Dear Ttbn,

The link you provided is incorrect - it should be: http://australiansforbetter.com

«It is not all that onerous to tick 12 individual candidates below the line.»

Well I think it is, unless I do so randomly, because I don't know anything about these people, nor would it be reasonable to expect me to know about their lives.
I vote for policies, not for whoever happens to implement them,
hence I read everyone's policies, then rank all the squares above the line accordingly.

Come elections, I will read your party's policies too - hope they will be all summarised neatly in one place so I don't need to search for them across 100's of pages.

Of course I would never allow political parties to take away my preferences.

Yuyutsu

How you vote and for whom you vote is your business, but lazy voting gets lazy politicians.

You say that you vote above the line, but you then say that you “won't allow political parties to take away my preferences”, when you are doing just that.

1-6 across the top leaves the party getting the preferences it wants, not you. Those people might or might not all be suitable to you. For instance, at the last election, the candidate I most wanted was put last on the ticket, an unwinnable position, and that candidate has gone for good. I put him first, but thanks to lazy voters, he was a goner, an excellent candidate though he was in his time there.

I prefer to vote for 12 good people in the Senate. I have no interest in parties, because the Senate is the house of review, and voting for parties and THEIR preferences (which are getting if you vote above the line) is preventing it from doing its job.

Policies. They are for the lower house, where the government is formed.

I don't know what you mean when you say that you will read “your parties policies too”. I don't have a party. Certainly not when it comes to the Senate.

If the Senate is not doing its job as a house of review, free of political strictures, it is not worth having.

So, my current position is: voting above the line should be abolished. Nominations should be restricted to stop people just out for a bit of fun cluttering up the tablecloth size ticket, and a compulsory 12 votes is the way to go. If we can't do that, we are stuffed, and deserve to be so.

The real hurdle to move from incompetent administration to competent administration is to change the heads of Departments at every election. They then should be able to weed out the non performers & actual saboteurs.
When that is not done you get what we have, the majority of the office staff sabotage every attempt of the Government to restore order & bring everything into line. Robodebt was one such blatant example. Constant blaming the previous administration when in fact it is always the same people running the show. Pretty stupid really !

Dear Ttbn,

So let me clarify what I do come election time:

1) I consider which policies are most important for me to have and which policies are most important for me to prevent, then assign them points, positive and negative respectively.

2) I go online over the principles/policies pages of ALL parties on my ballot papers, whether in the lower or upper house, summing up the points for each of my above policies per party.

3) I sort my order of preference for all parties from top to bottom according the number of points (positive or negative) they received.

4) I mark all boxes on my ballot papers accordingly - which means that for the Senate, I mark ALL boxes above the line, not just 6 or 12, hence I make my own preferences, not any party's.

The only thing I do not do and would personally find too exhausting, is to distinguish below the line between individual candidates within the same parties.

I hope this makes sense.

Maybe we need an AI voting / candidate summary.
Something that you can add in certain preferences, and the AI looks at everything, taking into account all factors and gives you a summary of best and worst candidates based upon your own preferences.

And some good videos that make understanding all the ins and outs of elections and to use ones vote in the best manner more easily understandable.

Google: 'What is a senators job?'
AI Overview
A senator's job is to represent their state or territory's people, debate and vote on proposed laws (bills), scrutinize government actions, and work in committees to investigate issues, ensuring laws are fair and government is accountable, essentially acting as a voice for their constituents and a check on power. They debate national issues, question ministers, and vote on legislation, requiring them to stay informed on public opinion and current affairs.

Yep ok ttbn, you've won me over.

"Good idea? Bad idea?"

- Good idea.

It seems they can't possibly do this job with integrity in the best interests of the constituents if they instead represent the interests of a political party.