In the House of Reps, I voted:
1. Christian Democratic Party
2. Liberal (John Howard)
3. Family First
4. Labor
then other gibberers
In the Senate (I didn't have James Baker in my state):
1. Pauline's Party
2. One Nation
3. Christian Democratic
4. Conservatives for Climate and Environment
5. Liberal
6. Family First
7. Labor
and not much thought for the rest of the 79 boxes (*).
For me, the biggest issue was immigration. CDP will not win my House of Reps seat, so my preference will go Liberal, but they made a stand against Muslim immigration so they got my vote.
For the Senate, Pauline and One Nation will oppose both Muslim and African immigration. I think the environment deserves some recognition, so I went with the Conservatives for Climate. If none of them get up, then my preference goes Liberal again.
Work Choices bothered me, I think the Libs pushed it too far, but Ross Gittins reckoned there was not much difference in the end - both parties compromised.
With immigration, the Liberals have let in record numbers of immigrants. Most notably, a lot of Africans, and I would have like to have kicked them for that. But I don't think Labor would be any better, judging by the state leaders who called Kevin Andrews a deep-South racist for limiting the Africans. And I still worry Labor is soft and wet.
A lot of right-wingers go on about the right to bare arms, and whilst I agree generally in the right to self defence, I haven't entertained thoughts of giving preferences to the shooters party.
In the end, CDP and Pauline are the most vocal on immigration.
Voting is hard.
* I didn't literally vote 1 to 7 for those parties. I numbered incrementally through each of the groups' candidates i.e. Pauline (1-2), One Nation (3-7), CDP (8-15) or whatever the numbers were.
How I voted
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Good on you for voting for Pauline.
I hope she gets in Queensland - that will really shake things up and give the lefties and the faux-conservatives a shock.
"voting is hard" all right, for someone who takes the trouble to examine the issues and the various candidates and party's positions.
Good for you. :-)
From what i can see immigration wasn't an issue high on the voters agenda. I may be wrong but i don't think Pauline did very well, not sure.
Not sure, but it does appear that no-one campaigning on immigration will get near a Senate seat. Experience overseas suggest things have to get pretty ugly before immigration gets front-and-centre attention. Denmark and the cartoons. France and the riots. US and the amnesty Bill. Italy and the recent rape-murder. The UK had a big debate about it recently. Apart from that, the Swiss seemed to have breached the suffocation of political correctness with a massively brazen public campaign. It will take an organised lobby group with a visible campaign to raise the issue to mainstream. Only then will we know whether Australia really wants immigration or not.
Post a Comment