The Australian election makes the Daily Show

[Alexander's Horse]

It keeps getting nuttier, the Opposition leader said this week one of his candidates had "sex appeal", sparking another furore.

And the footy finals are approaching so very few people give a toss anyway, one of the most unengaging election campaigns we've had for a long time. It hardly makes the headlines except when candidates screw up.

[Sava]

I saw this.

I like the bit about the lady who is like Sarah Palin.

[Alexander's Horse]

oh yeah, she was great, I'm sorry she had the good sense at least to step down.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

yes!

[regexcellent]

So who's probably going to win?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

So who's probably going to win?

People outside of Australia who enjoy a good joke.

[Alexander's Horse]

So who's probably going to win?

The Opposition Liberal-National coalition will probably win (Repub equivalents). They need 75 seats out of 150 in the lower house. They already have 72 and two will fall to them almost automatically with the retirement of a couple of maverick right wingers, plus other 1 guy is an ex-National party independent, which already gives them 75 going into the election if they hold all their seats.

Polls are currently firm at 52-48 in favour of the Opposition, so they may pick up seats to offset any losses. Many seats are within a 1-2% margin and the current government hasn't won an opinion poll since it was formed, over three years ago. Swings to the government are very rare although they'll probably pick up a seat or two in the Prime Minister's home state. He is a retread, just re-appointed and has boosted the government's chances but probably not enough.

Part of the public disinterest is over 70% of Australian believe the Opposition will win whatever happens, and the public usually gets this question right. So they have switched off politics and are enjoying the footy. The wackiness is partly about the media trying not to die of boredom on the campaign trail. if the Government wins it complete the greatest political comeback in Australian political history for the PM, but seems unlikely three weeks out from the polls.

[Zevico]

What AH said. And as a Young Liberal I couldn't be more pleased. Well, if the Liberals actually ran as Classical Liberals, rather than fiscally responsible Welfare Statists, I'd be more pleased. But I'll take what I can get.

[Hauldren Collider]

Does this mean Australia will become more or less of a nanny state?

[Alexander's Horse]

I hope less Hauldren, I hate the nanny state.

[Snotty]

As soon as I saw the news that that woman had been ousted, I called it that the government was going down. Rats deserting the sinking ship and all.

[Zevico]

Does this mean Australia will become more or less of a nanny state?

Less. But it's fair to say that the Liberals promise a smaller nanny state rather than a classical liberal state much as the Republicans promise the same. The word "Liberal" in Australia means classical liberal, or it refers to the party which is right of centre. But gosh we're pitching for the disaffected lefties with some of our wilder spending promises. We've accepted education reforms which consist entirely of throwing more money at bureaucrats just because it would be too much trouble to remind people that more spending does not always make for a better education. Renewable energy targets for the carbon dioxide emissions alarmists will drive up energy prices. We're promising less waste, but we could do so much better.

(For whatever reason the American left successfully redefined liberal to mean left wing, which is an inversion worthy of the Newspeak dictionary as far as I'm concerned.)

[Hauldren Collider]

(For whatever reason the American left successfully redefined liberal to mean left wing, which is an inversion worthy of the Newspeak dictionary as far as I'm concerned.)

Yes, this inversion is very annoying, I agree. The Democratic party is not liberal in any traditional sense of the word.

[giblets]

Liberalism first became a distinct political movement during the Age of Enlightenment, when it became popular among philosophers and economists in the Western world. Liberalism rejected the notions, common at the time, of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings. The 17th century philosopher John Locke is often credited with founding liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition. Locke argued that each man has a natural right to life, liberty and property[9] and according to the social contract, governments must not violate these rights. Liberals opposed traditional conservatism and sought to replace absolutism in government with democracy and/or republicanism and the rule of law.

hurr durr you linked to wikipedia!!!!1

Democrats love hereditary privilege, state religions, and absolute monarchs that rule by divine right.

[Zevico]

No one said Democrats are absolute monarchists. Classical liberals believe that Locke's vision acts as a constraining force against the power and influence of government. Democrats don't believe that governmental powers ought to be constrained in this way. Nor do some but not all Republicans. Some Republicans and Australian Liberals accept this vision as basically true. That is the difference.