In the 2004 election he had to stand as an independant.

You're half Indian/Malay and you vote for One Nation!

David Etteridge (and his wife Ashley) gave their preferences to Australian Democrats because one of their major platforms was not privatising government assets,like Telstra--also a major platform for the Democrats. David Etteridge actually votes on policies unlike you who just votes for the least likely person to get in. He put CDP before Greens,Labour and Liberal because he's very right wing.

I didn't show you the election results site earlier because I thought it would be too complicated for you--I was impressed CDP were beating Labour for the last seat until the very last distribution of preferences. I know they were.

Why are you so pleased Labour got in--isn't it crazy considering your vote went to CDP and you hate Labour? Why so pleased your vote lost? Why vote if you want to lose? So are you happy because you like CDP's policies or because they lost?

I didn't say Family First was pro-war.

It would be better if everyone voted below the line. But most aren't as dumb as you because at least they know where their first preference is going. If it's a major party, some of their candidates will get in and the excess in NSW Senate elections went to CDP--they are unlikely to get upset about this.

The Democrats and Greens never preference each other. If you want to vote for both you have to vote below the line.

Labour is anti the invasion of Iraq and pro the withdrawal of troops. There's plenty of proof for that and making up your own little stories about it being otherwise doesn't fit the facts.

John Howard is the only Prime Minister of Australia *ever* to completely thumb his nose at parliament by deciding to invade Iraq on his own.

You voted for a pro-war party in the Senate and are proud of it and you refused to vote antiwar in the House of Reps. You're basically pro-war or stupid--take your pick.

"It isn't important whether CDP..." Another classic Aziliz contradiction. At first you were preaching, vote for greens and I kept stating this would be useless because that would go to labour. You kept preaching thats not important as bigger parties see that you have symbolliaclly voted for the greens and they will change their policies accordingly. Now of all a sudden, its of the utmost importance to know exactly which preferences go where to the extent that a preference as low as 50/78 is knowledge that every voter should be equiped with...make up your mind? And yes it is relevant that there preferneces are so low, because it shows me that they dont want the bigger parties to ge the balance of power which is exaclty why I voted for independants in the first place? Why dont you tell me who you voted for (upper house) what do you have to hide aziliz?

"You're both proud of voting for CDP while loudly..."...you must think kids are watching this forum aziliz if you honestly believe anyone still buys this "I voted for CDP point?". It doesn't suprise, you wasted 20 posts trying to convince people i voted for liberal, you realised you were completly wrong so this is your pathetic attempt to label me with another pro war party.

"The Senate's part of Federal--not State Parliament"...yawn...another out of context statement provided purely to enteratin the feeble minded on-lookers. I already stated that the senate votes on and ammends legistaltion my point is they DONT CREATE foreign policy. Now let me guess youll paste the link that states they have the ability to create legislation? Watch senators in action before you paste websites and browse "hotspot websites" given by your lecturer...then come back to me.

"able to tip the balance of power that counts." hahahaha is there an echo in this room? Is this not what I stated in my first post. The sole reason I voted an independant was to give a non BIAS balance of power in the senate. And no the lower house is more important, they create and...

debate legislation, they are the main representatives of the governtment in power, etc. The senate is a filter to ensure the goverment in power does not abuse its privelages. Now I know your going to try and contradict this by pasting another link, but that is the reality of how democracy in this country works. Once again watch politicians in QUESTION TIME and see what they debate before you paste 600 links. All you have demonstrated is your ability to use google, and browse obvious media hotspots / recommended websites given by your lecturer.

What is fascinating is how niave you are to press releases and information on the web. I think youll find next semester that you change this mentality when you do the subject "how reliable is the web". Funny to see whats on politicians website relative to what they debate in question time.

"..as you were more likely to just pick the first group A.." I didn't say that I voted for group A, you did. Yet again a pathetic attempt to label me whichever way suits your argument (funny how many back flips your agrument has taken since realising my vote was not liberal).

"Family First. Family First won. There policy on Iraq..etc etc" Yes you implied that family first were pro war. Stop doing back flips your putting gymnasts to shame.

"But most aren't as dumb as "...yawn, remind me to have you on my debating team next time.

"The Democrats and Greens never preference .." and this explains why democrates voted for cdp over every other major party? According to your logic, democrates voted for CDP and are PRO WAR..."good one"

"Labour is anti the invasion of Iraq "...I quoted directly from their website. They are pro bush and so are you.

You didnt show me the abc election results because it contradicts your whole argument (yet again). I pitty you, you've completely destroyed your argument by trying to be to clever with google. It helps to have knowledge in your head, not on the web.

Stupidity on Stupidity on Stupidity.

So why keep bringing up Group A if you didn't vote for them? I talked about Group A, D, K and W Independants and simply said you were *more likely* to have voted for A--I still always referred to all four choices until your post on 4th July, at 4:59 where you started vehemently defending the choice of Group A, you continued to defend that choice in subsequent posts. Why did you start talking about Group A all of a sudden when I was talking about 4 groups? Hmmm? Now, slippery one, whom did you vote for? if you say it wasn't group A now, you're changing your story.

It's important both to vote for a minor anti-war party to make a stand and ALSO to know where your preference goes. BOTH. The two points of view are not mutually exclusive. Only a moron would argue that.

You voted for One Nation--no one is going to think you were simply protesting against the major parties. They are going to think you are anti-immigration and incredibly right wing. CDP was where your vote went.

"The senate DEALS WITH THE STATE" quote from you.

No balance of power is non-biased. if CDP got in and voted on legislation it would be very rightwing, very prowar and pro antiterrorism to the point of the loss of basic human rights. Why keep insisting that One Nation and the Chistian Democrats are unbiased simply because they are small--stupidity, stupidity, stupidity.

The major parties would sit up and notice how you voted--they would notice you chose One Nation. They would notice that CDP were in the running to the end.

You're so in denial on how legislation is made. Unlike you who spent so much time defending your vote for Group A independants, I never said I was a student--that's your silly fantasy. The website I sent you to learn about how legislation is made is the Parliament of Australia's website. You think you know more than they do hey dummy? Total stupidity.

I implied family first was pro-war, huh? I said family first won and then gave you a link saying they were anti the invasion into Iraq. Don't you think I read the link that I sent you? By doing so I told you they were anti the invasion in Iraq. You are soooooo incredibly stupid it is unbelievable.

You quoted Labour's Website? I sent you to the page where they stated quite clearly they were anti the invasion and would bring the troops home from Iraq if elected. You avoid talking about Labour's policy in Iraq completely.

You would not believe how stupid I think the Democrats were for preferencing Family First and CDP. But they are not simply voters they are a party with policies and their policies if they get elected are antiwar. I didn't preference Family First or CDP--I am not that stupid.

Nothing contradicts anything I've said. Especially not you.

"Stupidity on Stupidity on Stupidity". You just sound a like a little kid whos lost for words. Is this the best you have to offer, getting a bit frustrated that your being made to look like an idiot, well with comments like this...

"So why keep bringing up Group A " Once again you made the presumption I voted for group A. I am merely going along with your presumption as it makes LITTLE DIFFERENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS DEBATE (pro war, anti war). ALL independants have voted democrates before CDP (except whichever group voted for the greens). I cant even remember which independant I voted for it was 3 years ago? I can assure you though it was not group A, defintaly wasnt ettirage. It's funny how youve gone from making me a liberal (pro war) to making me a bible basher (CDP) to now making me racist (One nation)?

If your going to vote for me then at least stick with one party...And why do you keep shying away from who you voted for, Do you not have the time to research which party will not have a preference that contradicts your arguments (yet again) so that you can pretend you voted for them.

"You voted for One Nation"...yawn again! this is getting a bit boring, now let me guess I have to waste 20 posts stating I did not vote for one nation until you realise you were wrong and make another backflip to try and pin another party onto me?

"The senate DEALS WITH THE STATE"..and? The senate does indeed discuss more state issues as senators that represent their state raise these issues? Im not going to bother recommending to watch politicians in action as it just goes into def ears.

"No balance of power is non-biased" If you re-read what I said you will notice that I said non bias to the major parties. And yes that has happened in the past when independants have had the balance of power unfortunatly you obviously had no interest in politics back then.