Remember "Chemestry is my SHITe"? Yeah, this is a semi-regular thing now. Juq writes it up, I edit/fix/embed it up and then post it. Spondored by "Breezy™", made by Xykpgyagwyawgy™. Enjoy!

---

New thing, for now: Australian Federal Elections 2016.

So I thought about naming the name of this to be "Elections 2016", just to spite those Americans who think the only elections in the world are held in America. But then I chose against it; I didn't want to be so petty. So what is Australia? Well, it's a pretty weird island. Right now, it's the coldest bit of the year for them, but they don't actually celebrate Christmas, most of them, since there's no snow to do so. That's why irreligion (being agnostic or godless) is so popular in Australia: 58% Australians are irreligous (for comparison: 39% Americans; 90% China; 23% India). And so God chose to curse Australia with no snow. Well, he wasn't cruel enough to do that, actually, but *mostly no snow. Melbourne celebrates Christmas every 5 years, so that they have snow, while Syndey, they never have celebrated Christmas, and they won't in the new times for sure, thanks to global warming.


The Sydney operahouse, one of the borough's most hallmark buildings. Sydney holds 4.9 million folk, roughly 1/6 every Australian lives in Sydney. But it's cursed, don't let it fool you. It's never had recorded snowfall; it's record low temperate is 2.1*C. I mean, hot damn, literally.

So who is running in this election? Let's talk about who's in now, first. The last election was September 2013. Now, the ruling party is in a block, which is basically an alliance of politic parties in order to get a good majority.

• Coalition: this is the block who's ruling the government right now. They hold 90/150 seats in the Representative House and 33/76 (relative majority) in the Senate. They're a band of 4, eh, middle-right parties.
  
  • Liberal. 58/90 seats in the Coalition in the Represntative House and 23/33 Coalition seats in the Senate, so they mostly have the last say on what goes. Their name is actually a big misnomer, since they're leading the land in a conservative way: freer economy, but bigger overall government. Their leader is the now Australian prime minister (leader), Malcolm Turnbull. He's actually super rich, and somewhat self-made: he got lucky in the .com bubble. In the past, this party was the main strength for the Red Hunt in Australia, being very antisocialist, and began Australia's intervention in the Vietnam war. They're also notable for giving the indigenous Australians civil rights. They get their biggest support from West Australia state.
    
  • Liberal Nationalist. They've 22/90 Coalition seats in the Representative House and 6/33 Coalition seats in the Senate. Their thoughts are mostly like the Liberal party, but they're more clearly conservative. Their leader, T. Nicholls, used to be the Treasurer of Queensland, and they get most their upholding from Queensland.
    
  • National. They've 9/90 Coalition seats in the Representative House and 3/33 Coalition seats in the Senate. They are often called by their upholders as the Nats. In the German tongue, Nazi is spoken as "Natsi"... but anyhow, it's in the past tried to get the farmer's and backwood folk's vote, and more broadly, they say that they try to give a voice to Australians who don't live in the big boroughs (about 64% in Australia's 24 million big population live in its 5 biggest boroughs, respectively from biggest to smallest: Sydeny, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide). They used to be a bigger and better supported party, but the boroughing of Australia and the switching of farmer's votes from them to independent candidates has hurt them. The party is kind of "farmer socialism", but is definitely for capitalism in some sites, and is hated by environmentalists. Their leader, B. Joyce, is the Deputy Prime Minister, which means that he would take over if the prime minister died. They get most of their upholding from New South Wales.
    
  • Country Liberal. They've 1/90 Coalition seats in the Representative House and 1/33 Coalition seats in the Senate. They're very for indigenous Australian development and for North Land statehood, and are somewhat conservative. Their leader, A. Giles is Chief Minister of North Land.
  
  
• Work. They actually like to call themselves "Labour" since less folk understand what it means, as, let's be frank, who'd vote for the party that promises more work? Anyhow, they're the second biggest team (of 1), holding 55/150 seats in the Representative House and 25/76 in the Senate. They call themselves "Democratic Socialist", however, they're mainly just for passive anti-monopolisation deeds, and to keep things competitive. So I guess kind of liberal (actually). Their leader, B. Shorten, was the old Teaching Minister. Their biggest fans are in the Capital Land, so Canberra and Fraser, where they won in 2013 (42.9%).
  
• Green. Their party's hues are actually red. Nah, just kidding, that'd be faffed up if it was true. They've a whopping 1/150 seats in the Representative House, despite getting 8.7% the vote (8.7% of 150 is 13) in 2013, but do have a better 10/76 seats in the Senate. This clinks like a great party to me, they say their 4 pillars of the party stance is social justice (whatever that means, I don't think it's good, but whatever), sustainability (clean/alternate energies), more grassroots folkdom, and peace. Although, take all these with a grain of salt, I mean, they even upheld the 2011 year of dread in Libya. But they were against the Gulf War (which Australia was dragged into by the Work party), the Afghanistan War (dragged in by the Coalition), and the Iraq War (again, Coalition), so heed them a bit. But less broadly, they do uphold some kind of phasing out of cruel instituions like circa and zoos, but are against core strength (they've actually historically been the major strength in Australia fighting against core weapons) and for more oversight on waterelectricity. They're also for raising taxes on the rich so ehh, but more weightily, they're against Australia's sillily cruel detention programmes for immigrations and are for immigration and are for testing legalisation of drugs in Australia. Their leader, R. Natale, is a Victorian senator. Their biggest upholding is in the Capital Land.
  
• Family First. 1/76 seats in Senate, 0/150 in the Representative House. This party is actually kind of free; they are against the Pacific Answer (sending Australian asylom seekers to islands in Sealand to be processed and held there indefinitely), they support loads of gainknacking programmes for folk, and they're for curbing what they call "welfare reliance". So, kind of like libertarians, but with some Keynesianism, and evidently very big on family values: against abortion (in most cases), against selfkill, against gay marriage and other kinds of that, and against surrogacy in all cases. So uh, not really sure where to put it, I'd say it's kind of socialist, but barely. All these parties are pretty much in the middle. Anyhow, Family First party's leader, B. Day, is a senator for South Australia state, and the party gets most of its upholding from that state.
  
• Some other small parties, making up 4/76 in Senate and 3 independent seats making the leaf, and in the Representative House, respectively, 2/150 and 2/150. These parties are going to be think it a win if they even manage to stay in parliament at all.
  
  
  This is the now prime minister of Australia, (L), Malcolm Turnbull. I want to like him, he kind of has a cool name, but his policies are crap and his forehead you could use as a markerboard to teach phys with, and his pointy ears...I'm going to be frank, I really hate goblins, call me a racist, but I think they're ruining my country and internet.
  
  Now, how does the election go? Well, Australia actually mandates voting for all grownups (+18 years) since 1924, and fines if you don't, so naturally, turnout is high. Now, the two houses get their votes in different ways. The Representative House wields sudden-runoff voting, which as I understand, means that they rank their picks instead of one pick, and also only pick candidates that have over 50% support. If they don't, then they liquidate the candidate with the lowest muchness of votes and gainspread his votes equally amongst the candidates, and do that again until a candidate does have 50+% support. The Australian Representative House's job is mainly putting forth new hints and tips for how the government can make things better, or telling the government to stop making things worse, usually during Frain Time. Now, the Senate, it gets its votes wielding a Single Transferable Vote and does it kind of unfolkdomishly, doing it by "contsituencies", as they're called. Anyhow, and so it's just another vote where the voter picks his candidates best to worst, and if the most liked candidate doesn't get full majority, then the vote is transferred to the next, and so on until someone gets full majority. And in short, the Senate is a bit stronger than the Representative House, though not by much.
  
  
  In Australia, so not to influence voters in any bad bias, they randomly pick the order the parties will be shown by having someone blindfolded pick.
  
  Now, a synopse.

(top is good, bottom is bad)

Green:
*Against the draft.
*Against airtrikes on Choson to take out their core weapons.
*Against American military bases in Australia.
*Against overthrowing the S.A.R. president, Bashar Assad.
*For more nationalisation of healthcare.
---


Work:
*Against the draft.
*Against airtrikes on Choson to take out their core weapons.
*Against American military bases in Australia.
*Against overthrowing the S.A.R. president, Bashar Assad.
*For more nationalisation of healthcare.
---


Coalition:
*Against the draft.
*Against overthrowing the S.A.R. president, Bashar Assad.
---
*Not against airtrikes on Choson to take out their core weapons, but wants a "diplomatic answer" more liked.
*For American military bases in Australia.
*For more privatisation of healthcare.



Family First:
*For more nationalisation of healthcare.
---
*For the draft for all eligible unworking or unstudent folk.
*For airstrikes on Choson to take out their core weapons.
*For American military bases in Australia, as long as it is a joint Australia-America base.
*For overthrowing the S.A.R. president, Bashar Assad, but only after Mashreeq is slain.


Canberra, Australia's capital borough. It was a planned borough, and started to really be developed in 1908, as a compromise between Sydney being capital borough and Melbourne being it. It became capital borough in 1927 (note: Australia still was not independent; it gained independence in 1931).

Synopse 2 (unowly stances, more detailled, between the three biggest parties):

Coalition (90/150 seats in RH; 33/76 in Sen.):
*For growing the muchness of foreign work visas given out.
*For letting universities choose their fees (no government-set caps).
*For the Chinese-Australian free trade agreement.
*For the sale of Australian land to foreign buyers as long as specifically permitted by the government.
*Against raising the minimal wage.
*Against disproportionately raising taxes on the wealthy (more than they already have been).
*Against building the National Broadband Network.
*For cutting public spending to lower debt.
*For testing those on welfare for drugs.
*Against ending the British Kingdom's strength in Australia.
*Against maternal leave payments being proportional to the mother's wage.
*For legalising homosexual marriages, as long as faithful buildings had the right to refuse marrying such folk.
---
*Not against air striking Choson to take out their core weapons, but more likes a diplomatic answer.
*For more privatisation of healthcare.
*For letting America put more military bases in Australia.
*For lowering foreign help spending.
*Against accepting any Syrian refugees.
*For building the Muckaty core waste facility.
*Against more environmental regulations.
*For totally banning Muslim immigration to Australia.
*Against decriminalising any drugs.
*For the export of live wildlife.
*For uncurbed government surveillance on the homelanders.
*For upholding the Egyptian government, not the Muslim brotherhood.
*Against accepting asylum-seeking folk coming by boat.
*Against letting felons (old and now) the right to vote.

Work (55/150 seats in RH; 25/76 in Sen.):
---
*For setting a cap of 40k $ (~30k USD) for university fees.
*Against any sale of Australian land to foreigners.
*For moderately raising the minimal wage.

Green (1/150 seats in RH; 10/76 in Sen.):
*For taking an active stance to stop overwhaling about the Earth.
*For legalising hemp for all purposes.
*For banning medic clins to charge more than one price for any deal (yes, this is what it sounds like; the grounds is so that medic clins would not be incentivised to give useless, resource-wasting and more dear medic deals to you. I kind of get the grounds for this, but not fully sure I agree).
---
*Against the Coal Seam Gas projects until more research has been done to make sure they're safe.
*For banning the making of GMOs.
*For government-paid universities.
*Against foreign buying of Australian land to foreigners, though for leases.
*Against the mining and export of uranium.
*For sharply raising the minimum wage.

Xykpgyagwyawgy™

TM

Darn, and I was just about to totally use that exact sequence of letters for a new brand of automobile.

Also, this is likely not the permanent name, but eh, just wanted to not make this a mundane name and so came up with "Shitomir Post" at the last sudden. What is Shitomir? It's a real town actually (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhytomyr), and while I don't live there, I go there regularly. It's called Zhytomyr in Ukrainian, but Germans know what's up: it's s---; so they named it Shitomir. So Shitomir has clearly influenced me, and I think I was inspired by Shitomir's buildings and past to, uh, write this bit, so this is just another incarnation of Shitomir if you think about it.

Also, back to In Front of the Macroscope - it's being worked on :) but needs more alcohol so far. It's at like 10% or something of what's needed.

Edited 6/24/2016 05:15:09