SA Footy

A smart bet might be in March next year, from what I hear.
Budget's looking like it'll be dodgy, so get the election done before then.

If they have it in March is that not to early for a Senate Election?

elections cost way too much money lets go for a dictatorship instead

gossipgirl wrote:elections cost way too much money lets go for a dictatorship instead

Nah, we'll just stick with a plutocracy

Government's should run their full term. Being able to call early elections prove they are only interested in retaining power, not good governance.

The Sleeping Giant wrote:Government's should run their full term. Being able to call early elections prove they are only interested in retaining power, not good governance.

Newsflash.

gossipgirl wrote:elections cost way too much money lets go for a dictatorship instead

Has squids got the squids dictatorship up and running yet?

The Sleeping Giant wrote:Government's should run their full term. Being able to call early elections prove they are only interested in retaining power, not good governance.

Agree entirely, it plays us all for muppets.

Gozu wrote:

The Sleeping Giant wrote:Government's should run their full term. Being able to call early elections prove they are only interested in retaining power, not good governance.

Agree entirely, it plays us all for muppets.

Yep, me too. X3 on this point.
March 2013 is still the hot goss in Canberra this week as I have said before. Gillard v Abbott will happen and I believe it will be a landslide to the right.

Sky Pilot wrote:

Gozu wrote:

The Sleeping Giant wrote:Government's should run their full term. Being able to call early elections prove they are only interested in retaining power, not good governance.

Agree entirely, it plays us all for muppets.

Yep, me too. X3 on this point.
March 2013 is still the hot goss in Canberra this week as I have said before. Gillard v Abbott will happen and I believe it will be a landslide to the right.

Mitt Romney to win the US election wasn't it?

Gozu wrote:

Sky Pilot wrote:

Gozu wrote:

The Sleeping Giant wrote:Government's should run their full term. Being able to call early elections prove they are only interested in retaining power, not good governance.

Agree entirely, it plays us all for muppets.

Yep, me too. X3 on this point.
March 2013 is still the hot goss in Canberra this week as I have said before. Gillard v Abbott will happen and I believe it will be a landslide to the right.

Mitt Romney to win the US election wasn't it?

Yep, that's what I said. So what?

i think by now gillard and her indians would have raised enough tax money from the carbon tax to use those funds to have an election when they return early next year

Sky Pilot wrote:

Gozu wrote:

The Sleeping Giant wrote:Government's should run their full term. Being able to call early elections prove they are only interested in retaining power, not good governance.

Agree entirely, it plays us all for muppets.

Yep, me too. X3 on this point.
March 2013 is still the hot goss in Canberra this week as I have said before. Gillard v Abbott will happen and I believe it will be a landslide to the right.

I'd like to see a fifth of the seats - scattered not contiguous - up for election each year.
That would serve several purposes:
- provide continuity overall.
- give the voters a chance to send a message frequently.
- undermine the effect of media advertising and cut advertising expenditure.
- force candidates to connect more with the electorate they are supposed to represent rather than the party machine.

How would a government be able to make changes if every 12 months a new government was sworn in?

The Sleeping Giant wrote:How would a government be able to make changes if every 12 months a new government was sworn in?

It is an idealistic fantasy I admit, and I assume would be rejected by all parties including the Greens, because in time the parties would become irrelevant and MPs would be more representative of their electorate having to convince local voters rather than a party to choose them.

Then they may vote by conscience rather than compulsion by the party machine, leading to decisions by majority consensus.
Changing only a few at a time would give more continuity.

Sat 13 April is my tip.
It's the second week after Easter - the incumbents will likely be happy to have everyone distracted close to the election date.
Footy season has begun.

More logically, it is also a short time after the WA election due on 9 March 2013 IIRC. I doubt they would want to run concurrently with a state election campaign, especially with a Liberal incumbent sitting in WA.
The fastest an election can occur is 33 days after dissolving Parliament.
Parliament is due to sit on Tues 12 March. By dissolving it on the Sunday 10 March, the day after the WA election, a federal election could then be held 34 days later on Sat 13 April. A nice short time for the incumbents. Dissolving Parliament the day after the WA election would also stop the Parliament sitting as scheduled on 12-21 March - the last sitting period before the Budget is due on 15 May. If the incumbents lose, it also leaves the incoming govt with a hell of a lot to get its head around (financially) in just 32 days!

Just my two cents.

Today's poll results might now suggest that Labor will hang on as long as they can.

Squawk wrote:Today's poll results might now suggest that Labor will hang on as long as they can.

Think its down to the budget, if its going to be a shocker I would suggest they will go early to try and stem the losses. If they think they can balance the books either legitimatley or through being creative they likely will hang on for as long as they can in the hope that the opposition will make a mistake that they can capatilise on.

will not be any earlier than October 2013

Hasn't Julia recently said that they'll go full term?
Don't you guys believe her?