Jedi_Tiger
Well-known member
like Shortens failed Mediscare campaign??
Labor lie just as much ...
like Albo saying over 90 times electricity prices will decrease ...
Referendum 2023
- Thread starter Tucker
- Start date
- Status
Labor lie just as much ...
like Albo saying over 90 times electricity prices will decrease ...
Kaito
Well-known member
More dirty tactics from the No campaign:
The 3.5 million voters the No campaign is targeting to block the Voice
More than 3 million voters will be targeted by a barrage of calls and advertising from the No campaign after the anti-Voice movement used sophisticated software to identify persuadable voters in swing states.
Thousands of No volunteers in NSW and Victoria are making nightly calls to households in Tasmania and South Australia, as Fair Australia’s top campaigner, Chris Inglis, boasted during a training session that the No campaign has a much easier job than the Yes campaign, which requires support from a majority of voters nationally as well as a majority in four of six states to succeed.
This masthead revealed on Tuesday that Inglis had instructed volunteers to instil fear in voters’ minds, not to identify themselves upfront as No campaigners and to raise reports of financial compensation to Indigenous Australians if the Voice were set up.
In a campaign briefing, Inglis revealed extensive details about his campaign’s predictive software, which he claimed had identified 3.5 million undecided Australians in key states.
He told volunteers who had registered to work to defeat the Voice that the Yes campaign was “spraying” money by chasing 8.7 million voters nationwide.
“We don’t need Victoria or NSW,” Inglis said.
“It’s not that we don’t care about them. It means that we have a very, very targeted electoral strategy. We know what we need to do. We know who we need to talk to and there’s no point wasting cash like they are.
“We’re no longer trying to find 10 million votes out of nowhere. We know that we only need 3.5 million.
“They will spend a lot of time trying to convince Western Sydney, and it is very hard to convince Western Sydney to do anything irrational, and they’re finding that out the hard way.”
Conservative activist group Advance runs Fair Australia, the leading No campaign, which is aligned with the Coalition’s Indigenous Australians spokeswoman, Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, but is separate from the anti-Voice campaigns run by the Liberal party.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on Tuesday the revelations shone a light on the true nature of the No campaign, which he accused of “promoting fear rather than hope” as he held up the front page of The Sydney Morning Herald showing its story on Fair Australia’s tactics.
Opposition frontbencher Bridget McKenzie defended the No campaign’s approach of raising the prospect of financial reparations for Indigenous people, arguing the government was unable to say what the Voice would advocate for.
Labor’s national secretary, Paul Erickson, told Labor MPs on Tuesday that Opposition Leader Peter Dutton would suffer long-term damage as a result of his role in the campaign.
Erickson, who oversees Labor’s electoral research, claimed the No campaign’s cynicism contrasted poorly with Labor’s appeals to hope and the lasting effect of the referendum, even if Labor lost, would be to cement in voters’ minds an impression of Dutton as a wrecker.
According to four Labor MPs who requested anonymity because the briefing was private, Erickson stressed the importance of message discipline, intense campaigning, boosting referendum day turnout, and the approximately 5 million voters up for grabs.
In Fair Australia’s training session, Inglis explained how the No campaign’s voter identification tools helped direct its advertising, phone calls, and other forms of communication with voters still mulling their decision.
The campaign began with a commercially available list of 18 million people, Inglis said.
This dataset was then “washed against” what Inglis called a “geo-coded” address file of each household in Australia. Households were then categorised into small geographical areas for which the census gives demographic data such as age, education and income level.
“You mix it in a blender. You’ve got a bit of census, you’ve got the address files, you’ve got [Advance polling results],” he said.
“Everything then goes into saying, right well, according to your file, Janet is looking like she’s going to be a No voter, Terry looks like she’s going to vote Yes and Peter is going to vote no. And poor little Jimmy’s right in the middle open to persuasion.”
“For a model to be considered a predictive model, it has to be over 60 per cent accurate,” he said. “Our model has come in between 75 and 80 per cent accurate.”
On Sunday, a Fair Australia spokesman said the campaign’s messaging reflected the actual concerns of voters.
“We make no apologies for our volunteers being as persuasive as they possibly can be,” he said.
The 3.5 million voters the No campaign is targeting to block the Voice
More than 3 million voters will be targeted by a barrage of calls and advertising from the No campaign after the anti-Voice movement used sophisticated software to identify persuadable voters in swing states.
Thousands of No volunteers in NSW and Victoria are making nightly calls to households in Tasmania and South Australia, as Fair Australia’s top campaigner, Chris Inglis, boasted during a training session that the No campaign has a much easier job than the Yes campaign, which requires support from a majority of voters nationally as well as a majority in four of six states to succeed.
This masthead revealed on Tuesday that Inglis had instructed volunteers to instil fear in voters’ minds, not to identify themselves upfront as No campaigners and to raise reports of financial compensation to Indigenous Australians if the Voice were set up.
In a campaign briefing, Inglis revealed extensive details about his campaign’s predictive software, which he claimed had identified 3.5 million undecided Australians in key states.
He told volunteers who had registered to work to defeat the Voice that the Yes campaign was “spraying” money by chasing 8.7 million voters nationwide.
“We don’t need Victoria or NSW,” Inglis said.
“It’s not that we don’t care about them. It means that we have a very, very targeted electoral strategy. We know what we need to do. We know who we need to talk to and there’s no point wasting cash like they are.
“We’re no longer trying to find 10 million votes out of nowhere. We know that we only need 3.5 million.
“They will spend a lot of time trying to convince Western Sydney, and it is very hard to convince Western Sydney to do anything irrational, and they’re finding that out the hard way.”
Conservative activist group Advance runs Fair Australia, the leading No campaign, which is aligned with the Coalition’s Indigenous Australians spokeswoman, Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, but is separate from the anti-Voice campaigns run by the Liberal party.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on Tuesday the revelations shone a light on the true nature of the No campaign, which he accused of “promoting fear rather than hope” as he held up the front page of The Sydney Morning Herald showing its story on Fair Australia’s tactics.
Opposition frontbencher Bridget McKenzie defended the No campaign’s approach of raising the prospect of financial reparations for Indigenous people, arguing the government was unable to say what the Voice would advocate for.
Labor’s national secretary, Paul Erickson, told Labor MPs on Tuesday that Opposition Leader Peter Dutton would suffer long-term damage as a result of his role in the campaign.
Erickson, who oversees Labor’s electoral research, claimed the No campaign’s cynicism contrasted poorly with Labor’s appeals to hope and the lasting effect of the referendum, even if Labor lost, would be to cement in voters’ minds an impression of Dutton as a wrecker.
According to four Labor MPs who requested anonymity because the briefing was private, Erickson stressed the importance of message discipline, intense campaigning, boosting referendum day turnout, and the approximately 5 million voters up for grabs.
In Fair Australia’s training session, Inglis explained how the No campaign’s voter identification tools helped direct its advertising, phone calls, and other forms of communication with voters still mulling their decision.
The campaign began with a commercially available list of 18 million people, Inglis said.
This dataset was then “washed against” what Inglis called a “geo-coded” address file of each household in Australia. Households were then categorised into small geographical areas for which the census gives demographic data such as age, education and income level.
“You mix it in a blender. You’ve got a bit of census, you’ve got the address files, you’ve got [Advance polling results],” he said.
“Everything then goes into saying, right well, according to your file, Janet is looking like she’s going to be a No voter, Terry looks like she’s going to vote Yes and Peter is going to vote no. And poor little Jimmy’s right in the middle open to persuasion.”
“For a model to be considered a predictive model, it has to be over 60 per cent accurate,” he said. “Our model has come in between 75 and 80 per cent accurate.”
On Sunday, a Fair Australia spokesman said the campaign’s messaging reflected the actual concerns of voters.
“We make no apologies for our volunteers being as persuasive as they possibly can be,” he said.
Kaito
Well-known member
Yeah, I dunno, who's been playing dirty mate? Lol
Kaito
Well-known member
Agree with this. Just don't agree with the lies
and the fear mongering. Politics is a dirty
game, right or left from top to bottom smh
Tucker
Well-known member
Both sides are playing dirty.
The YES side will be shocked they are so far behind and will react poorly.
In the end, after a month of terrible behaviour, this country will be left divided and people will lose compassion for the real issue.
The whole approach to this since 2017 has been incompetent.
The YES side will be shocked they are so far behind and will react poorly.
In the end, after a month of terrible behaviour, this country will be left divided and people will lose compassion for the real issue.
The whole approach to this since 2017 has been incompetent.
Kaito
Well-known member
The the hell is that ignorant , if u went to get a loan and they said just sign here and then we will put the interest rate in , would u sign that , the same goes for the above ,
They are politicians and like the LNP i expect them to lie and many do.I hold the media to a higher standard than politicians in providing the truth to the public,however the Murdoch media have about the same degree of honesty that Pravda Nazi Putins and all extreme media provide.
Keith Murdoch would be crying in his grave if he could see what has become of what he started all those years ago when he risked everything in making sure Australians learned the truth about what a fiasco Churchill and the british generals had made of the Gallipoli campaign,these days his direct family are supporting the rich mates and liars in covering up the truth instead of exposing it
Jedi_Tiger
Well-known member
Poorly argued by Albo, no green alliance or preferential voting system to get him over the line on this one.
Perhaps he should have stopped jet-setting around the world and spent more time in australia trying to build a clear and concise case for the yes vote.
In October after the yes vote fails he will be overseas to see sleepy Joe so all will be ok...
Jedi_Tiger
Well-known member
The yes vote is like handing over a blank cheque and saying just fill this out we will put the amount in later.
That is ultimately why it will fail lack of detail
Curly_Tiger
Well-known member
Albo is owned by the globalists
That’s why he’s always overseas at some soirée getting his riding instructions
They’re all crooks who sold their souls to get where they are
Pollies don’t work for us, they work for them, whoever they may be, controlling all from the shadows
That’s why he’s always overseas at some soirée getting his riding instructions
They’re all crooks who sold their souls to get where they are
Pollies don’t work for us, they work for them, whoever they may be, controlling all from the shadows
Tucker
Well-known member
The YES campaign are lying as well.
There is evidence they are lying about the Uluṟu Statement from the Heart.
The NO campaign are using scare tactics certainly, however the YES campaign are using car salesman type tactics “don’t worry about it love, we’ve got it under control, nothing to concern yourself with…”
This project was well run between the years of 2015 to 2017. When the Referendum Council organised their 12 meetings throughout regional and metropolitan centres across the country, undertaking dialogue used to formulate the Uluṟu Statement from the Heart, that resulted from the National Constitutional Convention held at Uluru in 2017, things were working well. From that point on, it has slowly declined in quality as activism and leadership posturing has taken charge.
I’ll never get the image of Albo’s crocodile tears as he read the Referendum question out of my head. It’s the most embarrassing thing I’ve ever seen a man do…not a Prime Minister, but a man.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
Kaito
Well-known member
Yeah man, I think everyone is a bit disappointed
with the vagueness & lack of clarity on key points.
Pretty good summary of everything. Feel free
to have a read and discect/criticise it. Enjoying
this conversation from both sides of the ledger
An invitation: The Uluru Statement from the Heart. The 2023 Voice Referendum - Hawker Britton
Speaking on the lands of the Kaurna people, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese today announced that the 2023 Referendum on an Indigenous Voice to Parliament (the Referendum) will be held on the 14th of October 2023. The Referendum will ask Australians if the ‘Voice’, a body providing advice to the...
www.hawkerbritton.com
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
The No campaign media using scare tactics? Why? They be in the majority. Is this media spin? Is it real or fake news? Is there any evidence? Do you believe everything they write? Is this a case of Diabetes satchels?
Siberian Kitten
Well-known member
I'm not sure I care about dirty tactics or Dutton or Albo or the Murdoch media or the Guardian.
They are all a distraction from the issue - which is the fact that there is a TON of Aboriginal representation and billions of dollars put to Aboriginal problems, but all the same problems remain.
Maybe Aboriginals would benefit from less government intervention? In my experience, that the less I have to do with government, the better my life tends to be.
They are all a distraction from the issue - which is the fact that there is a TON of Aboriginal representation and billions of dollars put to Aboriginal problems, but all the same problems remain.
Maybe Aboriginals would benefit from less government intervention? In my experience, that the less I have to do with government, the better my life tends to be.
Enmore_Tiger
Well-known member
I found the below from the Law Council of Australia and would be interested in your thoughts. I'm not aware that they are considered activist so possibly it's an objective position.
Constitutional amendment to provide for the Voice is just and legally sound - Law Council of Australia
Constitutional amendment to provide for the Voice is just and legally sound
lawcouncil.au
And yet there are others from the same legal council that say that it can’t rule out the high court siding with the voice , this is all albos fault, because he refuses to give full details , now if ur a fair person u will have to agree that no one can say what will happen should it get up , so on that note u got to vote NO . I want a better out come for the people out in the outback but this will only help the activists who have already made a great living out of the misery of the people in need .
Tucker
Well-known member
I am aware of most of that. There are many questions though.Yeah man, I think everyone is a bit disappointed
with the vagueness & lack of clarity on key points.
Pretty good summary of everything. Feel free
to have a read and discect/criticise it. Enjoying
this conversation from both sides of the ledger
An invitation: The Uluru Statement from the Heart. The 2023 Voice Referendum - Hawker Britton
Speaking on the lands of the Kaurna people, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese today announced that the 2023 Referendum on an Indigenous Voice to Parliament (the Referendum) will be held on the 14th of October 2023. The Referendum will ask Australians if the ‘Voice’, a body providing advice to the...www.hawkerbritton.com
This paper glosses over what the Referendum Council achieved.
The council members: https://www.referendumcouncil.org.a...ppendix A - Referendum Council Membership.pdf
Held a consultation process in the form of a series of First Nations Regional Dialogues over a 6 month period in the following centres:
9-11 December 2016 - Hobart
10-12 February 2017 - Broome
17-19 February 2017 - Dubbo
22-24 February 2017 - Darwin
3-5 March 2017 - Perth
10-12 March 2017 - Sydney
17-19 March 2017 - Melbourne
24-26 March 2017 - Cairns
31 March - 2 April 2017 - Ross River
7-9 April 2017 - Adelaide
21-23 April 2017 - Brisbane
5-7 May 2017 - Torres Straight
10-12 May 2017 - Canberra
These meetings culminated with the National Convention at Uluru 23-26 May 2017. From these dialogues, the Uluru Statement from the Heart was constructed. After going to all this trouble, do people really believe that this highly credentialed and educated group of people, after consulting delegates from such a massive array of backgrounds and experiences, entering into dialogues and taking advice in dozens of different languages with elders and land councils all over this contry, only managed to come up with a 1 page document? Professor Megan Davis is on record stating it is 18 pages long and goes into detail for how Treaty will be brought about, how reparations will be sought and even how those reparations will be funded. Why are we being fed this line that it is only 1 page long?
We now have 2 Policy and Stakeholder Consultation Advisory Bodies - including a lot of the members which did not serve on the Referendum Council. These bodies are called the The Referendum Working Group and the Referendum Engagement Group and the members were all appointed by Linda Burney.
The Referendum Working Group consists of 21 paid members who "will provide advice to Government on successfully implementing a referendum within this term of Parliament on an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice enshrined in the Australian Constitution including timing to conduct a successful referendum, refining the proposed constitutional amendment and question, and the information on the Voice necessary for a successful referendum."
The Referendum Engagement Group consists of 61 paid members which "includes the Referendum Working Group members as well as additional people from across the country including representatives from land councils, local governments and community-controlled organisations. They will provide advice about building community understanding, awareness and support for the referendum."
All these people - these passionate, experienced, educated, dedicated people...all supported by the public purse...for nearly a full year now...cannot come up with a coherant blue print for how certain aspects of the Voice will be conducted. Why are they pushing so hard to get it through this year when they are clearly not ready?
The Voice will give independant advice to the Parliament and the Government
These representations will go through a research and development phase and will be made proactively by this body, in response to requests by the Parliament and Executive Government as they move forward on the development of proposed laws and policies.
How long will they be given to make their representations?
There are 250 mobs and over a thousand clans in this country the consultation process will surely delay the work of Governments?
How many workers are required in this body to thoroughly research and present proactive representations?
Will they be using contractors? If so, what is the process for awarding contracts?
How much will this all cost?
The Voice will be chosen by Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander people based upon wishes of local communititiesMembers of the Voice will not be appointed by the Executive Government, but by Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander Communities, abiding by the wishes of local communities and would be determined through the post-referendum process.
How many representative areas are there?
Is there a cap on Voice membership?
Will there be Indigenous elections for these positions?
Membership is for a fixed period of time. What is it?
Can members be removed ahead of this fixed period?
What happens when a member dies?
Why are these details to be determined post referendum?
The Voice will be representative of Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander communities, gender balanced and include youthMembers will conform to the 3 part test for authenticity and will be chosen from the States, Territories and Torres Straight Isands - remote and mainland. Membership will be gender balanced at national level.
I assume the 3 part test refers to the Proof of Aboriginality as detailed in the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres StraightIslander Studies (AIATSIS). This details:
- being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent
- identifying as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person
- being accepted as such by the community in which you live, or formerly lived.
Is this process working currently?
There seems to be a rise in fraudulant claims of Aboriginality already...do they expect this to get worse?
Most Aboriginal societies operate under a matriarchy. Why is there a need to balance gender representation when it has operated this way for 60 millenia?
Will this result in lesser value candidates for membership?
The Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory do not count as states for the Majority of States count in the referendum. Will this lead to lesser representation for Voice membership?
Same outcome for the Torres Straight Islanders?
How many remote Torres Straight Islanders will be eligible?
What is the breakdown in Voice membership pertaining to location? cities v rural v remote?
I have many more questions, but you get the idea...
- Status
Staff online
-
DempsModerator
Members online
- Tigerstigerstigers
- LARDS
- Speed2burn
- weststigerman
- cochise
- Tigerjan
- Halbrowne61
- Tiger-ferret
- upthetigers
- Westie
- gregjm87
- TheKhan
- Dr_Ice
- coivtny
- Ben hood
- Le Tiger
- Sully
- Wagga_Tiger
- Muffstar
- Tigergj
- Batmans Parents
- TSP
- WhiTe Tiger
- Rock Hopper Steve
- Tiger_Talk
- tigahhh
- Blooey
- innsaneink
- diedpretty
- Finger
- Demps
- weststigers
- cheeko
- hammertime
- GNR4LIFE
- watersider
- DrewPeacock
- clokan
- 4jtigers
- Rusty