TOPIC:

wrote:

All good points DD. The one thing I like about the US system is that a President can appoint experts to the position of secretary whereas here it's from party hacks. For instance, Janet Yellen is Secretary of the Treasury who was previously Chairperson of the Federal Reserve. Here we appoint Treasurers with little or no experience who rely almost entirely on departmental advice. IMO it's much better to have subject matter experts as Ministers than someone from inside the governing party with little or no experience or expertise.

In theory it is possible to appoint people with the necessary expertise.  However, there is a but and it is a big but.  Those nominated need to be confirmed in the USA Senate and therefore such nominees may not be confirmed.  Secondly, some nominees do not have such expertise.  For example, Ben Carson was appointed by Trump as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.. Carson is a retired neurosurgeon and author.  I believe he was a neurosurgeon of note but hardly the qualifications to head Housing and Urban Development.  

I am sure there are several more examples from both sides that could be cited.

wrote:

wrote:

Republic?  No way.  We’d end up like the corrupt and “greatest country in the worrrllld”.  Who in their right mind wants that?

There is no serious suggestion that an Australian Republic would be in any way similar to that of the USA.   The changes would be minimal by replacing the King or Queen and the GG with an Australian President whose powers would be that of the current GG.  It would also mean that it would be possible to have a Catholic Australian head of state.  
 

You are utterly and completely wrong on that' as a huge chunk of republicans favour the directly elected presidential style of the US, and its been the reason for the chronic division in the failed oz republic movement, there are many who point blank refuse to have politicians appoint a new head of state.

We have had a numerous Catholic GGs already and Jews as well, and there is a very strong Legal argument that the GG is actually the Australian head of State and the Monarch is "Sovereign" with no actual real power.

 

wrote:

Like the hatchet job the media have done on Porter.
 

Yep utterly disgracfell , the divredited Louise Milligan and her fabriacted criminal cases strikes again.

Peak ABC and shows just how much politcal power they have - people moan about Murdoch, but the ABC take it to a whole tax payer funded new leavel.

wrote:

Republic?  No way.  We’d end up like the corrupt and “greatest country in the worrrllld”.  Who in their right mind wants that??
 

Spot on.

wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

Republic?  No way.  We’d end up like the corrupt and “greatest country in the worrrllld”.  Who in their right mind wants that?

There is no serious suggestion that an Australian Republic would be in any way similar to that of the USA.   The changes would be minimal by replacing the King or Queen and the GG with an Australian President whose powers would be that of the current GG.  It would also mean that it would be possible to have a Catholic Australian head of state.  


 

You are utterly and completely wrong on that' as a huge chunk of republicans favour the directly elected presidential style of the US, and its been the reason for the chronic division in the failed oz republic movement, there are many who point blank refuse to have politicians appoint a new head of state.

We have had a numerous Catholic GGs already and Jews as well, and there is a very strong Legal argument that the GG is actually the Australian head of State and the Monarch is "Sovereign" with no actual real power.



 

Baz what I don't like about the current system is the parties hand pick who they want to lead them behind closed doors through backroom deals between the factions and they prop him or her up and say here, vote for him or her.

I like the US system where whoever wants to throw their hat in the ring has to go out there and earn it by putting themselves out there in rallies and convince their party members, not just their political party members they are the best candidate. We get to see what they stand for warts and all before we get to the election.

The US doesn't remove their president because a few polls aren't going their way. For instance, with the recent Liberal party change of leadership wouldn't you have liked to see Kirkup perform under pressure in debates with your boy Nalder, Le Strange and others who might think they are leadership material? If that happened I don't think Kirkup would be the leader of the opposition now.

wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

Republic?  No way.  We’d end up like the corrupt and “greatest country in the worrrllld”.  Who in their right mind wants that?

There is no serious suggestion that an Australian Republic would be in any way similar to that of the USA.   The changes would be minimal by replacing the King or Queen and the GG with an Australian President whose powers would be that of the current GG.  It would also mean that it would be possible to have a Catholic Australian head of state.  

 

You are utterly and completely wrong on that' as a huge chunk of republicans favour the directly elected presidential style of the US, and its been the reason for the chronic division in the failed oz republic movement, there are many who point blank refuse to have politicians appoint a new head of state.

We have had a numerous Catholic GGs already and Jews as well, and there is a very strong Legal argument that the GG is actually the Australian head of State and the Monarch is "Sovereign" with no actual real power.


 

The GG is not our head of state.  See link below from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade::

1.1 Head of State and Governor-General | Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (dfat.gov.au)

With respect to the division in those who would like an Australian Republic, I repeat there is no serious suggestion that Australia should adopt a USA style Republic.  Anyone who thinks that any referendum to change the Australian constitution to adopt a USA style Republic would gain a majority of voters and a majority of states is living in an alternate universe totally removed from reality.

wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

Republic?  No way.  We’d end up like the corrupt and “greatest country in the worrrllld”.  Who in their right mind wants that?

There is no serious suggestion that an Australian Republic would be in any way similar to that of the USA.   The changes would be minimal by replacing the King or Queen and the GG with an Australian President whose powers would be that of the current GG.  It would also mean that it would be possible to have a Catholic Australian head of state.  



 

You are utterly and completely wrong on that' as a huge chunk of republicans favour the directly elected presidential style of the US, and its been the reason for the chronic division in the failed oz republic movement, there are many who point blank refuse to have politicians appoint a new head of state.

We have had a numerous Catholic GGs already and Jews as well, and there is a very strong Legal argument that the GG is actually the Australian head of State and the Monarch is "Sovereign" with no actual real power.




 

Baz what I don't like about the current system is the parties hand pick who they want to lead them behind closed doors through backroom deals between the factions and they prop him or her up and say here, vote for him or her.

I like the US system where whoever wants to throw their hat in the ring has to go out there and earn it by putting themselves out there in rallies and convince their party members, not just their political party members they are the best candidate. We get to see what they stand for warts and all before we get to the election.

The US doesn't remove their president because a few polls aren't going their way. For instance, with the recent Liberal party change of leadership wouldn't you have liked to see Kirkup perform under pressure in debates with your boy Nalder, Le Strange and others who might think they are leadership material? If that happened I don't think Kirkup would be the leader of the opposition now.

I had a quick search of how much was spent on the USA 2020 Presidential election campaign.  Figures around $6.6 (US) billion are quoted.  To provide a pro rata figure for Australia that would equate to around $520 (US) million.  

wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

Republic?  No way.  We’d end up like the corrupt and “greatest country in the worrrllld”.  Who in their right mind wants that?

There is no serious suggestion that an Australian Republic would be in any way similar to that of the USA.   The changes would be minimal by replacing the King or Queen and the GG with an Australian President whose powers would be that of the current GG.  It would also mean that it would be possible to have a Catholic Australian head of state.  


 

You are utterly and completely wrong on that' as a huge chunk of republicans favour the directly elected presidential style of the US, and its been the reason for the chronic division in the failed oz republic movement, there are many who point blank refuse to have politicians appoint a new head of state.

We have had a numerous Catholic GGs already and Jews as well, and there is a very strong Legal argument that the GG is actually the Australian head of State and the Monarch is "Sovereign" with no actual real power.



 

The GG is not our head of state.  See link below from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade::

1.1 Head of State and Governor-General | Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (dfat.gov.au)

With respect to the division in those who would like an Australian Republic, I repeat there is no serious suggestion that Australia should adopt a USA style Republic.  Anyone who thinks that any referendum to change the Australian constitution to adopt a USA style Republic would gain a majority of voters and a majority of states is living in an alternate universe totally removed from reality.
 

The role of the Governor-General | Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia (gg.gov.au)

As stated the GG is the effective head of state.

Sorry Swan - Most Republicans support the direct election US style which is why the referedum failed in EVERY state,

wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

Republic?  No way.  We’d end up like the corrupt and “greatest country in the worrrllld”.  Who in their right mind wants that?

There is no serious suggestion that an Australian Republic would be in any way similar to that of the USA.   The changes would be minimal by replacing the King or Queen and the GG with an Australian President whose powers would be that of the current GG.  It would also mean that it would be possible to have a Catholic Australian head of state.  



 

You are utterly and completely wrong on that' as a huge chunk of republicans favour the directly elected presidential style of the US, and its been the reason for the chronic division in the failed oz republic movement, there are many who point blank refuse to have politicians appoint a new head of state.

We have had a numerous Catholic GGs already and Jews as well, and there is a very strong Legal argument that the GG is actually the Australian head of State and the Monarch is "Sovereign" with no actual real power.




 

Baz what I don't like about the current system is the parties hand pick who they want to lead them behind closed doors through backroom deals between the factions and they prop him or her up and say here, vote for him or her.

I like the US system where whoever wants to throw their hat in the ring has to go out there and earn it by putting themselves out there in rallies and convince their party members, not just their political party members they are the best candidate. We get to see what they stand for warts and all before we get to the election.

The US doesn't remove their president because a few polls aren't going their way. For instance, with the recent Liberal party change of leadership wouldn't you have liked to see Kirkup perform under pressure in debates with your boy Nalder, Le Strange and others who might think they are leadership material? If that happened I don't think Kirkup would be the leader of the opposition now.
 

You dont vote for PM you vote for your local member, its head of Government, so its up to the MPs to pick their leader, the good thing is the power is much more spread, the executive power is not concentrated in one spot like a republic, the other thing is if you are stuck with a crap leader there is no way of getting rid of them, which is a nightmare the us has been through more than once,  on the flip side a really good one can only serve a limited period, so there would be no Menzies, Howards or the like, most crap PMs get the flick for a reason the good once survive.

Bazza post=201584

wrote:

Bazza post=201576

wrote:

wrote:

Republic?  No way.  We’d end up like the corrupt and “greatest country in the worrrllld”.  Who in their right mind wants that?

There is no serious suggestion that an Australian Republic would be in any way similar to that of the USA.   The changes would be minimal by replacing the King or Queen and the GG with an Australian President whose powers would be that of the current GG.  It would also mean that it would be possible to have a Catholic Australian head of state.  




 

You are utterly and completely wrong on that' as a huge chunk of republicans favour the directly elected presidential style of the US, and its been the reason for the chronic division in the failed oz republic movement, there are many who point blank refuse to have politicians appoint a new head of state.

We have had a numerous Catholic GGs already and Jews as well, and there is a very strong Legal argument that the GG is actually the Australian head of State and the Monarch is "Sovereign" with no actual real power.




 

Baz what I don't like about the current system is the parties hand pick who they want to lead them behind closed doors through backroom deals between the factions and they prop him or her up and say here, vote for him or her.

I like the US system where whoever wants to throw their hat in the ring has to go out there and earn it by putting themselves out there in rallies and convince their party members, not just their political party members they are the best candidate. We get to see what they stand for warts and all before we get to the election.

The US doesn't remove their president because a few polls aren't going their way. For instance, with the recent Liberal party change of leadership wouldn't you have liked to see Kirkup perform under pressure in debates with your boy Nalder, Le Strange and others who might think they are leadership material? If that happened I don't think Kirkup would be the leader of the opposition now.

 

You dont vote for PM you vote for your local member, its head of Government, so its up to the MPs to pick their leader, the good thing is the power is much more spread, the executive power is not concentrated in one spot like a republic, the other thing is if you are stuck with a crap leader there is no way of getting rid of them, which is a nightmare the us has been through more than once,  on the flip side a really good one can only serve a limited period, so there would be no Menzies, Howards or the like, most crap PMs get the flick for a reason the good once survive.

For me personally I usually vote for the Party/Leader I want. They are the ones that make the big decisions that impact us the most. In this instance at the current state election I voted for my local member because I like her, she is fighting for the local residents on local issues and I am not a fan of Michelle Roberts who is obsessed with screwing motorists with speed cameras, removed radar detectors (which I stopped using anyway), got rid of daily news reports of Speed Camera locations and has tried no doubt to stop the Waze app from reporting camera locations. I think she leaned on them to remove the Speed Camera button because they removed it but can still report Police. 

Plus I think Mark McGowan and 1 Metre Rita hae become cocky arrogant shits and the opposition needs every vote they can get.