elected I am committed to engaging with the electorate on all matters before casting my vote in Parliament.


Leaving the ballot blanc would work, voting is still anonymous in Australia I assume. So it would be added to the 'spoiled' votes pile.

Anyway there are other reasons against compulsory voting

https://irpp.org/research-studies/policy-matters-vol8-no3/

Our turnout was just over 65%, going back up thanks to Trump lol. If you want people to go out and want to vote, you have to engage with the public. Forcing people to make an unknowledgable / unwanted choice isn't making the results any more valid.

Anyway goodluck Australia, make the 'right' choice :)

As to "validity", I agree, but this then also opens the door to things like a minimum age change.

Who really believes an 18 year old is wise enough and well informed enough to vote? They aren't now, and we weren't back then either. "Old enough to fight, old enough to vote", only really makes sense if you're forced to fight. If you've chosen to fight, that's simply your choice. There was good reason why min voting ages were higher in the past, or not even based on age, and while people may argue that, today, we're more educated and have more info at our fingertips, that doesn't necessarily make you more intelligent overall or less prone to being fooled in a world of free, instant social media, where reasonable consequences for those trying to fool you don't really exist.

I'm not for being forced to vote either, but I don't necessarily see any of these rules as black and white, right or wrong. As long as the majority decides and agrees on them then that's acceptable since it would be their choice, assuming they're free to leave as well if they disagree.

In the United States, all 18-year-old males are required to register with the Selective Service. I had to register within 30 days of my 18th birthday. So even though the United States does not currently have an active draft, we are still nonetheless required to register. That, alone, mandates that 18-year-olds be allowed to vote on the people who can make the decisions to activate the draft that can send them into combat. And since the U.S. not only allows 18-year-olds to serve in the military, but the Armed Forces actively recruit in high schools, 18-year-olds should absolutely be given the right to vote, which was why the 26th Amendment was ratified.  Many countries in Europe still have compulsory military service as well. 

As far as being wise and well-informed, there are an awful lot of older people who are neither wise nor well-informed, and indeed act like wrinkled gray men- and women-children. Should they lose the right to vote based on some arbitrary standard? 

I'm personally not willing to allow some designated "wise men" decide my fate in what is supposed to be a democratic free society. 



EricHiggin said:

I'll have to look into this a bit more, because at first glance it does sound better than what we have in Canada.

I'm not ok with being forced to vote though. I don't care if I can write anything in and void the ballot. Forcing me to waste my time if I've concluded it's a waste of time, not only sounds anti democratic but will just piss people off. 

There is actually a small loophole in the law... It's only compulsory to vote if you register to vote.

I didn't start voting until I hit the young age of 30... However having matured somewhat (Hint: Big ask for a firefighter), decided to add my opinion and morals to help guide the country in a direction I believe it should go in.
In saying that, once I registered to vote, I have to vote every election.

Compulsory voting does have some advantages, there isn't wasted resources trying to "encourage" people to have a democracy sausage and vote, more effort can be placed on the issues at hand.
And because it's compulsory, small excuses like "work" isn't really applicable, so most people get some time off work.

There is also the advantage of having one less excuse of why a political party won/lost, so a lot less whinging and moaning.

EricHiggin said:

As to "validity", I agree, but this then also opens the door to things like a minimum age change.

Who really believes an 18 year old is wise enough and well informed enough to vote? They aren't now, and we weren't back then either. "Old enough to fight, old enough to vote", only really makes sense if you're forced to fight. If you've chosen to fight, that's simply your choice. There was good reason why min voting ages were higher in the past, or not even based on age, and while people may argue that, today, we're more educated and have more info at our fingertips, that doesn't necessarily make you more intelligent overall or less prone to being fooled in a world of free, instant social media, where reasonable consequences for those trying to fool you don't really exist.

I'm not for being forced to vote either, but I don't necessarily see any of these rules as black and white, right or wrong. As long as the majority decides and agrees on them then that's acceptable since it would be their choice, assuming they're free to leave as well if they disagree.

By legal definition here... An Adult is someone who is 18 years of age or older, that means.. They can drink and go to clubs and pubs, drive cars and trucks, join the army, fire or ambulance service and deal with deceased casualties... I think if we are going to legally allow them to do all those things, they should be legally allowed to vote to help guide theirs and the nations future.

That said, not all 18 year old are unwise, just like how many 50 year olds are factually stupid and lack wisdom. - It's a case by case basis.

The only real appropriate way to "weed out" poor voting is to have an I.Q test and bring in strict laws to curb misinformation during political campaigns.
I.E. There SHOULD be legal repercussions when a candidate says something stupid like "Stopping a war in 24 hours" when everyone knows it's logistically impossible.

SanAndreasX said:

Three states in the U.S. use preferential/ranked choice voting in varying degrees, namely, Maine, Alaska, and Hawaii. Republicans, naturally, reject anything other than winner-takes-all, first past the posts. American conservatives were raging that the leader of the right-wing party that got less than percent of the vote in Austria didn't become their chancellor. As far as they were concerned, FPO's 28.85% of the vote percent of the vote entitled Herbert Kickl to the chancellorship as the "will of the majority" (plurality doesn't exist for these people. Even Trump's tally of the 2024 vote was a plurality rather than an actual majority.)

It's worked extremely well for us, obviously sometimes there is some "wheeling and dealing" occurring after an election to shore up majority support to govern, but that's where the advantages of preferences start to come into play as independents and minor parties can hold the balance of power.

curl-6 said:

Just put my vote in; there wasn't even a line, I was in and out in 2 minutes.

Polling seems to suggest that much like in Canada, Trump's disastrous first few months in office have turned a lot of voters here against right wing parties/politicians, with the Liberal party having led polls months ago, only to now be trailing behind Labor in almost every poll.

I have been a Labor supporter since the 2019/2020 bushfire season when our leader (Scott Morrison) pissed off to Hawaii while our country burned... Then following the backlash by the entire nation, came back and tried to force his way onto the fire ground to meet us and shake our hands.
Pauline Hanson lost my support when she visited my city while it was flooding and refused to leave the hotel.

Can't respect a political party that can't respect us.

I did support Liberals during the John Howard years, lots of economic growth and lots of downpaying of debt, was a good time, despite some policies being regressive such as LGBTQI rights.

Thankfully the seat of Barker is a Labor safe seat and we have seen some amazing progress in the region.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

SvennoJ said:
EricHiggin said:

As to "validity", I agree, but this then also opens the door to things like a minimum age change.

Who really believes an 18 year old is wise enough and well informed enough to vote? They aren't now, and we weren't back then either. "Old enough to fight, old enough to vote", only really makes sense if you're forced to fight. If you've chosen to fight, that's simply your choice. There was good reason why min voting ages were higher in the past, or not even based on age, and while people may argue that, today, we're more educated and have more info at our fingertips, that doesn't necessarily make you more intelligent overall or less prone to being fooled in a world of free, instant social media, where reasonable consequences for those trying to fool you don't really exist.

I'm not for being forced to vote either, but I don't necessarily see any of these rules as black and white, right or wrong. As long as the majority decides and agrees on them then that's acceptable since it would be their choice, assuming they're free to leave as well if they disagree.

Depends on the education. I was far more informed about politics and aware of the political process at age 18. I grew up in The Netherlands and political science was part of the curriculum. Schools also did mock votes (at least in my time) and then compared the school's results to the nation wide results.

So yeah I believe I was far more qualified to cast a vote at age 18 than now with the way the media distorts everything. 

Sorry to say, but today we are less educated :( The quality of education my kids receive here in Canada is woeful to what I got in high school in The Netherlands. Since Covid education is a joke. My kid (currently in high school) only has 8 subjects a year. Two semesters with 4 subjects a day, the same 4 every day. I never see him do much homework either, gets it all done in school.

I had 6 or 7 different subjects a day, different every day, 3 trimesters. (Of course as a tiny country, French, German and English were all mandatory subjects) No time to do homework in school, 1-3 hours a day after getting home.

And of course nowadays kids all use chatgtp, google, copy-paste, you tube. We had to read books, write on paper without a backspace button and go to the library for information! I don't understand now how I had the time for all that and still go over to friend's houses to play video games lol.


But sure, validity is questionable with any system. It's far too easy to manipulate people with shady ads. At least with a compulsory vote you have everyone show up, not just the ones that want the immigrants out or whatever negative voting point politicians are pushing.

Well I was basing it more so on Canadian edu. As you've found out, our edu sucks, and has for a long time. Wasn't much different in HS for me. We had 2 semesters, 8 subs per semester, 4 subs one week, 4 more the next, back and forth. About 1 hr homework per night on average. Politics was barely taught and was done as a part of history class, and very few students took it seriously because there was a general mindset amongst young people that politics didn't matter, for different reasons, and teachers or parents didn't really seem to care much that the kids didn't care, which just reinforced the mindset. Same with French class, nobody paid attention, and nobody seemed to care much. French teachers were always terrible at their job which didn't help either. Sounds like I had it better than you, but worse than your kids, or maybe it's the other way around, and you had it best.

Manipulating people get's just that much easier when there's only one political view in the news, or when one political side is always cast as the 'bad guys'. Compulsory vote with a bunch of people who don't really know who or what they're voting for isn't any better, and could totally be far worse. What do you do when you only have a few parties, and all options are clearly terrible? You force yourself to submit to that? That's not what democracy is supposed to be, and just because it may not be clear that moment has come yet, doesn't mean it won't or can't, so why put yourself in that position to begin with, if you didn't have to? Force is always the last choice in a true democracy.



PS1   - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.

PS2  - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.

PS3   - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.

PS4   - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.

PRO  -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.

PS5   - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.

PRO  -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.

Around the Network
SanAndreasX said:
EricHiggin said:

As to "validity", I agree, but this then also opens the door to things like a minimum age change.

Who really believes an 18 year old is wise enough and well informed enough to vote? They aren't now, and we weren't back then either. "Old enough to fight, old enough to vote", only really makes sense if you're forced to fight. If you've chosen to fight, that's simply your choice. There was good reason why min voting ages were higher in the past, or not even based on age, and while people may argue that, today, we're more educated and have more info at our fingertips, that doesn't necessarily make you more intelligent overall or less prone to being fooled in a world of free, instant social media, where reasonable consequences for those trying to fool you don't really exist.

I'm not for being forced to vote either, but I don't necessarily see any of these rules as black and white, right or wrong. As long as the majority decides and agrees on them then that's acceptable since it would be their choice, assuming they're free to leave as well if they disagree.

In the United States, all 18-year-old males are required to register with the Selective Service. I had to register within 30 days of my 18th birthday. So even though the United States does not currently have an active draft, we are still nonetheless required to register. That, alone, mandates that 18-year-olds be allowed to vote on the people who can make the decisions to activate the draft that can send them into combat. And since the U.S. not only allows 18-year-olds to serve in the military, but the Armed Forces actively recruit in high schools, 18-year-olds should absolutely be given the right to vote, which was why the 26th Amendment was ratified.  Many countries in Europe still have compulsory military service as well. 

As far as being wise and well-informed, there are an awful lot of older people who are neither wise nor well-informed, and indeed act like wrinkled gray men- and women-children. Should they lose the right to vote based on some arbitrary standard? 

I'm personally not willing to allow some designated "wise men" decide my fate in what is supposed to be a democratic free society. 

Well I didn't go into everything I think when it comes to who should be able to vote and why, mostly because it's a lot and this wasn't really the thread to do it in without getting way off topic. Based on what you questioned:

I think if a Country is going to decide to draft, they should have to have an election prior, even if it's a short snap election. Let the people in the age range of the draft vote and decide. Besides that rare occasion, make the min age higher.

I also don't think every old person should be able to vote either. Cognitive ability would be key, so some basic tests should be a given to weed out anyone who's 'lost it', and perhaps an IQ test, with a min cutoff that doesn't weed out the majority however.

I personally wouldn't go to war just because my Gov said I had to. Send those who agree and will willingly sign up to go, because if the war is just, there should be plenty willing to fight, so why do you need me? Unless it's not legit... then fight it yourself and get rekt.



PS1   - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.

PS2  - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.

PS3   - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.

PS4   - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.

PRO  -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.

PS5   - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.

PRO  -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.

Oh that right...or is it the left...idk (the actual conservatives) are winning that one. I don't even need to look at their polls, the fact that Sly News Autrailia won't fuck off out of my feed like Russia Today before I blocked them after Ukraine is enough to tell me they have a very strong hold.



Labor is in front. Good result.

I think we can partly thank the clusterfuck that is the Trump administration for this as well.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:

Labor is in front. Good result.

I think we can partly thank the clusterfuck that is the Trump administration for this as well.

Thanks Trump for hurting Conservatives in two countries in a row now.

America's stupidity is becoming the best thing for centre/centre-left governments.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 03 May 2025

Multiple have called it for Labour - ABC, Sky News, 7News.