GrodsCorp

The disappointing Greens

Monday 27 November 2006, 9:13 am

The Editor

Categories: Media, Victoria Decides '06

Tags: FamilyFirst, Labor, RichardDiNatale, TheGreens, TheNationals, VictorianElection07

So The Greens were an abysmal failure on Saturday, according to the mainstream and fringe media. Abysmal failure because they failed to live up to the hype created by those same media outlets and because their vote “plateaued” at a “pathetic” 10%.

Four points:

1) The Greens have won, according to whichever estimate you choose to believe, two, three or four seats in the upper house. A gain of two, three or four respectively. They have gone from being a minor party with no Parliamentary representation to a Party with potentially equal upper house representation to the Nationals. By the next election The Greens will have significant Parliamentary experience with all the benefits that come with Parliamentary offices and staff, along with a swathe of experienced candidates with voting records and legislative histories.

2) Although the vote is still too close to call The Greens have come within a bee’s dick of snatching the lower house seat of Melbourne from the ALP. If it wasn’t for the mother-of-all-scare campaigns run by the ALP in the dying days of the election there is every chance Richard Di Natale would’ve drunk champagne by now.

3) The Greens received double the Nationals’ first preference votes and nearly triple the extreme Family First’s. If it weren’t for the National’s highly concentrated vote resulting in eight lower house seats The Greens would be the undisputed third force in Victorian politics.

4) No other Party has ever had to deal with such a concerted and sustained fear campaign run by a major media outlet.

I think The Greens should be proud of their result over the weekend and feel safe in the knowledge that it provides an excellent platform for improvement in 2010.

11 Comments

MrLefty\'s pathetic stalker (Monday 27 November 2006, 11:20 am) #

\”excellent platform for improvement\” ?

The Greens vote actually decreased by 0.1% since 2002. The Greens lost voters.

They were an abysmal failure.

Ed\’s note: You really are pathetic, MrLefty\’s pathetic stalker.
Grendel (Monday 27 November 2006, 12:24 pm) #

Abysmal? seriosly, a 0.1% decrease of votes now qualifies as ‘abysmal’?

So does the (roughly) 2% swing against Labor count as an abysmal failure? Of course not - seats gained are seats gained regardless of the total vote. I reckon it shows the Greens ran a better tactical campaign for strategic gains rather than attempting broad appeal for an overall increase in popular support but no real political gains.
The Editor (Monday 27 November 2006, 2:28 pm) #

I’m guessing the above comment from “MrLefty” is another one from his pathetic stalker. Awaiting independent verification via email from real MrLefty.
The Editor (Monday 27 November 2006, 2:35 pm) #

Stalker status verified.
MrLefty (Monday 27 November 2006, 2:37 pm) #

Yup. That was my stalker. I think the Greens did superbly, despite the most vicious, dishonest and sustained smear campaign I’ve ever seen in Australian politics.
The Editor\'s pathetic stalker (Monday 27 November 2006, 2:47 pm) #

I have smelly feet.

Ed\’s note: You take that back!
Grendel (Monday 27 November 2006, 3:57 pm) #

And my comments still apply to Mr Lefty’s pathetic stalker who is now rendered even more pathetic by posting in a place where the editor has smelly. . .waiiit a minute, I’M posting in a place where the editor has smelly feet!
The Editor (Monday 27 November 2006, 4:36 pm) #

Oh, the humanity! It’s a STALKERFEST!
MrLefty\'s pathetic stalker (Monday 27 November 2006, 11:53 pm) #

It was a great day today. I opened the Australian Newspaper and got to read two pages of articles saying how successfuly Family First performed and how badly the Greens failed.

I noticed a Family First candidate was assaulted on Saturday and Liberal candidate threatened in the same seat. Typically violent ratbag behaviour from the left, continuing the standard they set at G20.
Adam (Friday 1 December 2006, 12:41 am) #

“Don’t feed the Trolls” ;-)
Melbcity (Sunday 24 December 2006, 5:16 am) #

Analyis of the election results show that the Greens won in Western Victoria thanks to the preference allocation of Family First and ballot papers that have gone missing, unaccounted for.

The conduct of the State Election was corrupt, the information commented on Andrew Landeryou was not confidential, as you have implied.

Public elections must be open and transparent and the detailed progressive results of the election should also be in the public domain. If anything the VEC is at fault by not publishing accurate information or details of the election results.

The Victorian Electoral Commission and Steve Tully, Chief Electoral Commissioner was actively engaged in a cover-up crisis management as a result of their monumental stuff-up. The explanation provided to the media for their multiple stuff-up was false and does not give the full picture or facts behind their errors in the count.

I am informed that the conduct of the State Election and Steve Tully’s management will be reviewed by the State Parliament in 2007.

There is a lot issues that need to be considered such as the VEC accessing illegally the results of the e-voting system prior to the close of the November 25th poll without any scrutineers present.(Steve Tully’s tried denying the allegation, and became abusive when we raised this issue following email sent our by Glenda Jackson, VEC Election Support Manager, sent to the media) Link.

Mr Tully’s refusal to provide relevant statistical details in relation to the conduct of the election including the number of ballot papers issued, detailed preference data and ongoing concerns that the VEC’s data-quality was not the best (And that is putting it mildly).

Based on the limited information, released by the VEC ballot papers have gone missing and remain unaccounted for. The VEC failed to publish detailed polling place breakdowns of the upper-house vote (Something that is normally the provided during election counts (The 2004 Senate election provided polling place results.

We have now had to submit an FOI request to try and obtain copies of the detailed preference data and polling place return. (This is further example of the abuse and the extent that Mr Tully will go to avoid accountability and the need to provide an open and transparent election results). the conduct of this election has brought the Victorian Electoral Commission and the State Election into disrepute. these concerns have nothing to do with the final outcome of the election.

More information…
click here and here

God bless.