I just answered questions in a phone poll (for the first time ever, I am part of the random sample used to make predictions - yay!).

The interesting thing was that the questions forced me to think a bit about my voting. My answers surprised me - they certainly shed some light on how I thought I would be voting and how I SHOULD vote. It was an illuminating experience!

<< My answers surprised me >>

Hahaheheeeee. That’s funny Oto! ( :>)

I’d be interested know a bit more about this experience that has led to think that you should be voting differently to what you had previously thought!

Hrrgh!

I'll try that again....

I’d be interested TO know a bit more about this experience that has led YOU to think that you should be voting differently to what you had previously thought!

It's okay, Ludwig...I've always been a bit puzzled as to why there is no editing mechanism on this forum.

I think the concept of local candidates is stupid as far as parliament/government is concerned.

It would be logical in the Senate, but it creates an uncomfortable double-purpose (or double alliegance) when these people- accountable to only a few odd thousand of their neighbours, may get a position as prime minister.

Local GOVERNMENT, on the other hand, would be logical (that is, scrapping states and local councils as a half-way between body, accountable more directly for all of the local and infrastructural affairs.

I have found that Party matters much less than the intelligence, ability and general goodwill of the local member. A dullard or an uncaring, insensitive git will act the same regardless of political affiliation.

Anyone who needs to work with their local member will say the same thing, pick the best person for the job with only a weather eye for the platform of their party. It is worth remembering that not all of the best players are on the one team.

However, the silliest vote of all would have to be the protest vote. Talk about shooting oneself in the foot. How can anyone want anyone who sets himself up to be a Devil's Advocate - more likely, a loose cannon? If there is room in parliament for members who are there solely to criticise, there should be a similar reduction in the numbers in the House.

Pick the best available candidate: aim to get value for money, those are your taxes going for that cool $1million PA minimum it costs per member.