![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I would usually write "a plague on whoever came up with that old 90s R&B vid of the guy singing the song about counting before he 'starts all over again' and posted it EVERYWHERE to describe Nevada's ballot counting" but with COVID on the planet, it seems unwise.
BUT DAMMIT I'VE HAD THAT SONG IN MY HEAD FOR FOUR FREAKING DAYS.
--
My maths/politics geek friend is still occasionally posting updates on the numbers in the states. Someone pointed out that it doesn't matter now that Biden has PA, and he replied in allcaps: IT MATTERS TO OUR TIPPING RESULTS
--
I have drunk most of a can of Mountain Dew. This was probably unwise.
--
A few newspaper headlines in Australia:
The West Australian: Donny Spit!
Sydney Morning Herald: A Time To Heal
--
An originally-from-GA friend got narky about something one of the PSA guys said regarding most GAians not even knowing who Chuck Schumer was. Except I took it to some other Americans (because I wanted advice on whether to suggest cooling her jets and if so, how) and they said that it was more about federal vs local politics - big vs small govt - which made more sense of the first reply I saw to her, which was about who knows best for the area and the liberties of the individual.
--
In other, local political news, the NSW Electoral Commission is redrawing state electoral districts: I think that the population of the area has increased so much that they're adding new districts.
We'd be in one of the new districts, which would be a mix of low-density suburban and high-density suburban with significant non-white and immigrant populations.
At least two local politicians (neither of them from the in-power party at local, state, or fed level in our area) said this was going to be a kind of gerrymandering to ensure present incumbents had better chances of holding onto their seats. Which is interesting because I don't think our state rep (or the state rep of the electorate that we're being merged with) was that hard up for votes. Must check his numbers for last election (last year).
As I said, significant non-white and immigrant populations, which doesn't automatically mean a centrist vote around here. A lot of non-white and immigrant populations either don't trust democratic processes, or they're conservative in outlook. Then again, the whole area is pretty conservative in outlook, so it's not like we're suddenly going to turn hard left (the Greens). Although the Greens are starting to see larger numbers in state and federal elections. Conservatives are easily 50% or more, but Centrists are at least 15-20%, and the main Left Wing Party (Greens) saw a peak of over 10% in the last set of elections. Possibly even more.
We may be heavily churched around here, but our churches believe and speak of things like Climate Change and Acknowledgement Of Country (the primacy of the indigenous peoples who lived here before colonisation; they haven't quite reached the point of reparations, so far as I know). It's just that it gets lost when you start bringing Religious Privilege (under the name of "Religious Freedom") into the mix: then they'll vote for whoever will allow us to maintain our religious privilege.
It would be interesting to see what's required to run for office. Would I want to run for office? Probably not, given that I'd end up with my fannish history on display and I'm not comfortable with that. Plus, I fall asleep in meetings so so easily. And I'm really not a good policy person, I'm a fix-it person. Which tends to mean running a bit roughshod over others if I think there's a solution that I can enact. Benevolent dictator of the world? Sure. Politician? I don't think so!
Okay, time to work.
BUT DAMMIT I'VE HAD THAT SONG IN MY HEAD FOR FOUR FREAKING DAYS.
--
My maths/politics geek friend is still occasionally posting updates on the numbers in the states. Someone pointed out that it doesn't matter now that Biden has PA, and he replied in allcaps: IT MATTERS TO OUR TIPPING RESULTS
--
I have drunk most of a can of Mountain Dew. This was probably unwise.
--
A few newspaper headlines in Australia:
The West Australian: Donny Spit!
The front page of tomorrow's The West Australian. pic.twitter.com/rodWYHP3xl
— The West Australian (@westaustralian) November 8, 2020
Sydney Morning Herald: A Time To Heal
Back on the job. Here’s Monday’s front page pic.twitter.com/hA49VTtw6P
— Ben Cubby (@bencubby) November 8, 2020
--
An originally-from-GA friend got narky about something one of the PSA guys said regarding most GAians not even knowing who Chuck Schumer was. Except I took it to some other Americans (because I wanted advice on whether to suggest cooling her jets and if so, how) and they said that it was more about federal vs local politics - big vs small govt - which made more sense of the first reply I saw to her, which was about who knows best for the area and the liberties of the individual.
--
In other, local political news, the NSW Electoral Commission is redrawing state electoral districts: I think that the population of the area has increased so much that they're adding new districts.
We'd be in one of the new districts, which would be a mix of low-density suburban and high-density suburban with significant non-white and immigrant populations.
At least two local politicians (neither of them from the in-power party at local, state, or fed level in our area) said this was going to be a kind of gerrymandering to ensure present incumbents had better chances of holding onto their seats. Which is interesting because I don't think our state rep (or the state rep of the electorate that we're being merged with) was that hard up for votes. Must check his numbers for last election (last year).
As I said, significant non-white and immigrant populations, which doesn't automatically mean a centrist vote around here. A lot of non-white and immigrant populations either don't trust democratic processes, or they're conservative in outlook. Then again, the whole area is pretty conservative in outlook, so it's not like we're suddenly going to turn hard left (the Greens). Although the Greens are starting to see larger numbers in state and federal elections. Conservatives are easily 50% or more, but Centrists are at least 15-20%, and the main Left Wing Party (Greens) saw a peak of over 10% in the last set of elections. Possibly even more.
We may be heavily churched around here, but our churches believe and speak of things like Climate Change and Acknowledgement Of Country (the primacy of the indigenous peoples who lived here before colonisation; they haven't quite reached the point of reparations, so far as I know). It's just that it gets lost when you start bringing Religious Privilege (under the name of "Religious Freedom") into the mix: then they'll vote for whoever will allow us to maintain our religious privilege.
It would be interesting to see what's required to run for office. Would I want to run for office? Probably not, given that I'd end up with my fannish history on display and I'm not comfortable with that. Plus, I fall asleep in meetings so so easily. And I'm really not a good policy person, I'm a fix-it person. Which tends to mean running a bit roughshod over others if I think there's a solution that I can enact. Benevolent dictator of the world? Sure. Politician? I don't think so!
Okay, time to work.
Tags:
no subject
I'm sorry to hear that gerrymandering happens the world over. Ugh.
no subject
Queensland Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen was particularly notorious for it...
"Bjelke-Petersen's government was kept in power in part due to an electoral malapportionment where rural electoral districts had significantly fewer enrolled voters than those in metropolitan areas. This system was introduced by the Labor Party in 1949 as an overt electoral fix in order to concentrate its base of voters in regional towns and rural areas in as many districts as possible. Under Nicklin the bias in favour of rural constituencies was maintained, but reworked to favour the Country and Liberal parties by carving new Country-leaning seats in the hinterlands of provincial areas and Liberal-leaning seats in Brisbane.
The bias worked to Bjelke-Petersen's benefit in his first election as premier, in 1969. His Country Party won only 21 percent of the primary vote, finishing third behind Labor and the Liberals. However, due to the Country Party's heavy concentration of support in the provincial and rural zones, it won 26 seats, seven more than the Liberals. Combined, the Coalition had 45 seats out of 78, enough to consign Labor to opposition even though it finished percentage points ahead of the Coalition on the two-party vote. While in opposition, Bjelke-Petersen had vehemently criticised the 1949 redistribution, claiming that Labor was effectively telling Queenslanders, "Whether you like it or not, we will be the government."
In 1972, Bjelke-Petersen strengthened the system to favour his own party. To the three existing electoral zones—metropolitan Brisbane, provincial and rural—was added a fourth zone, the remote zone. The seats in this area had even fewer enrolled electors than seats in the rural zone—in some cases, as few as a third of the enrolled electors in a typical Brisbane seat. This had the effect of packing Labor support into the Brisbane area and the provincial cities. On average, it took only 7,000 votes to win a Country/National seat, versus 12,000 for a Labor seat. This gross distortion led to his opponents referring to it as the "Bjelkemander", a play on the term "gerrymander". The 1985 proposal would have made the malapportionment even more severe, to the point that a vote in Brisbane would have only been worth half a country vote. The lack of a state upper house (which Queensland had abolished in 1922) allowed legislation to be passed without the need to negotiate with other political parties."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh_Bjelke-Petersen