Preference deals sucked. Look at the example of Ricky Muir of the Australian Motoring Enthusiasts Party: he received 17,122 first preference votes (0.51% of the total), but through the magic of redistribution, he was elected to the Senate where he held the balance of power. And that’s because, given the choice between numbering one box above the line and letting the party you vote for determine the order of your preferences, or numbering every box below the line (122 for my area this year) and guiding them yourself, most people went with option A.
But in 2013 that was 97 candidates competing for 6 seats; this time the whole Senate is up for election so those 116 candidates are competing for 12 seats. It still sounds like a really huge & complicated ballot though.
Not helped by the fact the average punter, especially in Queensland, has no idea what the fuck the senate actually does, IME.
I’ve somehow ended up as the office’s go-to “Politics Guy”, which has been interesting given I work in fairly left-leaning industry yet tend to think of myself as a centrist on many issues (or more importanly, I agree with the Left on a number of issues but also strongly disagree with them on others; I also agree with the Right on a number of issues and strongly disagree with them on others.)
What really surprises me are the number of microparties which run in Federal elections where, barring flukes like Senator Muir (who, I gather, actually seems to be a decent guy and a good representative of his constituents) they’ve got no chance of getting in; instead of running in state elections where they might win (depending on the area) and, more importantly, would be in a stronger position to actually implement some of their policies (assuming they have more than one, that is…)
The senate ballot paper was ridiculous today. Twice as wide as the actual polling booth itself, it made FINDING the parties you wanted to vote for really bloody difficult. I think I spent three times as long voting today than on any other occasion. Any wonder the line to get into the polling centre was a couple of hundred metres long. :eek:
On the upside, it gave me time to eat my Democracy Sausage (thanks Martini) and onion in white bread with tomato sauce. No cake stall at the local primary school though.
I think that’s for two factors.
-
The micros are still playing the old games by the new rules.
-
When we have 12 senate seats per state with 6 in a half senate election then it is essentially impossible for LIB or LAB to pick up sufficient votes to get 4 quotas (needs 66% of the vote). So the senate allocation is either 3-3 or far more likely 3-2-1 with the minors almost guaranteed that they will be a seat in the offing courtesy of the preference deals.
The minors don’t win the seat based on the preference deals between themselves, but the deal keeps the lucky one of them in the game long enough until the over-quota votes of the majors begin to get allocated.
When the next expansion of the HoR/Senate occurs we have 14/state in the Senate and 7 at a half election. Then either LIB or LAB could reasonable expect to get 4 and a 4-3-0 result is more likely than 4-2-1 or 3-3-1.
That one is most likely to be a minor party than a micro, say a Green, or a Democrat or some State based personality akin to Palmer or Xenephon.
Glorious day in Sydney to vote.
Queues at the local school snaked back 100m+ in a reasonably quickly moving line.
Chatted amicably with the pleasant chap behind me in the line who was a dockside workers, both knowing that we were going to cancel the impact of each others vote. 
The LIB NSW Senate preferences are:
- LIB/NATs,
- Fred Nile’s Christian Democrats (oh please NOOOOOO!)
- Shooters, Fishers & Farmers (i.e. the pro-gun lobby)
- Family First (words fail me)
- Liberal Democrats (Leyonhjelm - local equivalent of the Tea Party)
- Australian Motor Enthusiasts (Ricky Muirs mob!)
Surely the LIBS would accept the odd LAB would be better than the last draw from the bottom of that cracker barrel?
So apart from that who are the others that he LIBS thought who are the even more odious.
HEALTH AUSTRALIA PARTY (the anti-vaxxer fruit cakes)
ANIMAL JUSTICE PARTY (Australians should become vegans, only comment in the campaign was their candidate claiming the Orlando shooting was a government conspiracy)
SUSTAINABLE AUSTRALIA PARTY (anti-immigration)
AUSTRALIAN LIBERTY ALLIANCE PARTY (anti-Islamic who claim Trump stole there ideas)
DERRYN HINCH’S JUSTICE PARTY (Hinch has never voted in Aust and he has a political party?)
JACQUI LAMBIE NETWORK (we’ve seen that in action since 2013. Nup)
SECULAR PARTY OF AUSTRALIA
KATTER’S AUSTRALIAN PARTY
PALMER UNITED PARTY (of course, without Palmer who’s split)
… and more than a score of others who make the AUSTRALIAN SEX PARTY and the PIRATE PARTY AUSTRALIA sound like viable electoral options.
Folks, those who wish American had more political choices … it ain’t what it’s cracked up to be.
The Pirate Party are quite non-insane actually, despite the fun name. Freedom of speech rights, NBN, copyright reform, climate change action … basically a bunch of geeks. Oh, and they want to support Bitcoin … ok, a little bit insane
I’d never heard of them, but checked out their platform post-voting and yes, they sound like a very reasonable bunch.
Sorry now that I DIDN’T include them in my vote.
And now you understand how BREXIT happened! [ducks gumboot thrown at orbital velocity]
They got my 3rd pref!
Absolutely true, and chucked gumboot well deserved.
I must say however, in my defence, this election has passed in a bit of a haze for me. An overseas holiday, followed within a few weeks by a house-move meant I’ve had little time to listen to or read about some of the newer parties and their policies. Hence why I’d not come across the Pirate Party.
But yes, point well taken and I promise to better informed next election. 
I was actually a bit annoyed at all the independent candidates below the line on the Queensland Senate voting paper - there seemed to be a dozen or so, way off on the far right hand side of the paper, and I looked at them and thought “Who the fuck are you people?”
I hadn’t heard anything from any of them, I had no idea who they were, what they represented - or, quite frankly, why they were wasting everyone’s time (and their money) by bothering to run.
I’m not talking about interesting-microparties-with-valid-policies like the Sex Party and the Pirate Party (both of whom I had heard of and knew their policies) either; just random people who had decided to run for the Senate but hadn’t (it seemed to me) bothered to actually tell anyone who they were, what they stood for - you know, the important stuff voters need to know when making a decision.
Also, I voted below the line and it took ages because of all these chancers taking up space on an insanely large ballot paper. Sure, it made my Democracy Sausage™ feel particularly well-deserved, but even so - there shouldn’t be 100+ candidates on a ballot, IMHO.
Current ABC projection LIB majority of 4.
I reckon a hung parliament is even money.
I’ve been looking at the very early Senate results. Here’s my guess as to what the Senate will look like:
Lib/Nat coalition - 29
Labor - 27
Greens - 9
Nick Xenophon - 3 (all from SA)
Pauline Hanson - 3 (NSW, QLD & WA)
Others - 4 (including Jacqui Lambie and Derryn Hinch)
One extremely doubtful (the 12th seat in VIC)
I don’t think either major party will find it easy to get legislation through that Senate.
What about a grand coalition of the Libs and Labs?
Very unlikely: the Liberal Party of Australia is the equivalent of the British Conservative Party. A red-green coalition (Labor and Greens) is more likely – but almost certainly won’t happen, because neither side trusts the other, and both are trying to woo the same young inner-urban voters.
Senate is certainly wonky but the Reps is where the fun is.
LAB can’t get a majority, nor can they get a stable minority from the .
LIB has slight chance of 2 seat majority, then need one for Speaker.
More likely they are minority and they won’t get the votes they need from the independents,
I reckon another election is looming.
If another election happens within the next year, I bet the Libs slip down further. Electorates don’t like to have to be voting all the time. Especially if we have a plebiscite in the meantime
This is the RESULT of above-the-line voting. I’m pissed off every time I thnk about it. Somebody “thought” that having above-the-line voting would make it easier to vote.
Completely failed to realize that the number of candidates on the ballot paper is determined by the ability of the votor to make sense of it, and using a more sensible organisation just means that the ballot paper will expand again up to the ability of the votor to comprehend.
We get a metre-long (four foot) ballot paper because of the number of parties above the line. We get a long list of un-affiliated candidates because you don’t have to pay any attention to that group at all: they don’t interfere with the voting-above-the-line.
You could easily make the unafiliated group more sensible, by allowing them logos and trademarks, like the above-the-line parties get. The result, of course, would not in the end make voting any easier.
We have just gone backwards, without, I’m sure, any thought about the ultimare consequences. It’s now HARDER to vote in the senate, because you have to vote preferences again. so now we can expect the senate ballot paper to become EASIER again - it will take a while to wash through, just as it took a while for the ballot paper to become harder after they made it easier.
I think the big challenge is “how do you make Senate voting easier”, though?
I mean, on one hand, it’s undemocratic to say “No single-issue parties” but on the other hand, if the only thing you’re bringing to the table is (to make up an example) that you want clearer Country of Origin labelling on products, maaaaaaaybe someone at the Australian Electoral Commission should be allowed to say “No” to that.
What might be worthwhile is requiring people to get a much larger number of signatures before they’re allowed to nominate - 5000 or so.
Of course, in these days of internet slacktivism, recreational outrage and meaningless petitions and so on, it wouldn’t be hard for people to decide that, for the lulz, they’re going to get the Voting Rights For Pets party on the ballot - but it might stop all these independents who are obviously just trying their luck, along with stopping some of the crazy microparties who don’t actually have any real community support.