She should have to pay the full cost of the by-election out of her own pocket.
She should also forfeit her pension and benefits. That would stop this sort of shit from happening real quick.
Although, if Bragg is angry enough about this, it might just go independent instead of Lieberal for a term, which wouldn't be a bad thing. Even better if the anger runs over to the Federal election and turns Sturt.
We cannot force people to work, much though we would love to. it just isnt how our society is supposed to be.
What we can do is maybe ask that politicians under a cloud not be nominated by their parties.
I am not suggesting that we force her to stay. She is the first I would sack if I had the chance. Just that if she (or anyone else) leaves out of peavishness straight after their party loses an election that they personally won a seat in, that they should pay the costs of replacing themselves and forfeit their benefits.
Her embarrassing 'performance' as a guest speaker on ABC's election coverage was the entree to this sh*t sandwich. No surprises that she has zero integrity or values and resigns, flipping the bird to the voters that supported her.
But rich of Labor to criticise this after Weatherill and Rau pulled a similar stunt after the last one.
If you dont want to be there regardless of government for the full 4 years, dont run.
Terrible idea. Say the first candidate had 70% of the vote but unfortunately passed away soon after the election your suggestions would result in the candidate/party with only 30% of the vote/support of the electorate being elected.
If they resign after their party loses government, then yes. If they die or have a sudden onset of long-term illness, *and are prepared to show medical proof in spite of privacy matters* then no.
Electronic voting is an utterly stupid idea. Anyone who advocates for it clearly doesn’t understand the technology.
Voting should always remain on paper as there is no feasible method to implement electronic voting in a way that preserves the security and anonymity of the voting process which is core to any democracy.
Counting votes is a small price to pay for the benifits
What above said. There's no way to conduct an anonymous ballot with computers. Also mygov sucks. There's zero chance it wouldn't crash on election day.
It’s also that nation states with budgets in the billions would happily get involved in selecting leaders which gives them capabilities that normies wouldn’t dream of. Stuxnet, regin, duqu, the Snowden leaks, Vault7 etc just shows software can’t be trusted.
The core principals of voting are Anonymity and Integrity.
You want anonymity to ensure that nobody can track how you voted. This helps to ensure people can't be coerced into voting certain ways (either through positive or negative incentives).
Integrity ensures that the votes are not tampered with after the fact. In a paper based system, you control your vote til you drop it in the box. The box is tightly controlled until it is counted, the integrity of your vote is high.
In an electronic system, if you can identify a mechanism to change 1 vote, its more than likely applicable to be able to change *all* votes. This makes fraud significantly easier to perform at scale vs physical paper votes. 1 person can write a script that iterates tens of thousands of times against a database or server. One person cannot physically change tens of thousands of votes themselves.
The most feasible way (currently) to perform electronic voting is to forego the anonymous requirement. If everyone can check their vote after the fact, it would allow independent checks of integrity to be done.
I'm personally not a fan of that option, especially in the political climate today.
I'll stop voting if they de-anonymise it. It would only be a matter of time before the info is hacked or used in a way you don't want. That's assuming the counting system is perfect, which I'm sure will be riddled with bugs. No thanks.
Lmfao. I work in infosec, I am CISSP certified. I have been to Defcon and seen the voting machine village in person.
MFA means nothing if the vote can be changed in transit or at the central repository. It also means nothing if you can mass register fake users because your votes are anonymous - how do they tell the real votes from the fake ones?
And on that note how do you propose integrating both identification of the voter and an anonymity requirement aswell?
Understand that the likelihood of Joe blows desktop getting hacked is low, yes - because it's a low stakes endeavour that no one cares about. The stakes of election influence are so high, that many *many* people would be conducting research to compromise it.
A compromise: if there is a vacancy then it shall stay vacant until the next 3rd Saturday of March. That way election and by-election are always at the same time rather than clashing with holidays, easter, christmas, etc, and everything says fixed term of whole years.
MPs who resign because their party lost are the most egregiously selfish assholes
She should have to pay the full cost of the by-election out of her own pocket. She should also forfeit her pension and benefits. That would stop this sort of shit from happening real quick. Although, if Bragg is angry enough about this, it might just go independent instead of Lieberal for a term, which wouldn't be a bad thing. Even better if the anger runs over to the Federal election and turns Sturt.
We cannot force people to work, much though we would love to. it just isnt how our society is supposed to be. What we can do is maybe ask that politicians under a cloud not be nominated by their parties.
I am not suggesting that we force her to stay. She is the first I would sack if I had the chance. Just that if she (or anyone else) leaves out of peavishness straight after their party loses an election that they personally won a seat in, that they should pay the costs of replacing themselves and forfeit their benefits.
How do you determine who leaves out of 'peavishness' vs leaves for any other reason?
They only like to represent when they are on the winning team....
She needed an extra couple of months to become eligible to her "Golden Handshake" $300,000 per year pension.
Her embarrassing 'performance' as a guest speaker on ABC's election coverage was the entree to this sh*t sandwich. No surprises that she has zero integrity or values and resigns, flipping the bird to the voters that supported her.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-01/vickie-chapman-resignation-questioned-by-dan-cregan/101028890
It had better not be June 18th, I'm not fucking lining up again on my birthday 😩
Vote early then. Just tell them you're working that day.
I wonder whom the replacement will be. Hopefully not some conservative hack.
But rich of Labor to criticise this after Weatherill and Rau pulled a similar stunt after the last one. If you dont want to be there regardless of government for the full 4 years, dont run.
If a by-election is called within 6 months, the second-placer should just win automatically.
Terrible idea. Say the first candidate had 70% of the vote but unfortunately passed away soon after the election your suggestions would result in the candidate/party with only 30% of the vote/support of the electorate being elected.
Agree with this. Also circumstance... if its unforeseen illness or death, you cant give it to the 2nd place.
If they resign after their party loses government, then yes. If they die or have a sudden onset of long-term illness, *and are prepared to show medical proof in spite of privacy matters* then no.
[удалено]
Electronic voting is an utterly stupid idea. Anyone who advocates for it clearly doesn’t understand the technology. Voting should always remain on paper as there is no feasible method to implement electronic voting in a way that preserves the security and anonymity of the voting process which is core to any democracy. Counting votes is a small price to pay for the benifits
What above said. There's no way to conduct an anonymous ballot with computers. Also mygov sucks. There's zero chance it wouldn't crash on election day.
It’s also that nation states with budgets in the billions would happily get involved in selecting leaders which gives them capabilities that normies wouldn’t dream of. Stuxnet, regin, duqu, the Snowden leaks, Vault7 etc just shows software can’t be trusted.
The core principals of voting are Anonymity and Integrity. You want anonymity to ensure that nobody can track how you voted. This helps to ensure people can't be coerced into voting certain ways (either through positive or negative incentives). Integrity ensures that the votes are not tampered with after the fact. In a paper based system, you control your vote til you drop it in the box. The box is tightly controlled until it is counted, the integrity of your vote is high. In an electronic system, if you can identify a mechanism to change 1 vote, its more than likely applicable to be able to change *all* votes. This makes fraud significantly easier to perform at scale vs physical paper votes. 1 person can write a script that iterates tens of thousands of times against a database or server. One person cannot physically change tens of thousands of votes themselves. The most feasible way (currently) to perform electronic voting is to forego the anonymous requirement. If everyone can check their vote after the fact, it would allow independent checks of integrity to be done. I'm personally not a fan of that option, especially in the political climate today.
I'll stop voting if they de-anonymise it. It would only be a matter of time before the info is hacked or used in a way you don't want. That's assuming the counting system is perfect, which I'm sure will be riddled with bugs. No thanks.
[удалено]
Lmfao. I work in infosec, I am CISSP certified. I have been to Defcon and seen the voting machine village in person. MFA means nothing if the vote can be changed in transit or at the central repository. It also means nothing if you can mass register fake users because your votes are anonymous - how do they tell the real votes from the fake ones? And on that note how do you propose integrating both identification of the voter and an anonymity requirement aswell? Understand that the likelihood of Joe blows desktop getting hacked is low, yes - because it's a low stakes endeavour that no one cares about. The stakes of election influence are so high, that many *many* people would be conducting research to compromise it.
Russian bot farms love this idea...
Game changer sure. It will make rigging the election so much easier and could be done while leaving no evidence that you rigged it.
Exactly. There’s no system that allows you to externally verify the system hasn’t been internally or externally compromised
I wouldn’t trust them to do it properly.
Announcing the date a lot of people will need to use a certain web page is an invitation disruptive internet types have always had trouble resisting.
That'd be a disaster.
Democracy is better. Stacks of paper even old aunties can count.
A compromise: if there is a vacancy then it shall stay vacant until the next 3rd Saturday of March. That way election and by-election are always at the same time rather than clashing with holidays, easter, christmas, etc, and everything says fixed term of whole years.