Luckily on the entire Sydney water front one party which you would think would have every single seat, doesn't has a single seat. Melbourne is a backwater.

Disclaimer, I own 3 water front properties.

Wawt, your recent effort is bovine excrement personified. The inescapable fact is that the opposition's  policies did not resonate with the silent majority, note the word majority.

Crying in your caviar will not make it taste any better.

rgren2 wrote:

---

Hopefully not to be recycled. ;)

---

I think you may need to read up on what "preferential voting" is Magnarc, old chap.

It means that the candidate was preferred by the electorate. It has nothing to do with who gets the most primary votes as your second choice also counts. Just because one only gets 35% of the primary vote does not mean the majority don't want that person elected. Of the remaining 65%, if the majority place that candidate second on the ballot then that candidate is elected.

In the Senate where there is proportional representation, each candidate only has to reach a quota of about 14% then the votes apply to the next on the party list and so on. Some senators that may be third or fourth on the list have been elected with just a handful of votes.

That is the reason why "first past the post" system is unfair. If you have, for example, 100 people voting in an election and 39 favour one candidate and another attracts 40 votes, then the person who attracted 40 votes would be successful even though 60 people didn't want that person. With preferential voting, the second choice comes into play. Obviously, if one candidate gets over 50% of the primary or first vote, there is no need to go to preferences, that candidate has been successful.