4 ms·
A wild guess: The most influential backers are Christians. They have the money to lend to the party so it can build effective marketing and political campaign t
by johnchristopher 11y ago
A wild guess: The most influential backers are Christians. They have the money to lend to the party so it can build effective marketing and political campaign to go after the rest of the voters.
- varjag 11y agoGiven that the majority of Australians are Christian it would indeed make sense that the most influential backers are Christians too. Probably been like that for a long time? Still there might be something in their campaigns that resonates with the views of the majority. One wouldn't imagine them consistently winning fair elections in predominantly Hindu or Muslim country, no matter the campaign spending.
- vacri 11y agoThe majority of Australians are secular. Take me: I'm from a family that's Church-of-England (C of E). I've been an atheist since at least 10 years old (first strong memory of it), yet the first time I filled out a census form, I ticked C of E because that was my family's religion. These days the religion question on the census form is the only contentious one on it, because of things just like this. Lots of people associate with a given religion but don't really practice it - churches in Australia are fighting falling attendance and graying congregations.
- chris_wot 11y agoThat's very much incorrect. Most Australians are agnostic.
- varjag 11y agoWell according to this: http://www.smh.com.au/national/is-australia-losing-its-religion-20150827-gj94ts.html http://www.smh.com.au/national/is-australia-losing-its-relig... ..while non-religious make up a fair portion of Aussies, most still identify as Christians.
- vacri 11y agoIf you scroll down a single comment, you'll see one from me pointing out at least one issue with the religion question on the census. Your own link shows another - the option for 'no religion' has historically been obfuscated or separated. Once upon a time, it didn't even exist. The whole point of your linked article is about how that question can be played with in order to fudge the results.
- TheOtherHobbes 11y agoMoney - conservative Christians don't usually cause trouble for corporations. Age - conservative retirement-age voters are far more likely to vote than the 18-30 demo. Networking - churches can, and do, bully-pulpit entire parishes. So policy is far further to the right than the population median.
- samizdatum 11y agoVoting is compulsory in Australia.
- tromac 11y agoOnly if you enrol, which is not compulsory.
- chris_wot 11y agoWrong. Enrollment is compulsory.
- johnchristopher 11y agoIs it actively enforced ?
- chris_wot 11y agoYup.
- vacri 11y agoYes, but not particularly harshly. The Electoral Commission's target is 95% of eligible voters enrolled, and it's currently at 93.5%. You are supposed to enrol at some time between your 18th birthday and the next election (which roll around every 3 years or so), so some of that non-enrolled percentage are folks who will do so shortly. A small amount of people are eligible to vote, but not capable, such as people with severe intellectual handicaps. In practice, most folks are enrolled. The penalty isn't particularly harsh ($20 first time missed a vote, $50 afterwards). I have a 40-year-old friend that's not enrolled, and as far as I'm aware, she has never been fined for it.