larenoz

[larenoz]

Welcome to the Blatantly Partisan Party Reviews: 2025 Australian federal election edition

I’ve already published one edition of the Blatantly Partisan Party Reviews for 2025, the WA state election; now, we turn to an even bigger electoral event, the Australian federal poll. A decade ago, with lax registration laws and the possibility of scoring a Senator off a minuscule vote thanks to the undemocratic distortions of Group Ticket Voting, a dizzying number of parties cluttered the ballot nationwide with misleading names and fringe platforms. Senate voting has now been reformed so that preferences only go where voters themselves direct them, and tighter enrolment laws have removed many chancers from the party register of the Australian Electoral Commission.

This year, I will be reviewing almost all parties contesting the election nationwide. I do not review Labor, the Liberal/National Coalition parties, or the Greens, because if you’re reading this blog you almost certainly know what you think about those parties. I have not yet decided if I will include One Nation in this edition. Otherwise, I am seeking to cover all registered parties who are fielding candidates, whether nationally or in just one state, and I will do my best to identify individuals standing nominally as independents but who represent an unregistered party. I will also cover independents contesting the Senate in Western Australia, where I live and vote; if I have time, I will cover any that catch my eye elsewhere (particularly Victoria, as I still think of Melbourne as “home”).

Time for my usual disclaimers: I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of a political party. I review from the perspective of a small-g green democratic socialist. I am trained and work as a political historian of Australia and New Zealand. This background guides my reviews, which originated as—and remain—notes to inform my own vote. I do not aim for any false neutrality or objectivity, and I share these remarks in the hope they are useful to others trying to navigate Australia’s plethora of micro-parties. It should be obvious but these are my personal opinions, which should not be construed as representing the views of my employer nor of any other organisation with which I am affiliated.

I am, of course, not alone in reviewing parties. Leading psephologist Kevin Bonham has already released his rundown of Tasmanian Senate candidates. The b_auspol blog will review the parties and independents that are contesting the Senate in NSW and, if the past is any guide, those reviews are certain to be smarter and more clear-eyed than mine. And Something for Cate is a blog continuing the thoughtful election-reviewing traditions of deeply-missed Catherine of Cate Speaks; it has been three years since we lost Cate and election season still feels empty without her, but I am so glad her legacy endures.

If you are unsure how to cast a ballot, Patrick Alexander has two handy explainers: you can’t waste your vote for the House of Representatives and what’s the go with voting for the Senate?

I will start posting reviews tomorrow. Early voting begins on Tuesday 22 April and I want to post as many reviews as possible by then. Each review concludes with a recommendation. Before I explain this, I should clarify that in the House of Representatives (small green ballot), you must number every square; in the Senate (large white ballot), you must number 1–6 above the line or 1–12 below the line, and then distribute further preferences if you want. I recommend giving full preferences in the Senate because failing to number all boxes weakens the power of your vote. The more preferences you give, the more powerful your vote is; it will stay in the count longer.

Here is my recommendation system for this year:

Good preference: a party with a positive overall platform that has few or no significant flaws for the left-wing voter.

Decent preference: a party with a generally positive overall platform but I have some reservations; or, a single-issue party with a good objective but by definition too limited in their scope to encompass the fullness of parliamentary business.

Middling preference: a party with a balance of positive and negative qualities, or a party with a decent platform undermined by a notably terrible policy or characteristic.

Weak or no preference: a party with more negatives than positives. In the House of Representatives, put these parties as low as possible. In the Senate, I recommend you do likewise to maximise the potential power of your vote; but I recognise that some of you prefer not to express preferences between varying gradations of undesirability or prefer not to rank the most odious parties.

This schema is flexible; I may, for instance, suggest a “middling to decent preference”.

Stay tuned for those very partisan reviews!

[larenoz]

Blatantly Partisan Party Review VIII (federal 2025): David Pocock

Running where: ACT for the Senate

Prior reviews: federal 2022

What I said before: “Normally, individuals running on a ‘don’t ya know me and what I stand for?’ platform tack on something so that they are the Jacqui Lambie Network or the Rex Patrick Team or Katter’s Australian Party. David Pocock, however, has had an inspired moment and simply registered his party’s name as his personal name. This isn’t the David Pocock Group, Network, or Team. This is David Pocock.” (federal 2022)

What I think this year: Pocock has been a pretty decent Senator. He had a shaky first few months as he learnt how it all works, but once he figured out whose advice to take, whose to ignore, and what were the signs of a self-interested chancer in the setting of parliamentary lobbying, he got to work in a left-leaning way on issues affecting Canberrans and the nation alike. And, given that his victory at the 2022 election denied the Liberals a seat, his presence is all the more welcome—our parliament is better for Pocock ousting Zed Seselja.

Word on the street is that Pocock has done so well to cement his position in Canberra that he might even outpoll Labor. I will believe that when I see it, but in the contest with the Liberals for his seat, he’s the favourite to retain it. I have seen some speculation that Labor’s vote could drop low enough that Pocock scoops the left-leaning vote while the Liberals do enough to win the second seat ahead of Labor, but I don’t see this as likely. The fact that under Dutton the Liberals have taken aim at the public service and work-from-home policies makes me suspect they might register their worst ever result in Canberra.

Pocock’s website touts his “Wins”, including his ongoing goals. I like he opens with stats that he has given 617 parliamentary speeches, attended 167 ministerial meetings, considered 349 items of legislation, and negotiated 221 amendments. Canberrans, of all people, are most likely to appreciate this kind of info. He then sets out his main issues, and the left-leaning voter will find a lot to like in what he promotes that he is “still fighting for”. Not much leaps out at me as unappealing; he supports 4-year fixed-term parliaments, and while I think parliament should have fixed terms, I have seen no evidence that 4-year terms result in better governance than 3-year terms (and given Australia’s lengthy experience with both at state level, this evidence should be easy to produce if it exists). I prefer not to make politicians less accountable to electors. But this doesn’t seem to be something for which Pocock is fighting especially hard. His leading goal for political reform is to have the ACT’s Senate representation expanded from two to four Senators, which I agree is long overdue.

Pocock has been out the gates campaigning effectively for re-election and he has been busy releasing policies. Alongside climate action, for which he is well known, and action on cost-of-living issues, this year he has a strong focus on health, including more investment in the ACT’s healthcare system, better access to bulk billing GPs, and subsidies for longer appointments so that people with complex conditions don’t have to pay so much. I really like that he is pushing to overturn the ban on gay men in monogamous relationships from donating blood. It is an outdated policy that is no longer necessary for safety and repeal would bring Australia into line with other comparable countries and improve our blood supply.

On the housing front, he emphasises the need for much more investment in public and social housing, which should please many left-wing voters, and I’m happy to read that “the Territory must do more to relax zoning and other rules that restrict permissibility of ‘missing middle’ townhouse and medium-rise apartment buildings. More medium-density housing must be allowed … [and] The ACT Government has to find ways to speed up the development assessment process.” Build! Additionally, Pocock promotes “reform” of negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions. This would be welcome but other parties have stronger positions. I suspect he is right, though, that to make such reforms palatable—especially as this is such a hot-button issue among Australia’s chattering classes—provisions for existing investments will need to be grandfathered in to any reforms.

All in all, I think Pocock is a very good option for left-wing voters in the ACT, and I would unhesitatingly rank him above Labor. I would possibly (probably?) put him above the Greens too. I’m not an ACT voter though, so I don’t have to decide that one for myself.

Recommendation: Give David Pocock a good preference.

Website: https://www.davidpocock.com.au/

[larenoz]

Australia is heading into a Federal election and the conservative leader is being referred to as Temu Trump.

Which is honestly one of the least cruel names he’s ever had.

Just saw @ashlelnok on Instagram refer to the current administration with, "this is what happens when you order fascism off Temu" and I'm wheezing. Fucking wish.com Nazis. Fuck.

[larenoz]

major traffic incident

[larenoz]

Enjoy your day..

[larenoz]

This week, I read a fic that was around 20 years old, which had originally been posted on the author's personal website and which she added to AO3 a few years ago. She listed her email address with the fic, so after I finished reading, I sent her an email saying how much I enjoyed the story, how much I appreciated the work and effort she obviously put into it, and thanked her for uploading it to AO3. She responded the next day and thanked me for my message, then said she had a few more stories in the same series that she hadn't gotten around to uploading. I checked this morning--she added a 35,000 word novella and thanked me in the summary.

👏 comment 👏 on 👏 old 👏 fics 👏

[larenoz]

Discussing baby’s future

[larenoz]

Our youngest kitten is so funny, I overslept my alarm for a lecture so I was lying in bed moaning how I need to track someone down and get their notes, and kitten was worried about the noise so he came up to me and started doing biscuits on my belly.

Now I have plenty of dough to make biscuits with, so I didn't mind, but I also hadn't eaten breakfast and my stomach started making sounds.

The sheer ALARM on this poor baby's face. Eyes wide, ears pinned back, looking at me in horror. Then he starts kneading faster. Ofc, my stomach and intestine start doing more noises. Kitten is distressed! Horrified! He probably thinks I'm dying and his tiny CPR is the only thing keeping me alive.

Eventually I can't keep my laughter in anymore so I get up and my stomach stops and this BABY starts meowing and cuddling up to me like he really did save my life and was overjoyed I made it by the skin of my teeth.

And then I got up and he went over to his food bowl and started meowing twice as hard.

[larenoz]

Someone at an old job asked why I wanted to write up the meeting minutes for our team and I said 'i wanna control the narrative' and they were like 'what' and I pointed out that no one was gonna remember what we said in six months and so my interpretation of the meeting would dictate the assumed reality of what happened

"none of you ever send corrections when I offer the draft so y'all have consented to my version"

"we don't read that shit"

"you must trust me implicitly to create our shared reality that's so sweet"

That's how several coworkers decided I was a supervillain and how I learned several coworkers didn't understand record keeping as like a CONCEPT

[larenoz]

cats being capable of understanding accidents and even giving you a little head bonk to let you know you're still cool makes it infinitely funnier that they don't understand when you're trying to help them

cats when you step on their tail: i'll admit that was rather ouchie, but given the lifetime of goodwill and trust between us, one must conclude this booboo is but a fluke.

cats when you try to get their claws unstuck from the couch covering: this nefarious bitch has never had a single honorable intention in their dishonest and shameful life, this must be one of their sinister plots or perhaps even an attempt on my life,

[larenoz]

[larenoz]

We need to go back to using sailing ships full time like immediately. Yes it would take longer to get places but the Aesthetic is unmatched

Like there is nothing sexier hthan this

[larenoz]

Hey RNM fandom! @fandomtrumpshate 2025 is opening soon - Fandom Trumps Hate is an online auction of fanworks, with the proceeds going to small, progressive nonprofits that are working to protect marginalized people. FTH began in the immediate aftermath of the 2016 US Presidential Election, and over the course of the last 8 years has raised over $300,000 for a range of amazing organizations.

This year's supported nonprofits cover a variety of issues, including several that are directly relevant to RNM fandom - disability justice, domestic violence, immigration, LGBT rights, and many more.

Creator signups open January 20th, and you can sign up to create/offer any kind of fanwork that can be delivered digitally - fic, art, podfic, fanvids, fan labour like betaing or offering specialist expertise, etc.

I'm planning to sign up to create art, and I hope to see some of you there! You know Liz would want you to 😉❤️

About FTH | FTH FAQ | FTH 2025 Calendar

(thank you to @dr-lizortecho for the gif!)

[larenoz]

hi gay

hi whore

[larenoz]

[larenoz]

It's not only sexy af but REAL bi/queer representation, which isn't half-assed or noncommittal, that Buck explicitly is hot for Tommy over masculine things. Tommy, in general, is very trad masc; he's super muscular, tall, with a strong jaw, deep voice, short hair. During their kisses (so far), neither is clean shaven. Buck likes Tommy's cleft. Tommy shows up to the wedding specifcally as a filthy, manly firefighter, and Buck calls him *a beast* in a flirty tone before eagerly kissing him.

Buck is attracted to Tommy *because of* his manliness, not in spite of it.

They really put two masc men together romantically/sexually on main channel cable TV and made no apologies, excuses, or compromises. 🏳️‍🌈 What a time to be alive. 🥲