Tasmania had a fairly healthy 63.6% “Yes” vote for the survey (4th behind WA, Victoria and the ACT), although I’m not sure how things played out in individual seats.
I am going to be careful how I say this but if there was a public vote and those politicians go against there electorates vote wouldnt that make them a dictator or dictorlike qualities?
Were you trying to say “dicklike” qualities? 
1 Like
I’d admit I was wrong about that. That shouldn’t rule me about having anything to say politically.
Haha its what i should be saying. But it should have read dictatorlike qualities.
Or were you? :-p
It evens out when the regions which voted no have their representatives vote yes. It’s interesting that hasn’t been reported it’s all been about the hypocrisy and the evil if any MP or Senator chooses to vote no when their region said yes but there’s been absolutely no mention of the MP’s who will vote yes when their electorates voted no. I believe NSW and Western Sydney had a lot of these electorates.
As for the “delaying tactics” by Turnbull I think some people are just looking for reasons to complain about Turnbull. Had he not delayed Parliament with only one week of sitting left and it taken longer to pass through the Senate before going to the lower house where it would then have had very little time to go through or not make it through before being break then people would have been whinging about how incompetent he was and how terrible it was that he has failed and it now has to wait for next year etc… Instead he’s delayed Parliament by a week to allow it to pass the Senate which it only did on Wednesday afternoon when the week was half over but could have easily taken longer but now it’s just a matter of waiting a few extra days for it to go through the lower house. Since it’s taken this long, what’s a few extra days? Since Labor once again had several years in government to pass it but never did, since Labor decided to block the original Plebiscite idea which was what the Liberals went to the election with and many people voted for which led to the postal survey at the later end of the year. Why is it all Turnbull’s fault when it could have been done months or even years ago?
Interesting story though on news.com.au about how after SSM was made legal in America and UK the numbers of those couples getting married were well down on what was expected meaning that one of the more popular arguments for it which was the tourism $$$ has actually been a lot less than predicted.
Anyway, congratulations to all those who voted yes, I know I’ve said a lot over the past months in support of the traditional marriage view and overall with several issues during the campaigning which was bad from both sides but the people have spoken, all people have had the chance to be heard and it was well supported. Congratulations to those among the forum who decide to get married once it’s legal and I truly wish you a lifetime of happiness.
2 Likes
I agree though its a democracy. If a region said no then their representatives should be voting no in parliament. They represent that region. Their views should be modified to represent their views.
With that said are you sure those regions havent had their representatives say no? And if so which ones said yes against the peoples choice?
1 Like
You are very naive if you think the same sex vote is the reason for the break in parliament.
Pretty sure the ones in Western Sydney were in Labor seats where I thought they were all going to be voting yes. I haven’t checked if they were voting yes or no but to be honest I don’t really think it should matter now. The results are in and there’s clearly more members voting for yes so I don’t see why there still needs to be a constant witch hunt against the no voters as if to shame them.
Turnbull needs this to pass and he needs it to pass quickly if he has any chance of keeping his job. He’s ticking all the boxes to make sure the conservatives can’t stop it from passing before Christmas. He’s been a supporter of it all along so why wouldn’t he be wanting to ensure it passes quickly? Once this passes, Labor loses one of their big election winners and things even up between the two parties.
1 Like
Touche. Bloody spell correct on my phone. 
1 Like
It was the first thing the media covered straight after the vote. Both Newcorp and Fairfax talked about then moved on. I guess it’s not worth backing the losing side in the long run.
1 Like
Fair enough, I never heard a mention of it, I only ever heard the continuing “outrage” for if any people chose to vote no when their electorate had voted yes.
I’d say they are pitching their stories to the majority.
But does it really need to be mentioned though? Why continue focusing on negatives of the no voters when the vote has been run and won? There’s no need to continue shaming those who vote no or inciting the intolerance towards them. Surely now is the time to do the good news stories of it all.
I thought it was because of the banking royal commission being established
Yep, that and the citizenship saga and the loss of numbers and people threatening to cross the floor now that the majority is so fragile. There are several reasons.
The reason I bring it up is because politicians shouldnt be running their own agenda and are only a representative of an electorate. They are not dictators. If their electorate says they want something then they should be fighting for it.
1 Like
Disagree. If you do not feel your member isn’t representing your electorate whilst doing what’s best for your state or country’s best interests, then your recourse is to vote them out at the next election.