Animal Justice Party ACT

chewy14 said :

chewy14 said :

So what’s the issue?
…
If you’re too lazy to find out what a party actually stands for and who they’re preferencing then you get what you deserve.

The issue is that parties such as the AJP are trading on misrepresenting what they stand for, and are secretly set up to deliberately pervert voting. Imagine if some white supremacist group set up a party called “Free the Refugees Party” and fed preferences to the Coalition.

Ah that was my point. The Greens aren’t green, the Liberals aren’t liberal and Labor don’t support labour either. If you’re too silly to find out what they actually stand for then too bad for you.

But it’s not too bad for you (you being the lazy person not realizing what they’re voting for). It’s too bad for the rest of us. If people are too silly to put in the effort to find out what they’re voting for then they’re probably too ignorant to care when it’s all over.
It’s trickery, plain and simple. It’s like telling the retarded kid at school that you’ll give him your special pet rock if he gives you his LCM bars every day.

Roundhead89 said :

In a political forum online I brought up the issue of the Liberal Democrats saying that the Electoral Act forbids the registration of names which contain the names of other parties, and I asked how the name slipped thru. Someone replied that the other parties needed to object to another party name to get a complaint heard and upheld. Apparently the Liberal Party and Australian Democrats didn’t say anything and as a result the Liberal Democrats were able to stand under that name and as a result now have a senator in NSW.

…and of course there is the similar case of the Democratic Labour Party, which elected a Senator in Victoria at the 2010 election.

I’m somewhat sympathetic to this view – clearly the LDP benefit are attracting some voters thinking that they’re someone they’re not – but is it really fair if one group is allowed to claim exclusive use of generical political brands like “Democratic”, “Liberal”, “Labour” or “Socialist”? The LDP at least have a strong claim that their policies hew much closer to the Classical Liberal position than the Liberal Party of Australia.

farout said :

Ha ha. The preferences from the AJP decided the outcome of this one.
Count 13 saw 1,869 (1.18%) votes originally from Animal Justice Party distributed to Liberal (Zed SESELJA) via preference 21.

Had these votes been directed to the Greens instead, Simon would have got 53,696 which would put him over the line.

Moral of the story: Don’t mess with the AJP!

I hope the AJP is suitably ashamed that its officers’ childish and petulant behaviour has directly resulted in one less Greens senator than we otherwise would have.

But then again, they are essentially irrational morons who probably are incapable of the self-awareness necessary to experience shame.

farout said :

Ha ha. The preferences from the AJP decided the outcome of this one.
Count 13 saw 1,869 (1.18%) votes originally from Animal Justice Party distributed to Liberal (Zed SESELJA) via preference 21.

Had these votes been directed to the Greens instead, Simon would have got 53,696 which would put him over the line.

Moral of the story: Don’t mess with the AJP!

The Senate voting system urgently needs reform to lock fringe micro-parties out. It is a disgrace that they can clog up the senate and frustrate an elected government. In NSW a party was actually able to use the name of not one but two other parties (Liberal Democrats), hijack the vote, be placed at the top of a ballot paper with 110 candidates and be elected. We need a system like the Victorian upper house with multi member electorates and a far stricter criteria for party registration and the naming of parties.

In a political forum online I brought up the issue of the Liberal Democrats saying that the Electoral Act forbids the registration of names which contain the names of other parties, and I asked how the name slipped thru. Someone replied that the other parties needed to object to another party name to get a complaint heard and upheld. Apparently the Liberal Party and Australian Democrats didn’t say anything and as a result the Liberal Democrats were able to stand under that name and as a result now have a senator in NSW.

farout said :

Ha ha. The preferences from the AJP decided the outcome of this one.
Count 13 saw 1,869 (1.18%) votes originally from Animal Justice Party distributed to Liberal (Zed SESELJA) via preference 21.

Had these votes been directed to the Greens instead, Simon would have got 53,696 which would put him over the line.

Moral of the story: Don’t mess with the AJP!

no, that is a prediction, not yet a fact. the prediction is based on everyone voting above the line, but they did not.

IP

Also, I have to give a special mention to the Canberra TImes for once against screwing up their election coverage. They ran a headline saying Sheikh looked set to get the seat, followed by a headline saying Seslja in a close fight, to headline now that he’s making ground. Can these people stop jumping the gun?

You can’t necessary link animal welfare with gay marriage and global warming, so I don’t see where you could automatically assume preferences should go from one to another. I also considered voting them first knowing that, although obviously wouldn’t get a seat, the preference would flow where I ultimately would have preferred it. You can’t assume all voters are idiots and didn’t understand this – particularly when our senate ballot is relatively easy to vote below the link, unlike NSW/VIC. Counting is still under way, so it’s likely Zed will survive, but not guaranteed. I expect Sheikh, like the opportunist he is, to re-join the Labor party after the national slump in the Greens vote.

farout said :

Ha ha. The preferences from the AJP decided the outcome of this one.
Count 13 saw 1,869 (1.18%) votes originally from Animal Justice Party distributed to Liberal (Zed SESELJA) via preference 21.

Had these votes been directed to the Greens instead, Simon would have got 53,696 which would put him over the line.

Moral of the story: Don’t mess with the AJP!

People, as it clearly says on the ABC website, their Senate results page shows projections based on votes so far and the ABC’s own algorithms. They are not actual results.

The Canberra and Fraser divisions haven’t updated their Senate numbers since 1am this morning and as far I know, they haven’t finished the first preferences yet.

If you want the real numbers, use the AEC data.

farout said :

Ha ha. The preferences from the AJP decided the outcome of this one.
Count 13 saw 1,869 (1.18%) votes originally from Animal Justice Party distributed to Liberal (Zed SESELJA) via preference 21.

Had these votes been directed to the Greens instead, Simon would have got 53,696 which would put him over the line.

Moral of the story: Don’t mess with the AJP!

Don’t you mean “Don’t vote for the AJP!”?

davo101 said :

poetix said :

Deref said :

Isn’t it about time that we abolished above-the-line voting?

I think that would penalise people in States where there are often over a hundred Senate candidates.

Also people with limited literacy skills would be disadvantaged.

By multiplying candidates even more, a group could hope to increase the informal vote, if one had to number each square. This could be manipulated.

Preferential above the line or optional preferential (more detail from Antony Green).

Above-the-line preferential would be a good development.

Below-the-line optional preferential would be less good as it has the potential to make the accusation ‘a vote for a mnor party is a wasted vote’ come true. The 2008 ACT election is a good example of how things can go wrong.

Darkfalz said :

IrishPete said :

dustytrail said :

thebrownstreak69 said :

As long as the Greens don’t get in, I’m happy.

Agreed! Canberra has only 2 Senators and it has always been 1 ALP 1 Liberal for balance in the Senate. Greens ARE Labor. This town doesn’t need two leftard Senators.

Since when did the ALP return to the Left of the political spectrum? I must have missed that massive policy shift.

IP

Carbon tax? Rudd supporting gay marriage? Welfare bribes like the school kids bonus, baby bonus only for low incomer earners?

Lets see the coalition offered welfare bribes in the school kids bonus, baby bonus, first home buyers bonus… Apparently the Coalition though feels the middle and upper class deserve government handouts as much as those who really do. There is a lot of selfishness in the coaltion policies, gay marriage is another one, because right now gay people can do just about everything else including have kids and raise them as a family. the whole gay marriage debate is just ridiculous and shouldn’t even be a debate, except for a minority who want to argue about it.

I’ll agree i’m not sure the Carbon tax really ever was going to work, I do support something more than what the coalition is going to do, but again its the selfish attitude now, when realistically, helping the environment is just a good thing to do, regardless of ones beliefs in climate change.

Oh and people may say the Labor government did some bad things. I fully expect the next 3 years to continue to lay that blame as the coalition fulfill very few of their promises. I can’t wait to hear how labor are to blame for the boats not stopping, because they are going to keep on coming, as thats abogus political issue to win votes of the narrow minded and uninformed.

farout said :

Ha ha. The preferences from the AJP decided the outcome of this one.
Count 13 saw 1,869 (1.18%) votes originally from Animal Justice Party distributed to Liberal (Zed SESELJA) via preference 21.

Had these votes been directed to the Greens instead, Simon would have got 53,696 which would put him over the line.

Moral of the story: Don’t mess with the AJP!

Thats the ABC computer prediction, however in theory this is still quite tight. Its based on the above the line preference votes. Even so, the libs got a quota for many elections past so maybe they’ll take the ACt more seriously in future….

Robertson said :

housebound said :

Robertson said :

justin heywood said :

Robertson said :

…and that’s why we end up with the likes of Abbott running the country: too many morons voting.

Yep. Thank god all the intelligent people have given us the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era. In years to come, I’m sure all the morons will look back at this period and say, ‘THIS was our finest hour, those people knew how to run the country!’

I’m sorry, there simply isn’t any comparison between Tony “Science is crap” Abbott and the ALP government that successfully got us through the GFC, implemented a much-needed carbon tax, reduced energy consumption with a very successful home insulation scheme and provided an internationally-recognised best treasurer for decades, among reams of other policy successes.

Maybe you’re talking about the fictitious Rudd/Gillard/etc era that only exists on the pages of The Australian and on Alan Jones’ radiowaves?
Easy solution to that: stop reading and listening to bull$#@%, you will be better informed about reality.

Yes. Don’t ever read/listen to views from the side you don’t agree with. Only ever listen to your own side.

More fun is to read what bad things each side says about itself, and what good things it says about the other. Much more interesting.

Yeah, unlike you I don’t agree with one side. I can sniff out bull%$#@ though, and almost everything The Australian has published over the last 6 years on,
– NBN
– Pink Batts
– Climate change
– Government debt
has been of the pure and unadulterated kind.

Care to share your source on this?

(Or is it just made up?)

Ha ha. The preferences from the AJP decided the outcome of this one.
Count 13 saw 1,869 (1.18%) votes originally from Animal Justice Party distributed to Liberal (Zed SESELJA) via preference 21.

Had these votes been directed to the Greens instead, Simon would have got 53,696 which would put him over the line.

Moral of the story: Don’t mess with the AJP!

poetix said :

Deref said :

Isn’t it about time that we abolished above-the-line voting?

Also people with limited literacy skills would be disadvantaged.

Good. They should have spent more time paying attention in school instead of letting off pipe bombs.

Maybe the Senate should have a system more like the ACT Legislative Assembly where you vote for as many candidates as you like but aren’t obliged to fill in every box.

Otherwise the most intelligent way to fill in a ballot is to vote for everyone you’d like more than Liberal, Labor and Greens, and any independent or silly party candidate who seems to be reasonably popular in your electorate, make sure you’ve put down enough information to choose the eventual candidate then put Rise Up and any other dangerous loonies last and donkey vote the remaining candidates that just don’t matter.

And that’s effective but just sad.

poetix said :

Deref said :

Isn’t it about time that we abolished above-the-line voting?

I think that would penalise people in States where there are often over a hundred Senate candidates.

Also people with limited literacy skills would be disadvantaged.

By multiplying candidates even more, a group could hope to increase the informal vote, if one had to number each square. This could be manipulated.

Preferential above the line or optional preferential (more detail from Antony Green).

Deref said :

Isn’t it about time that we abolished above-the-line voting?

I think that would penalise people in States where there are often over a hundred Senate candidates.

Also people with limited literacy skills would be disadvantaged.

By multiplying candidates even more, a group could hope to increase the informal vote, if one had to number each square. This could be manipulated.

Isn’t it about time that we abolished above-the-line voting?

housebound said :

Robertson said :

justin heywood said :

Robertson said :

…and that’s why we end up with the likes of Abbott running the country: too many morons voting.

Yep. Thank god all the intelligent people have given us the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era. In years to come, I’m sure all the morons will look back at this period and say, ‘THIS was our finest hour, those people knew how to run the country!’

I’m sorry, there simply isn’t any comparison between Tony “Science is crap” Abbott and the ALP government that successfully got us through the GFC, implemented a much-needed carbon tax, reduced energy consumption with a very successful home insulation scheme and provided an internationally-recognised best treasurer for decades, among reams of other policy successes.

Maybe you’re talking about the fictitious Rudd/Gillard/etc era that only exists on the pages of The Australian and on Alan Jones’ radiowaves?
Easy solution to that: stop reading and listening to bull$#@%, you will be better informed about reality.

Yes. Don’t ever read/listen to views from the side you don’t agree with. Only ever listen to your own side.

More fun is to read what bad things each side says about itself, and what good things it says about the other. Much more interesting.

Yeah, unlike you I don’t agree with one side. I can sniff out bull%$#@ though, and almost everything The Australian has published over the last 6 years on,
– NBN
– Pink Batts
– Climate change
– Government debt
has been of the pure and unadulterated kind.

Robertson said :

justin heywood said :

Robertson said :

…and that’s why we end up with the likes of Abbott running the country: too many morons voting.

Yep. Thank god all the intelligent people have given us the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era. In years to come, I’m sure all the morons will look back at this period and say, ‘THIS was our finest hour, those people knew how to run the country!’

I’m sorry, there simply isn’t any comparison between Tony “Science is crap” Abbott and the ALP government that successfully got us through the GFC, implemented a much-needed carbon tax, reduced energy consumption with a very successful home insulation scheme and provided an internationally-recognised best treasurer for decades, among reams of other policy successes.

Maybe you’re talking about the fictitious Rudd/Gillard/etc era that only exists on the pages of The Australian and on Alan Jones’ radiowaves?
Easy solution to that: stop reading and listening to bull$#@%, you will be better informed about reality.

Yes. Don’t ever read/listen to views from the side you don’t agree with. Only ever listen to your own side.

More fun is to read what bad things each side says about itself, and what good things it says about the other. Much more interesting.

Could only take 300 to 400 votes for AJP to hand Abbott the Senate. So much for animal welfare. And see you later, same sex marriage, climate action, environment & biodiversity protection, the barrier reef, good public education, fair benefits, childcare support and all the rest of it. Congratulations AJP. You’ve really represented your base *slow clap*

justin heywood said :

Robertson said :

…and that’s why we end up with the likes of Abbott running the country: too many morons voting.

Yep. Thank god all the intelligent people have given us the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era. In years to come, I’m sure all the morons will look back at this period and say, ‘THIS was our finest hour, those people knew how to run the country!’

I’m sorry, there simply isn’t any comparison between Tony “Science is crap” Abbott and the ALP government that successfully got us through the GFC, implemented a much-needed carbon tax, reduced energy consumption with a very successful home insulation scheme and provided an internationally-recognised best treasurer for decades, among reams of other policy successes.

Maybe you’re talking about the fictitious Rudd/Gillard/etc era that only exists on the pages of The Australian and on Alan Jones’ radiowaves?
Easy solution to that: stop reading and listening to bull$#@%, you will be better informed about reality.

justin heywood said :

Robertson said :

…and that’s why we end up with the likes of Abbott running the country: too many morons voting.

Yep. Thank god all the intelligent people have given us the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era. In years to come, I’m sure all the morons will look back at this period and say, ‘THIS was our finest hour, those people knew how to run the country!’

It’s been said before, but it bears saying again “It doesn’t matter who you vote for a politician always gets in”

Robertson said :

…and that’s why we end up with the likes of Abbott running the country: too many morons voting.

Indeed. It’s how the watermelon party keep getting representatives elected. It’s also how parties like the AJP get votes.

Robertson said :

…and that’s why we end up with the likes of Abbott running the country: too many morons voting.

Yep. Thank god all the intelligent people have given us the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era. In years to come, I’m sure all the morons will look back at this period and say, ‘THIS was our finest hour, those people knew how to run the country!’

dustytrail said :

thebrownstreak69 said :

As long as the Greens don’t get in, I’m happy.

Agreed! Canberra has only 2 Senators and it has always been 1 ALP 1 Liberal for balance in the Senate. Greens ARE Labor. This town doesn’t need two leftard Senators.

dustytrail said :

thebrownstreak69 said :

As long as the Greens don’t get in, I’m happy.

Agreed! Canberra has only 2 Senators and it has always been 1 ALP 1 Liberal for balance in the Senate. Greens ARE Labor. This town doesn’t need two leftard Senators.

Since when did the ALP return to the Left of the political spectrum? I must have missed that massive policy shift.

IP

Carbon tax? Rudd supporting gay marriage? Welfare bribes like the school kids bonus, baby bonus only for low incomer earners?

What’s “leftard” about the carbon tax, you doofus?

And you conveniently forgot the fact that Gillard didn’t support homosexual marriage.

David Cameron, Tory leader in the UK passed a homosexual marriage bill. Does that make the Tories “leftards”?

I think Darkfalz’s understanding of politics is hopelessly ill-informed and I think he clings to a nice little black/white view of things because he doesn’t have the brains to assess it properly.

…and that’s why we end up with the likes of Abbott running the country: too many morons voting.

pepmeup said :

Fair call my spelling and grammar are terrible. I’ve managed to do ok do far, but truthfully I am trying to improve by reading and writing more.

This is an attitude that you cannot fault.

Agreed.

Darkfalz said :

IrishPete said :

dustytrail said :

thebrownstreak69 said :

As long as the Greens don’t get in, I’m happy.

Agreed! Canberra has only 2 Senators and it has always been 1 ALP 1 Liberal for balance in the Senate. Greens ARE Labor. This town doesn’t need two leftard Senators.

Since when did the ALP return to the Left of the political spectrum? I must have missed that massive policy shift.

IP

Carbon tax? Rudd supporting gay marriage? Welfare bribes like the school kids bonus, baby bonus only for low incomer earners?

You miss the point. Tony Abbott is promoting a generous paid parental leave scheme. Does that make him a socialist?

Labor still have a few leftish policies, but they also have a whole raft of policies Genghis Khan would be proud of. I don’t know when they stopped being Left, but they certainly haven’t returned to being Left.

IP

IrishPete said :

dustytrail said :

thebrownstreak69 said :

As long as the Greens don’t get in, I’m happy.

Agreed! Canberra has only 2 Senators and it has always been 1 ALP 1 Liberal for balance in the Senate. Greens ARE Labor. This town doesn’t need two leftard Senators.

Since when did the ALP return to the Left of the political spectrum? I must have missed that massive policy shift.

IP

Carbon tax? Rudd supporting gay marriage? Welfare bribes like the school kids bonus, baby bonus only for low incomer earners?

Good on them, they can see the writing on the wall. They could do a lot more good being friends with the Liberals than they will being friends with the Greens. All of the Greens policies are destructive, no matter the intentions.

Most of the minor parties seem to have fluffed their senate preferencing, right across the board. I voted in NSW on Monday, and I voted below the line. Yep, 110 boxes to number. Quite a worry actually, they seem to want people to just number one box above the line.

I think AJP are being short-sighted in this one. I voted them 1 and 2 in the NSW senate, but then continued with my numbers, so they only get my vote for a short while, it’s not theirs, it’s mine.

dustytrail said :

thebrownstreak69 said :

As long as the Greens don’t get in, I’m happy.

Agreed! Canberra has only 2 Senators and it has always been 1 ALP 1 Liberal for balance in the Senate. Greens ARE Labor. This town doesn’t need two leftard Senators.

Since when did the ALP return to the Left of the political spectrum? I must have missed that massive policy shift.

IP

Jono said :

pepmeup said :

I would say the problem is that most cat loving AJP voters would not have the ware with all to navigate the AEC website and find out where the preferences will flow.

I normally leave the English errors on the RA alone, although I struggle with the people who don’t even have a primary school level of communication and use constructions like “would of” and “could of”.

However, I have to comment of your achievement here where you’ve turned one word into three.

“…ware with all…” – To beware with everyone? To have items for sale to the public at large? Not quite sure how to interpret it. Maybe I’ll have the wherewithal to work it out one day.

Fair call my spelling and grammar are terrible. I’ve managed to do ok do far, but truthfully I am trying to improve by reading and writing more.

thebrownstreak69 said :

As long as the Greens don’t get in, I’m happy.

Agreed! Canberra has only 2 Senators and it has always been 1 ALP 1 Liberal for balance in the Senate. Greens ARE Labor. This town doesn’t need two leftard Senators.

chewy14 said :

So what’s the issue?
…
If you’re too lazy to find out what a party actually stands for and who they’re preferencing then you get what you deserve.

The issue is that parties such as the AJP are trading on misrepresenting what they stand for, and are secretly set up to deliberately pervert voting. Imagine if some white supremacist group set up a party called “Free the Refugees Party” and fed preferences to the Coalition.

Ah that was my point. The Greens aren’t green, the Liberals aren’t liberal and Labor don’t support labour either. If you’re too silly to find out what they actually stand for then too bad for you.

Poetix, I got yer vitamin b12 right here!!

(Not grabbing crotch, just reaching for multivitey. Plus the vegan D3 I found at fyshwick market.)

But I will certainly direct my preferences where I want them to go, which will not be Liberal.

I would think that most people who vote on an animal welfare (rights) platform would be incredibly well-educated and thoughtful, if somewhat lacking in Vitamin B12.

Jono said :

pepmeup said :

I would say the problem is that most cat loving AJP voters would not have the ware with all to navigate the AEC website and find out where the preferences will flow.

I normally leave the English errors on the RA alone, although I struggle with the people who don’t even have a primary school level of communication and use constructions like “would of” and “could of”.

However, I have to comment of your achievement here where you’ve turned one word into three.

“…ware with all…” – To beware with everyone? To have items for sale to the public at large? Not quite sure how to interpret it. Maybe I’ll have the wherewithal to work it out one day.

I would’ve thought the larger problem is that “wherewithal” is not the correct word. I don’t think he was trying to say the voters don’t have an internet connection rather that they lacked the intelligence required.

WRONG, Ken the voting dingo!
SLAPPO!!!

pepmeup said :

I would say the problem is that most cat loving AJP voters would not have the ware with all to navigate the AEC website and find out where the preferences will flow.

I normally leave the English errors on the RA alone, although I struggle with the people who don’t even have a primary school level of communication and use constructions like “would of” and “could of”. However, I have to comment of your achievement here where you’ve turned one word into three.

“…ware with all…” – To beware with everyone? To have items for sale to the public at large? Not quite sure how to interpret it. Maybe I’ll have the wherewithal to work it out one day.

So what’s the issue?

A lot of people voting for Labor think they’re voting for workers rights.
A lot of people voting for the Liberals think they’re supporting small government and fiscal responsibility.
A lot of people voting for the Greens think they’re voting for an environmental party.

If you’re too lazy to find out what a party actually stands for and who they’re preferencing then you get what you deserve.

I believe only about 3% vote under the line, and around 5% donkey (number 1234…. starting at the top rather than choosing who to place at 1). That’s Australia wide, not ACT, which may be alittle different. The roo cull’s a local issue anyway, and I’m not dure how handing the Abbott the Senate is going to make any difference to it at all. After reading some of the things they’ve put out, and their inability to respond to any questions about what they’re doing let alone criticisms, I just think they’re really, really stupid.Far, far to stupid to vote for.

So AJP is in reality just another preference-farming Liberal outfit.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/08/22/revealed-the-libertarian-rights-micro-party-links/?wpmp_switcher=mobile

“A swag of right-wing micro-parties running Senate and House of Representatives candidates at the forthcoming federal election have been exposed as being controlled by the same cabal of fringe-dwelling acolytes.

The Australian Electoral Commission’s official party registration page reveals that scorched-earth political operator David Leyonhjelm is the registered officer for both the Outdoor Recreation Party (Stop the Greens) and the Liberal Democratic Party …”

It’s time corruption in this country was stamped out:
Mal Brough needs to go to gaol. The crooks from the AWB need to go to gaol.
And this above-the-line voting has to go.

with Canberra having about 14 partys in the senate this election, I would have thought that the above the line option would be more popular than normal, im not sure what percentage usually vote above the line but my guess is more will this election than the last one.

Anyway I can see with the ballot paper we have and the AJP in column A. it is highly likely that their choice to preference the Liberal party before the Greens, may well be the final nail in the coffin for what ever chance Simon Shiekh had in winning. and yes it was their choice to put Liberals above the Greens.

I am for live export and the roo cull so I don’t really care, as I heard someone say the other day, “there must be a more efficient way of controlling roo numbers, than hitting them with our cars”

I would say the problem is that most cat loving AJP voters would not have the ware with all to navigate the AEC website and find out where the preferences will flow. I think all party’s should make it very clear where they are sending their votes. I doubt many true AJP voters would prefer Zed to Shiekh.

I also doubt weather the AJP will have a party in Canberra after the election if their preferences put Zed over the line.

As long as the Greens don’t get in, I’m happy.

farout said :

If people vote above the line for AJP, their vote is going to the AJP, and or whoever the AJP thinks is most deserving of their preferences. That’s exactly how one would expect preferential voting to work.

Sure. Except AJP is playing a little payback game with the Greens over the roo cull, which could lead to the Libs (who support the cull & want to increase live export) getting over the Greens (who oppose live export.
From what I’ve seen on AJP’s facebook accounts, most people who are voting out of concern for animal welfare wouldn’t think AJP would support a party with worse animal welfare policies than another because of a vendetta. Which is why I posted.

With so few Senate candidates in the ACT, there’s not much need to vote above the line.

It’s likely to matter more in NSW where there are over 100 Senate candidates, so above the line voting is going to be more common/necessary. I just found an ABC article saying that in Qld the AJP have done a deal with One Nation!

IP

Baggy said :

geni_lou said :

THEY can. I think people should know where their vote’s going. Especially if it’s achieving the opposite of what they think it will.

Perhaps if people bothered to look these things up for themselves, they’d know. If they can’t be bothered, they’re probably not likely to care anyway, are they?

I think people generally take on trust that if a group sets up as an ‘issue’ party, they won’t act in a way that is detrimental to that issue. It’s not always easy to find or understand the impacts of preferences. It doesn’t mean people don’t care. I’ve voted for parties before that I thought were indy and have ended up being a front group, which (apart from being terrified of Zed in the Senate & Abbott controlling both houses) is why this behaviour bugs me so much.

If people vote above the line for AJP, their vote is going to the AJP, and or whoever the AJP thinks is most deserving of their preferences. That’s exactly how one would expect preferential voting to work.

geni_lou said :

THEY can. I think people should know where their vote’s going. Especially if it’s achieving the opposite of what they think it will.

Perhaps if people bothered to look these things up for themselves, they’d know. If they can’t be bothered, they’re probably not likely to care anyway, are they?

THEY can. I think people should know where their vote’s going. Especially if it’s achieving the opposite of what they think it will.

If they’ve decided to award THEIR preference the Libs, that’s entirely their call. That is how Preferncial Voting works.

If they want to delete comments on THEIR facebook page, that’s their call as well.

Non-issue.