By Jo Nova
Election day is almost upon us. To vote against the Blob let’s help as many good minor Party candidates as we can.
We are in an information war, and by definition, the best candidates in the Australian election are the ones the media ignores and sometimes they’re also the people the Liberal party has thrown out. (We know they oppose The Blob — think of Craig Kelly -NSW and Gerard Rennick – QLD. )
Its worth knowing that Gerard Rennick People First and The Libertarians, have combined with the Heart Party to form the Australia First Alliance (AFA) — and in NSW, ACT, Vic and QLD they will appear together on the Group Ticket.
- Gerard Rennick — People First –– want to enshrine freedom of speech in the constitution, limit immigration to 100,000 work visas. They think Australia needs to build new coal, nuclear, gas and dams, and remove all references to “climate change”. Their policies are here. They have candidates in NSW, Vic, QLD, SA, and WA.
Craig Kelly joined the Libertarians — Also want to enshrine free speech in the constitution, abolish 18C, oppose all misinformation and disinformation laws. Privatise the ABC and abolish the e-safety commissioner. They want more restrictions and fees on immigration than we currently have but set no cap. They will fight back against deals with global organizations (like the UN and the WEF).- The Heart Party wants all Australians to be able to choose their medicines — no forced vaccinations, no coercion, no discrimination.
For the first time the Liberals* have preferenced One Nation in 57 seats. One Nation have preferenced the Liberals in a a dozen or so key seats including the Opposition Leader’s. That might make some difference. (It’s crazy the right don’t cooperate more.)
- One Nation also want free speech in the Constitution, believe we should withdraw from the Paris agreement. The indefatigable Malcolm Roberts (QLD) has fought climate legislation for years. They want to cap visas at 130,000 people and reduce foreign students.
The How to Vote Cards are available for People First, Libertarians and One Nation. Otherwise, you can find all your candidates on the AEC page. Just type in the postcode.
Every vote in the Australian election is worth $3.38 as a first preference to any party winning more than 4% of the vote. That money means a lot to the small parties. Pick your number 1 with care. Then list all the freedom loving minor parties, and finally, sigh, one “big” party.
Do you want your Senate Vote to Extinguish? If you don’t put a number next to the Liberals (7, 8 or 9 say) and one of your first six choices isn’t elected, your vote may vanish into the ether. It may feel like a worthy protest (the Liberals did endorse the ghastly Under-16 Social Media ban), but The Greens, Teals and Labor will thank you. The Blob hopes die-hard conservatives neutralize themselves. And small parties get soft power from sending preferences.
For West Australians: in the Senate — Ky Cao is running as an independent and comes highly recommended by David Archibald, a long time skeptic and defense analyst.
***Small parties would love any help you can give. Handing out How-to-Vote cards on the day, or being a scrutineer can make a big difference. Call them if you can spare an hour.***
Turning Point Australia has put together a table of party policies below.
Parties listed: One Nation / Gerard Rennick People First | Libertarian Party | Trumpet of Patriots | Family First | Great Australia Party | Liberals | Labor | Greens | Teals.
Click to enlarge!
*Liberals (for foreign readers) means theoretically conservative. Supposedly for free speech and smaller government.
Topher explains the voting strategy with marbles. It makes so much sense…
And obviously, this post is authorized by me, and are entirely my own opinions. Do I need to say that?
I am happy we have an active freedom movement in Australia.
But, sadly, most Australians (most present company excepted) are simps for Big Interventionist Government, censorship and control, totalitarian medical intervention as during covid, demand “free stuff” without limit, don’t want small government, refuse to think critically, don’t like or respect President TRUMP or what he’s achieving (so much so that fake conservatives like Dutton distance themselves from him and the socialists liken Dutton to him) and don’t demand individual rights and liberties in the classical liberal sense among other failures to demand freedom. [Classical Liberals as loosely defined by people like Ludwig von Mises, Murray N. Rothbard, Nathaniel Branden, Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, Friedrich Hayek, etc..]
Look how many supported the world’s most draconian covid lockups as we had in Australia, for example, and we still see obsessive mask wearers even today. How many complain about censorship and the position of the e Safety Kommisar who even attempts to censor sitting members of parliament like Senator Babet (Trumpets of Patriots) (and perhaps does, we will never know as she doesn’t publish list of what’s censored)? Not many.
The reason the former British colonies Australia, Canada and NZ and Once Great Britain itself reject notions of “natural rights” is because they were influenced by the philosopher Jeremy Bentham and his philosophy of utilitarianism and who did not believe in natural rights as derived from God or nature (depending upon your belief). He thought rights only came from man, i.e. government. They could be given and just as easily taken away.
The founding fathers of the US on the other hand were influenced by philosophers like John Locke, Jean Jacques Rousseau and Baron de Montesquieu who did recognise God-given natural rights and this is reflected in the US Declaration of Independence and US Constitution.
Video about “Jeremy Bentham’s Attack on Natural Rights” at: https://youtu.be/Ecp-PR_K1JI (16 mins)
273
Anyone with decent medical knowledge will tell you that the lockdowns were a very sensibly way to limit opportunities for covid to spread.
It’s embarrassing to find people with such little knowledge. Those who want the ill-informed public to decide for themselves whether they should have vaccinations are just as foolish.
I don’t entirely blame people for this foolishness. State and federal governments in Australia failed to provide information at the level of detail required for people to understand the situation. Was the failure theirs alone or did the very juvenile media in Australia filter the details out and not pass them along to the public?
Just think, how many times during covid did you hear, or read, what virologists and epidemiologists had to say? In the Australian media that I usually access it was about twice in the two years. This was pathetic. I found detail from international sources although I needed to be careful with them because most countries let covid run rife before having any lockdown, which meant the lockdowns achieved little.
By the way, another thing the government did badly was not adjusting countermeasures against covid as (a) more was learnt about it and (b) the virus mutated.
29
Speaking of comparisons:
“Elbow” and “Doc” Evatt?
110
Even Bob Hawke’s Administration was more right of Dudsy and the LNP. How the worm has turned.
And Bob’s Mob were right about most things.
131
Button, Walsh, Kerin to name a few of his ministers. Kerin was popular with farmers and graziers – to a degree. Walsh was a top finance minister who resigned over fiscal policy. Old guard Labor with a certain amount of competency.
50
Thanks for the caution about votes (above the line) being extinguished.
I’ve voted Postal Vote (first time) and for the first time voted above the line. Fortunately I did what I normally did when voting below the line was to put The Greens absolutely last and work my way upwards. Liberal scrutineers might notice that they are 5 or 6 below the minor parties. I hope that they do.
211
Jo, please help clarify.
If voting Senate above the line, is it better to NOT give the Greens any number so that your vote is extinguished as far as GRN is concerned?
Do give a high number to Libs so they do get something counted but once you choose any of the many participants they still get a count even if last in your ballot?
10
Your vote, IF you number ALL candidates, can NEVER go to the lowest number on the list.
This is because when only TWO candidates are left, and one is your last preference and the other ANY other preference. Your vote will go to your MOST preferred candidate remaining on your ballot. This will allow a count of ALL remaining, eligible votes and one of the two will win. The election is OVER.
If your preferred preference loses, your vote will not go to the last one standing since there is no need to distribute the votes any further.
If there were 7 parties above the line and you numbered 1 to 6 and OMITTED giving the greens the number 7 vote, then your vote would extinguish before going to the greens. Similar if there were 12 parties above the line and you numbered any numbers 1 through 6, 7, 8, 9, etc. When your vote is extinguished it’s out of the count.
I won’t go into HOW the votes are distributed from the ONE first over the line with an excess, since that is getting complex and involves a proportional split of the total vote received by the selected candidate in proportion to where the subsequent second and thirds, etc went.
120
Thanks, that is how I understand it too voting above the line. No number – no vote.
In my case, I am considering giving the Libs my number 2 above the line since I feel it is important to keep James Paterson in the Senate. Similar to Canavan in Qld, they are true conservatives and patriots and may not toe the party line all the time.
Freedom parties will get my number 1 but the odds are still short for them to prevail so in effect I will vote for the Libs’ numero uno (Paterson).
Voting below the line makes sense if you know/research each candidate and do not agree with their party’s hierarchy as to who is placed second or third..
91
An example of that was in 2022 when quite a few voted below the line in NSW, when the Libs moved the late Major General Jim Molan down their senate ticket and voters specifically wanted Jim to be elected. Jim was 3rd on the list and received nearly 16,000 votes, while the Lib candidate 2nd on the list only got 2,000.
60
For the senate, not giving the Greens a number would mean your vote can’t be allocated to them if all your choices before them aren’t selected.
Best thing to do is number more than just the minimum 6 boxes to ensure your vote gets distributed to a preferred party/candidate at some point.
Of course, for House of representatives ballot. You have to number all the boxes including the Greens. Failure to number any box could mean your ballot paper is deemed incomplete and invalid. In theory they should still be able to count it if your intention is clear, but it’s not worth risking it being invalid so number all on the House of Reps ballot.
70
Too late now as most have voted. However, no body should vote above the line for the senate as parties control who is on the list, how many are on the list and the order of the list. It is not democratic.
6 years ago senator Rennick was the third liberal candidate and he was lucky to be elected. The result was in order LNP ALP LNP ON LNP Green. The first candidate on the lists of the greens, ALP and LNP/LP/Nat are the useless ones who are only interested in their own welfare and power rather than the good of the country (except for Jacinta Price in NT). If there was no above the line voting Senator Rennick may have stayed with the liberals as people can chose the individuals they prefer.
10
Gerard got my vote. I will post my ‘postal vote’ this morning.
100
Kicking myself as I only voted Rennick above the line and not following with a minimum of five others. Optional preferential is my go.
40
In Australia, the deranged Left (a tautology I know) don’t respect freedom or democracy and have obvious issues with impulse control and anger management.
Look at the following video. A Leftoid attacked a Trumpets of Patriots volunteer handing out flyers at an early election booth in Melbournistan.
https://youtu.be/aFZvIvX89TU
And in the following video independent reporter from Rebel News, Avi Yemeni questions the “carbon footprint” of the Teals.
https://youtu.be/ZtXLKd6mdV0
152
I think the Coalition have an uphill battle, but I hope the Teals lose seats and the vile Greens and Labor don’t do as well as expected.
I’ve already voted and the Coalition have received my preference vote after most of Jo’s list get the first bite.
I’m also looking forward to Rowan Dean’s summary tonight on Sky News.
262
The punters have Labor six lengths in front at the post.
The question is will the Libs replace Dutton after the election, considering the Trump Effect, probably not.
32
Sometimes the only public gain from an election is that the leader of the losing party is replaced. If that doesn’t happen this time there really will be h*ll to pay.
30
For the Senate I always vote below the line.
In Victoriastan there were 65 candidates this year.
It was a tough decision who to put last. So many lowlifes to choose from.
170
As I use to do (and once in NSW there were 126 below the line) put The Greens last with their candidates in reverse order. Then work your way up.
50
I want to get rid of the uni-party because they are both dancing to a tune that doesn’t come from Australians
122
Vote for independents and put the majors last, a pox on both their houses.
31
Great post Jo.
I have been putting people onto the Topher Field YouTube video on the preferential voting system and how to protect the right leaning minor parties by voting for the minor Right parties, in any order of your preference, before the Liberal or Nationals, where your vote will end up. But it puts the minor party in a better place to pick up the last Senate seat against a Green, plus the election money helps the minor party.
So go have a look at Topher and spread the word. This will go towards styling the Left/Green vote in the Senate.
230
“stymying “, not styling!
31
Thanks Murray, yes, I’ve added the Topher video to the post. He does a great job. It is a scandal that Australians don’t know how this works because it could break the Uniparty in a single election.
102
My wife’s meandering through her favourite web pages yesterday gave her a giggle. An Australian woman thought she was succumbing to dementia because she had difficulty discerning fact from fiction – BUT she found the remedy was to stop watching ABC.
290
Liberals in my area Warringah, have on NSW Senate Paper
Libertarian/Heart/Gerard Rennick People First No 5 on their Senate paper
https://www.liberal.org.au/team/jaimee-rogers#how-to-vote
100
The Liberals are not conservative or pro-freedom so generally put such parties low on the preferences.
Although for the first time ever, they have preferenced One Nation in some seats but I suspect that’s not because One Nation believes in freedom but for ulterior political purposes.
Trumpets of Patriots have a policy of putting the sitting member, whoever they are, last on preferences.
41
Although they have Libertarian/Rennick at No.5, it’s worth noting that they have:
2. Australian Christians
3. Family First
4. One Nation
All similar to Libertarian, although the Australian Christians aren’t on that matrix.
It’s basically the same in other states with One nation 2 or 3, Libertarian 3 or 4, with Family first in the mix too.
Australian Christians are either not represented in all states or not in the top 5 in all states.
The Nationals slot in at 2 in SA and WA.
30
Many Australians, present company excepted, don’t understand how preferential voting works.
Thus, they follow the “how to vote” cards of their preferred party
Most don’t understand that you can place your order of preference from the least bad candidate to the most bad one in your preferred order, not that of the party’s recommendation.
And if you vote for a pro-freedom party and they don’t get elected and you put the fake conservative Liberals after the freedom parties, your vote won’t be wasted, it will still eventually go to them after the earlier preferences are exhausted.
122
I have endlessly seen ads from Labor saying the Dutton nuclear program will cost $600 billion.
(And as if Labor was ever concerned about overspending in any case.)
This is a blatantly obvious lie and the true cost of building a reactor can be found in seconds. $600 billion implies $85 billion per reactor which is clearly absurd and an overestimate of about ten times.
I don’t know how they continue to get away with advertising that lie and clearly Lamestream Media “journalists” are too incompetent or too complicit in the lie to call the party out on that.
Even the Liberals seem to be silent on the matter.
241
The published and oft discussed cost of building nuclear reactors is a bit like saying it will cost x amount to buy a car. And like anything else it might be as well to ask an expert (say an engineer) to get some true insight. Obviously cost depends on the required capacity and chosen technology but we have enough guidelines now to make a rough assessment. The $85b is reasonable should the decision be to build a large reactor servicing a large number of homes but other options should also be considered including the use of SMR’s in the mix. In fact these much cheaper alternatives should form the backbone in providing power across such a large continent with a relatively scattered population. Hopefully the links below will fill in a few gaps…
https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/cost-of-sizewell-c-expected-to-reach-40bn-15-01-2025/
https://minerals.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Small-modular-reactors-in-the-Australian-context_Ben-Heard_2022-update.pdf
63
The MSM are both complicit and incompetent.
91
I suspect that Anthony Albanese is breaking the law with his persistent lie about the cost of nuclear. It would be nice, if he is re-elected, to see the election result challenged in the courts on that basis. In one stroke, Australian democracy could be dramatically boosted.
50
DM,
All can search World Nuclear Organisation to source historic build costs for a few hundred past reactors. I was going to post what $600 billion can buy (tip, many more than the 6 to the Libs plan) but there are several units of measurement like national currencies to bring into line that will take some time.
Trying for tomorrow Saturday.
Geoff S
30
It looks like Simon Holmes a Court may take Freo with his Teal “community independent” Kate Hulett. Labor lived the Teals last time, as they took Lib seats. Now Labor are being attacked. “Community Independent” is code for “Simon Says”.
170
I feel like a prisoner about to be hanged from the scaffold to-morrow. My last words before the greens hangman pulls the lever will be ‘You asked for what you are going to get so suffer you fools.’
151
I’m not happy that the issues have been simplified so much. Sure some people need things to be simple but life isn’t simple and neither is politics. An easy example is “oppose”. If a party opposes something does that mean they want it altered or want it removed?
Some parties oppose increasing the GST. Such an increase would (a) raise revenue, (b) make people reconsider their spending and (c) take some of the burden off taxpayers who seem to have to fund every hare-brained government scam … sorry, scheme.
Another example is lockdowns, People with medical knowledge saw the good sense in doing that. The wider public was poorly informed by state and federal governments and then relied on claims from overseas where lockdowns were only put in place after covid was rife, which meant those lockdowns were useless.
423
Thanks Jo , great post .
Important to read the instructions on the ballot paper ( so as not to make your vote invalid ) .
I may be wrong but I think there is ” optional preferential voting ” below the line on the senate paper , but you must vote for a minimum number ( I think 12 ? ) .
That makes it a lot easier to vote below the line and thus puts you in control of where your preferences go .
If that is the case The greens , teals and labor will not get a number at all .
However I will prepare my own ” how-to-vote-card ” and take it with me just in case .
90
I reckon it is the most complicated voting procedures that I can recall. It is very difficult, for example, to combine candidate suggestions from more than one group. There are a couple of groups that I approve, and I thought that I would pick and choose from them easily. Not so. It was quite complicated because of the number of candidates – particularly for the Senate.
70
Sadly there will be no appetite for change until the pain of daily existence becomes too hard to bear. Whether that be immigration, cost of living pressures or the inevitable power cuts who knows but in Australia we ain’t there yet. The weather is pretty much perfect, still seems to be money floating around, restaurants are busy and the streets are still relatively safe. The cracks are beginning to show this time round but not enough to make people think seriously about alternatives. MSM pushes the 2 party narrative and most intellectually challenged Australians think the choice is simply between blue and red. Those who choose not to participate in society vote red because of the freebies; those who choose to actually work for a living are divided between the two, depending on income level, and the remainder (those who read these pages) think critically and vote accordingly but remain frustrated at the inability of so called freedom parties to make headway. Given another term of awful government the picture may well change but in the meantime chuck another shrimp on the barbie and she’ll be right mate…..
150
By weight of numbers in my email today and yesterday, Labor’s battery gift using OPM is a vote catcher. Lots of businesses have models that depend on Federal and State largesse. It could even swing some Greens and Teals voters to Labor.
All those people in the Gippsland region involved in the offshore wind development off Victoria will not be voting for LNP.
Have you noticed the lack of Snowy 2 in any of the poling. LNP do not want to raise it because it was their idea. Labor do not want to raise it because it is flushing money into big holes in the ground where water should now be running.
140
The blackout on political advertising is next to useless now. I am still getting emails, pop-ups and texts from political parties.
80
Yes. They do need to update the legislation for modern media. Or remove it. Currently only applies to TV and Radio licensed broadcasts.
70
Apparently they are not illegal during the blackout stage of the election process.
Political advertisements aren’t bound by the ‘truth in advertising’ rules/laws either.
Why?…Because….they’re ‘special’ ya know. Just ask ’em!
100
Shakes head because of the Hopium addicts…
Mumbles something about “precipice”…
Wanders off, still shaking head…
61
The name Liberal Party for what has traditionally been the “conservative” party in Australia can be confusing, given what we have come to associate with the name in modern times.
The name relates to economic liberalism. Free enterprise and liberal trade.
60
BTW we should listen to Nuclear experts like Dr Adi Paterson when he compares cheap, reliable Nuclear with toxic W & S and then we definitely wouldn’t vote for loonies like the Greens, Teals or Labor parties.
Here he talks to Chris Smith about the cost of Nuclear and why it is much cheaper than toxic W & S and is available 24/7 /365 days a year and would last way beyond 2100.
And we don’t have to destroy thousands of klms of our environments for a zero return.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSfURlFZwmM
140
It’s time to recall Oliver Cromwell’s Speech dissolving the Long Parliament 372 years ago.
60
That was repeated for Neville Chamberlain in 1940
30
FWIW – UK
“When You Thought The Met Office Could Not Get Any More Dishonest!”
Another temperature record – supercharged by barriers, porta-potties and diesel generators
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/05/01/when-you-thought-the-met-office-could-not-get-any-more-dishonest/
90
In an update we have the lying Far Left Met Office claiming a record high temperature for May yesterday. This was recorded not at Heathrow Airport but at the horticultural gardens at Kew which I am pretty sure is not one of the few WMO grade 1 or 2 sites in the UK. For those who do not know Kew Gardens lies on the river Thames in the western suburbs of London. For the WMO 3 to 5 sites there could be a variance of 2 to 5 degrees from the recorded temperature.
21
FWIW – will “Their ABC” report this?
“BREAKING: President Trump Signs “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media” Executive Order to Defund NPR and PBS”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/05/breaking-president-trump-signs-executive-order-defunding-npr/
103
Excellent news for Americans.
But the amounts they get are tiny compared to Australia’s Their ABC and SBS.
And Dutton won’t defund them even if he is elected.
72
Oops. Count one red as green. Sorry about that.
10
They have actually..
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-02/donald-trump-cuts-funding-for-pbs-npr/105244626
And even included:
” The broadcasters get roughly half a billion US dollars ($A780 million) in public money through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and have been preparing for the possibility of staff cuts since Mr Trump’s election.
In comparison, last financial year the ABC received $1.137 billion in Commonwealth funding.”
I’m glad I was sitting down when I came across the story, and that my chair has arms.
61
Listening to Their ABC Radio National in my car lately, more than I want to, it’s clear that it’s a $1 billion dollar per year 24/7 far Left propaganda operation that doesn’t work for the benefit of all taxpaying Australians but just Greens, Labor and Teals. They have a huge adverse effect on Australian democracy.
140
The imminent Federal Election is, no doubt, Australia’s most crucial election for future freedom and prosperity, yet voting couldn’t be trickier. It seems as complicated as defusing a time-bomb whilst in an echo chamber full of painfully distracting, loud media hype and certain pettifogging politicians who’ll stop at nothing to promise us the fix to all they’ve buggered up in the first place.
100
Somehow, it seems trickier than it used to be. Given that the law doesn’t actually require us to vote, only to turn up, surely the rule should be: Put ‘1’ against your preferred candidate and optionally ‘2’, ‘3’, … against as few or as many more as you wish. Documentation can explain the implications of not entering ‘2’ etc, but surely it should be the voter’s choice. After all, if the voter writes “NOBODY” across the paper, that is exactly how it is accepted.
40
Agree.
I’ve often suggested here that we should have optional preferential voting in the Reps, but few seemed interested.
30
FWIW – Suprise! Suprise!
“Radio Liberty Let The Cat Out Of The Bag Regarding The EU’s Game Plan For Ukraine”
“Russia can expect nothing in return from the EU if Putin concedes to allow their troops and aircraft to deploy in and patrol over Western Ukraine…”
More at
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/radio-liberty-let-cat-out-bag-regarding-eus-game-plan-ukraine
20
FWIW
“The California Bullet Train Is A Good Lesson In Political Deception”
“If one tries to make sense of an exercise in spending billions of dollars for a Train to Nowhere, one cannot use conventional financial logic. There is a logical process at work, but it is a logic of a different sort than what appeals to a typical reader of this page. Political logic, especially in a state like California where progressive politics dominates, veers sharply from economic and business logic.”
More at
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/california-bullet-train-good-lesson-political-deception
Your key to “Elbow’s budgetary logic”?
40
Good luck to you all in Australia. Take heart from yesterday where Reform overturned a 15,000 Labour majority in the first byelection defeat for Far Left PM Two Tier Kier Starmer. Reform also won the most seats in our local elections.
70
The difference Gerry is that our equivalents to Reform get zero media and are virtually unknown. Albeit One Nation is known but mocked mercilessly on TV.
The conservatives here are better than the Tories were at the last election but they’re not offering anything as decisive as Reform. That means the hottest topics are not being discussed much. Climate Change is invisible. Immigration is only lightly mentioned. So, I fear, mostly Australians are unaware there is even an option to vote for a centre right party or that immigration, Net Zero, and misinformation laws are a threat.
The media made sure the “issues” are pitiful bread and circus type nothingness.
Sleepers at the wheel.
60
Well done UK ! We’ll do our best here but it’s a tall task. We don’t want to end up like Canada !
30
Seems to be a strange heaviness about. Just been out to scope the election day booth I’m at and encountered 3 police squad cars doing the rounds of the general area. Stay safe all.
60
This year I looked at the names of candidates as a possible clue to religion. Found a rather large proportion related to Allah. Geoff S
70
Amazingly, Australia’a Voice (E) has 2 such names and 1 Pakistani (?) but (D) Aboriginal Indigenous Party has both candidates with names suggesting the religion of submission.
Also, the Ungrouped G group has 2 candidates who profess to belong to SEP – the Socialist Equality Party, a member of the 4th Internationale! The advocate the abolition of the capitalist system.
20
FWIW
“A Simple, Factual, and Sensible Rebuttal to the Chemtrail Conspiracy Theory”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/04/30/a-simple-factual-and-sensible-rebuttal-to-the-chemtrail-conspiracy-theory/
Suggestion – pour yourself a good sized one before reading the comments – there are about 3 pages
30
I only have two words to say to the person who make the video: Lisa Murkowski.
10
So happy to see this in so many different places. I feel like things might, ever so slowly, be moving in the right direction. We will never vote our way out of tyranny or systemic corruption. However if more voices can get in that toxic S’hole the better.
I feel sorry for the poor people like Gerald Rennick taking on these morons for us.
31
So how did all your votes for libertarians go?
You can get the same warm feeling peeing your pants and it makes just as much sense.
11