Risible rubbish. Name one party that has any prospect of winning a majority in the senate.

Electors vote one way for the reps and another for the senate. So, it goes without saying, that they need to bargain/wheel and deal, to get legislation passed.

The libs have already sold their soul and got into bed with the ultra-conservatives. So, the electorate will never give that motley crew a majority in the senate.

And expect more non-aligned independents (moderate libs) in the reps.
Alan B.

the electorate will never give that motley crew a majority in the senate.
Alan B,
You credit the electorate with much too much sense, no matter which side of politics.
I've done my own little surveys talking with everyday folk & more than half are drug abusers & the rest are just holding out their hands. The few who are actually willing to pull their weight as useful citizens with the common good in mind are so small in numbers they're now literally irrelevant ! Unless Australians agree to some common sense building scheme with a focus on responsibility, this Nation won't have the people to run even the basic services. We're seeing it already because of the hype regarding "education", no-one wants to work anymore in jobs for which their mentality is barely adequate. That's why a NMNS is a must asap !

Bad luck…move on!

The Howard government controlled the Senate 19 years ago.

Now, the major parties will have trouble gaining a majority in the lower house.

The Senate is gradually being taken over by minor parties and independents. Probably not a bad thing, as the Senate has ceased being worthy of being called 'states'house', with Senators all voting along party lines. The Senate is the way for the voices of those who don't like either of the major parties to be heard.

Nevertheless, it is wrong to assume that people prefer one party over another when they made no such indication on their ballot paper.

It is also wrong to force people to "prefer" one evil over another by stating on the bottom of their list whether they prefer Stalin or Hitler, then finding themselves guilty of one or the other being elected.

The change in the way the Senate is voted was therefore absolutely necessary, and the same partial preferencing ought to be allowed for the House of Representatives as well.

Some politicians could be hurt by this change all right, but previously it was the voters who were hurt.

"Tony if you want to get your legislation through the Senate you need a few more two percenters like Bob and me in the joint....failing that see if you can get some other far right radicals into the place."

Liberal Democrat Party, neither liberal or democratic, had to change its name to the Libertarian Party, hard to be at liberty when given the chance this mob would most likely lock up half the population.

It is so sad when politicians openly advise each other how to cut corners to gain quick tricks, that instead of appealing to the intelligent population with good policies, they "better" trap the dumb ones who do not even understand how voting works and only attend elections in order to avoid a fine.

given the chance this mob would most likely lock up half the population.
Paul1405,
Given that too many in the population are inflicted by a detrimental mentality just like yours the return of a liberal administration would definitely buy this Nation some time.

Dear Paul,

«hard to be at liberty when given the chance this mob would most likely lock up half the population.»

I am confused: who are you referring to, are going to lock up whom any why?

Yuyutsu,
It's quite obvious that Paul1405 is only interested in biting the had that feeds him, all just to get satisfaction for his perverse indoctrination that being responsible is a flaw.

Dear Indyvidual,

I would rather hear from Paul himself - his claim is intriguing.

Foxy,
?? Haven't you read enough of his hisses & growls to have all the info you need by now ?

Yes Foxy, since you haven't posted a word on this thread. Indy must be on ttbn's Jungle Juice as well.

Hi Yuyutsu,

This David Leyonhjelm appeared some years back in NSW, presented himself as a liberal and a democrat, holding a senate seat from 2014 to 2019 with a very small primary vote, but through wheeling and dealing with minor parties and extremists. The Liberal Democratic Party which Leyonhjelm represented soon showed itself as nothing more than another far right splinter party, advocating for such things as arming citizens and forming vigilante groups in the name of public order. The party was forced to change its name as it was seen as trying to garner votes by using the names from other political parties.

Dear Paul,

Fine, I understand, but why did you say that "when given the chance this mob would most likely lock up half the population."?

Leyonhjelm is the kind of person who believes free speech involves defaming others. Leyonhjelm was successfully prosecuted in 2021 for the deformation of Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young and ordered to pay $120,000 in compensation.

Judge Wigney in his findings said “Simply put, Mr Leyonhjelm launched a full-scale personal attack on Senator Hanson-Young’s character and integrity on the most flimsy of pretences,”

Seems to be a grub to me!

Dear Paul,

Fine, I understand, but this still does not explain your specific claim that "when given the chance this mob would most likely lock up half the population."?

David can't even get his numbers right. The Liberals only need 38 votes to block legislation, as the Constitution provides that if the vote is equal, the question shall pass in the negative. So they only need 7 crossbenchers, not 8.