Vast swathes of below the line votes remain to be counted

He got a beautifully hand-crafted “27” from this bloke!

harvyk1 said :

Deref said :

The informal vote is something like electoral Darwinism; if you’re too stupid to know how to do it, then it’s probably a good thing that you’re not counted.

I pseudo agree with that, the informal vote can also be by accident, made by someone who does know what they are doing, and who simply forgot that they’d already allocated the number 19 to someone else. Because there was a 19 twice, numbers 1 to 18 are not counted either, despite the fact that chances are a persons 19th place is unlikely to ever be counted when determining preferences. For a persons 19th place getter to be counted as a vote, the person would have needed to vote for the 18 most unpopular candidates ever first.

This is incorrect. The savings provision under S270 of the act allows for misnumbering of preferences. In the case if the senate, 90% of the squares need to be numbered with three or less errors.

To quote Pulp Fiction, Zed’s dead baby !

I started from the bottom, because I wanted to squeeze every drop of juice out of exercising my democratic rights.

The Rise Up nutters got dead last from me. The bullet train no-hopers were second last. And then (and this still gives me a little frisson of pleasure) third last for Zed. And Mrs LSWCHP did pretty much the same.

I’m still hoping against hope for a Zed defeat.

I really struggled with only having one last place vote to assign, and so many worthy candidates ripe for last place. It would have been lovely to assign last place to about 15 of the 27 candidates.

johnboy said :

Worth considering Kate Lundy isn’t sitting on an enormous quota either…

Perhaps the nightmare memories triggered by the return of Kevin suppressed the local Labor vote.

I was just looking at the AEC results page and a far as I can understand the Liderals got 28262 votes above the line so far and 41227 below the line, which haven’t been allocated to candidates yet. If I am understanding it correctly there is a chance the 2nd senate seat will go to Merinda Nash and not Zed or Simon.

The aec website shows that 79% of votes have been counted. Is the 20% JB refers to the same uncounted 20% (postal and prepoll votes)? Or is JB’s 20% part of the ‘unallocated’ votes? If it is the latter, then 20% of people who voted liberal voted Zed last, and we should see some interesting results once votes are allocated to candidates.

harvyk1 said :

I do believe you $2 something goes to whom ever you put a 1 against, above or below…

A candidate or Senate group is eligible for election funding if they obtain at least 4% of the first preference vote in the division or the state or territory they contested. Source: http://www.aec.gov.au/parties_and_representatives/public_funding/index.htm

So if you put a 1 against a party that is unlikely to pull 4% of the ‘1’ vote, you’re saving the taxpayer some money.

“Whose old Senate seat is this?”
“It’s Zed’s”
“Who’s Zed?”
“Zed’s dead baby”

26. Kate Lundy
27. Zed Seseldja

farout said :

I voted under the line, just because I didn’t think any party should get Election Funding.

Yeah – that’s how I voted in the House of Reps – as it’s a foregone conclusion, I might as well save the taxpayer some money by voting the Secular Party “1”.

johnboy said :

Worth considering Kate Lundy isn’t sitting on an enormous quota either…

I can’t see that being a problem – in the unlikely event she didn’t get the quota on first preferences, the vast bulk of preferences eventually flow to her anyway.

If Sheikh *does* get in, he’s going to have to behave very well indeed to eventually retain the seat – he will need to avoid all the obvious nutty-Green distractions the rest of them fell for and which caused their demise in the local assembly.

troll-sniffer said :

I normally vote above the line but this time I patiently numbered every square until I could put the magic number 27 next to Zed’s name. It’s a measure of how far down the estimation pole he was that i was prepared to put fundamentalist Christians and the like above him… yuck my stomach still churns at the choices I was forced to make, alone and friendless in that little cardboard cubicle.

I voted below the line as I always do, but I’m in Eden-Monaro. 27? Pfft…. in my dreams.

I’m not sure what the solution is, but I’ve got to say the 110 candidates and the metre long ballot paper was a bit ridiculous. No wonder most people vote above the line, and we now have the dubious pleasure of a Lib Dem senator.

Stone motherless last – even below the Green blow-in.

farout said :

I voted under the line, just because I didn’t think any party should get Election Funding.
So it was 1 for someone I don’t even remember – probably the Euthanasia guys or the Independent, then the Libs.
So there are a few (well, at least one) below the line votes that will go the Lib’s way.

I do believe you $2 something goes to whom ever you put a 1 against, above or below…

Deref said :

The informal vote is something like electoral Darwinism; if you’re too stupid to know how to do it, then it’s probably a good thing that you’re not counted.

I pseudo agree with that, the informal vote can also be by accident, made by someone who does know what they are doing, and who simply forgot that they’d already allocated the number 19 to someone else. Because there was a 19 twice, numbers 1 to 18 are not counted either, despite the fact that chances are a persons 19th place is unlikely to ever be counted when determining preferences. For a persons 19th place getter to be counted as a vote, the person would have needed to vote for the 18 most unpopular candidates ever first.

Going from 1- 27 with Zed last was perhaps the most enjoyable thing I did last Saturday morning. Bring back Gary! 🙂

I voted under the line, just because I didn’t think any party should get Election Funding.
So it was 1 for someone I don’t even remember – probably the Euthanasia guys or the Independent, then the Libs.
So there are a few (well, at least one) below the line votes that will go the Lib’s way.

There’s hope yet, then. I couldn’t bring myself to put anyone but Danny Nalliah’s mob last, but Zed was a close second.

The informal vote is something like electoral Darwinism; if you’re too stupid to know how to do it, then it’s probably a good thing that you’re not counted.

Robertson said :

You wouldn’t guess this was still undecided if you glanced at the ABC’s “results” site:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2013/results/senate/

The ACT appears to be breaking the model. Helps we had a “mere” 27 below the line candidates.

I normally vote above the line but this time I patiently numbered every square until I could put the magic number 27 next to Zed’s name. It’s a measure of how far down the estimation pole he was that i was prepared to put fundamentalist Christians and the like above him… yuck my stomach still churns at the choices I was forced to make, alone and friendless in that little cardboard cubicle.

You wouldn’t guess this was still undecided if you glanced at the ABC’s “results” site:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2013/results/senate/

johnboy said :

Almost, but not quite time….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Yp2L6c2KM

Yay! Thanks JB 😀

ACT did well. Lowest informal vote count across the country. We know what we are doing.

He wasn’t last on mine, either, I seem to recall being *very* challenged by the choice between the fundamentalist christians and the right-wing nutters to put dead last.
So, from memory, Zed got 5th-last on mine.

I must say, I got a fair way through numbering the boxes before I got to Emmanuel in the Independents – I wasn’t wearing my glasses so I couldn’t really read his name until I squinted, but I had intended to put him much higher than I did. I think I gave him 11.
Not that it matters, of course,
Sheikh 1
Lundy 2
was as much as matters.

Almost, but not quite time….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Yp2L6c2KM

Yeah, I’ve met Zed a couple of times, and personally I don’t think this could have happened to a nicer guy. For the record, he wasn’t dead last on my vote, but he was certainly way down the line.