Senate – New South Wales

Recommended Order of Preference (Below-The-Line):
  1. Jim Molan (Liberal) [COLUMN F]
  2. Kirralie Smith (Australian Liberty Alliance) [COLUMN AM]
  3. John Williams (National) [COLUMN F]
  4. Brian Tucker (Rise Up Australia) [COLUMN M]
  5. Maree Nichols (Rise Up Australia) [COLUMN M]
  6. Phil Jobe (Family First) [COLUMN C]
  7. Sally Vincent (Family First) [COLUMN C]
  8. Simon McCaffrey (Family First) [COLUMN C]
  9. Nella Hall (Christian Democrats) [COLUMN AF]
  10. Peter Rahme (Christian Democrats) [COLUMN AF]
  11. Deborah Lions (Christian Democrats) [COLUMN AF]
  12. Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (Liberal) [COLUMN F]
Reasoning:

*Update 1: The reason I have included Senator Fierravanti-Wells is because I don’t see any evidence that her blabbing to Nikki Savva was anything other than the result of the natural female urge to gossip.

Further, her statements appeasing Islam have to be seen in the light of her position as a Assistant Minister for Multicultural Affairs, where she is bound by the party position and must maintain a diplomatic posture.

Fierravanti-Wells has been very strong on the marriage issue, and will be a useful presence if Turnbull tries something shifty on the plebiscite. Let me quote from a recent profile of her done by Jana Wendt for SBS:

“Fierravanti-Wells views marriage between a man and a woman as a “bedrock institution”. She believes that in any plebiscite on same-sex marriage, the “silent conservative majority” would prevail. She believes that “CO2 is plant food” and not the cause of global warming. She supports Australia’s constitutional monarchy. She believes in God.”

These views are absolutely anathema to Turnbull, and she can be a thorn in his side. Remember, the left hate Christian Conservatives far more than they hate Pauline Hanson-style right-wing populists who agree with them on many social issues.

*Update 2: With regard to Fiona Nash’s exclusion, during the Howard Government she joined forces with Labor and Democrats Senators to viciously attack the then Health Minister Tony Abbott for his pro-life views on abortion. They didn’t want to allow him to have the appropriate ministerial control over RU486 and introduced legislation to strip him of powers and hand them to pro-abortion bureaucrats.

*Update 3: With regard to Angry Anderson’s exclusion, he is on record supporting homosexual so-called “marriage”. Those non-leftists who support that cause reveal a profound ignorance of the leftist agenda, of which it is a core component. The ALA give a conscience vote on social issues, so the views of the individual candidates are important.

*Update 4: I have changed Senator Fierravanti-Wells’ position as a result of some new information that came to my attention, but I believe she still deserves to be on the list.

*Update 5: Many are asking why One Nation tend to be low or non-existent in my preferencing. It is because they have some ‘progressive’ policies on crucial life-and-death issues like euthanasia and abortion. Their policies on these issues are identical to the Greens. One Nation, strictly speaking, are not conservatives. They are right-wing populists. I am a vehement pro-life social conservative, and my voting recommendations will reflect that.

Luckily there are socially conservative, pro-life parties who are also in tune with issues like gun rights (i’m strongly in favour of private firearm ownership). Rise Up Australia, for instance, tend to be high in my preferencing because they are both pro-life and pro-gun.

*Update 6: Steve Price and Andrew Bolt have endorsed my recommendation to vote below-the-line and put Jim Molan in the number 1 position.

#

10 thoughts on “Senate – New South Wales”

  1. I would put David Leyonhjelm of the Liberal Democrats #1. He’s not an ideal conservative on social issues but definitely solid on economic issues and tough on immigration.

    1. Leyonhjelm is very good on many issues, but I can’t stomach his attacks on the police and his position on social issues. Also, the Liberal Democrats are generally pro-immigration but with a totally different system to Labor/Greens/Liberal.

      1. I would rank him high because he has a better shot of winning as an incumbent than some of these others and has done a good job holding the gov’t accountable. We know he can be trusted to stick to his principles even when under pressure from Turnbull, and this would certainly presents a strong case for placing him higher than the Liberal candidates.

        He seems to understand the Islam problem as well:
        http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/07/01/senator-leyonhjelm-says-some-cultures-incompatible-australian-society
        He also seems to have gone the right way on the immigration votes so far in the Senate.
        Liberal Democrat stated party policy is to “Increase barriers to citizenship so Australia can sustain a high level of immigration and relatively free movement of people without the risk that new immigrants will undermine our democracy or social harmony.”

  2. How about One Nation? They alone have been saying what we believe in for years. Certainly Jim Molan and John Williams. And the main reason I would put Lleynholme on my list is because he has a good chance of getting back on and although I disapprove of some of his social policies he will never get them up. Kirralee Smith definitely No 1, Hansens party 2.

  3. The Liberal Democrat Party policies support Same Sex Marriage, the abolition of Medicare and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, disbanding most of the full time Army, free movement of people, legalising marijuana, euthanasia, genetically modified crops and the cessation of all Commonwealth involvement in health and education. LDP also support foreign investment and ownership.

    Not all that conservative, and they are now going to preference Labor in key seats as reported in The Australian.

    David Leyonhjelm states he is a libertarian NOT CONSERVATIVE.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *