Greens leader Adam Bandt projected to lose in Melbourne, leaving party without its captain

[+] Ilandar@lemm.ee 16 points 2 months ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 10 points 2 months ago (3 children)

She's also really strongly hated by a lot of the non-Greens population.

As a Queenslander, my support would be for Larissa Waters, partly because fuck yeah Qld, but also because her public image is much more positive.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 6 points 2 months ago

Yes, but they are never voting for greens anyway. She is divisive, more because she’s ruffled feathers and had campaigns against her. She is competent and recognisable.

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago

Yeah I think she has that Greta thunberg divisive reaction.

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 15 points 2 months ago

Well, bugger.

[–] maniacalmanicmania@aussie.zone 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm out of the loop on Greens party structure. The below is from Wikipedia:

On Saturday 12 November 2005 at the national conference in Hobart, the Australian Greens abandoned their long-standing tradition of having no official leader and approved a process whereby a parliamentary leader could be elected by the Greens Parliamentary Party Room.

Are there no other leadership structures?

[–] erici@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 months ago

Members get to vote for candidates in preselections and for the state council and other positions, but the MPs elect the leader.

[–] Budama25@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

2 Leaders in 1 election? Madre Mia!

[–] skribe@aussie.zone 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Three if Jacqui loses her senate seat too.

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What's going on in this electorate?

He had a reasonable margin last go round?

[+] Ilandar@lemm.ee 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] threeduck@aussie.zone 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The Mrs says it's not because of gerrymandering, but simple redistricting due to population changes, but surely whoever was in charge knew, right?

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 months ago

It only went from a 10.2% margin down to 6.5% with the redistribution, so it's not like they turned it into a marginal seat or anything. Basically every time you have a group of people redrawing electorates, you're going to have gerrymandering of some sort, but you can choose to regulate it in a number of ways. The AEC's mandate is to try and reduce the incumbent's margin where they can, rather than entrench them further, within the confines of averaging out the population with neighbouring electorates.

So, to answer your question, yes they absolutely knew what they were doing, but that wasn't exactly a secret at all. Pushing seats to be as marginal as possible rather than favouring incumbents, giving opponents a fair go at winning it, is probably the best outcome we could ask from an independent redistribution committee in my opinion.

Australian Politics

Rules

Recommended and Related Communities

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.