Why Strategic Voting Maximises Your Vote’s Power
By Denis Hay
Description
Learn how strategic voting can transform Australia’s politics. Empower your vote to challenge ALP-LNP dominance using preferences effectively.
Strategic Voting in Australia: Unlocking the Power of Preferences
Australia’s preferential voting system is a defining feature of its democracy. Yet, despite its potential to empower voters, it is often misunderstood or underutilised.
In this guide, we explore how strategic voting can revolutionise Australian politics, enabling citizens to break the ALP-LNP dominance and create a more representative democracy.
Misunderstanding Australia’s Voting System
1. The Basics of Preferential Voting
Australia’s preferential voting system allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference. Unlike first-past-the-post systems, this method ensures that votes flow from eliminated candidates to the voter’s next preference, deciding between the final two contenders.
– Key Insight: Voters, not parties, distribute preferences.
– Misconception: Many Australians believe parties control preferences, leading to misplaced trust in “How to Vote” cards.
2. The Impact of Preferences on Election Outcomes
Statistical analysis reveals a surprising truth: preferences rarely change the outcome of elections. In 134 out of 151 electorates (89%), the party leading in first-preference votes wins after all distributions.
– Exception: In 17 electorates, preferences did alter the results.
– Case Studies: Bennelong (NSW), Brisbane (QLD), Higgins (VIC), and Lyons (TAS).
3. The Consequences of Misunderstanding Preferences
When voters do not strategically distribute preferences, they inadvertently reinforce the ALP-LNP duopoly, limiting parliamentary diversity. For example:
– 24 X-Bench candidates led in first-preference votes, but only 15 won.
– 67 X-Bench candidates were second, but only one secured victory.
Why This Matters for Australian Democracy
1. The ALP-LNP Monopoly
The dominance of ALP and LNP stifles alternative voices and perpetuates policies that often serve corporate interests over public welfare. This duopoly:
– Supports controversial initiatives like AUKUS.
– Neglects pressing issues such as affordable housing and climate action.
2. Lost Opportunities for Representation
The underrepresentation of independents and smaller parties (X-Bench) hinders innovation and accountability in government. Strategic voting could dramatically increase their parliamentary presence, shifting the balance of power.
3. Voter Disillusionment
The complexity of the voting system, combined with misinformation, leaves many Australians feeling powerless. This disengagement further entrenches the status quo.
Solution: The Strategic Voting Model
1. Understanding Your Vote’s Power
Strategic voting empowers Australians to:
– Rank X-Bench candidates above ALP and LNP.
– Ensure their vote flows to major parties only if X-Bench candidates are eliminated.
Key Fact: Votes never expire – they are counted until they contribute to one of the final two candidates.
2. Steps for Strategic Voting
- Research all candidates in your electorate.
- Rank independents and smaller parties (X-Bench) higher on your ballot.
- Place ALP and LNP last, in the order of your preference.
3. Potential Impact
– If voters strategically preference X-Bench candidates, up to 40–60 independents could enter Parliament.
– This shift would force major parties to negotiate, creating a more representative and responsive government.
Implementing Change: Educating Voters
1. Voter Education Campaigns
– Use social media platforms, like X (Twitter), to give clear, information.
– Collaborate with grassroots organisations to run workshops and community events.
2. Analytical Resources
– Provide access to data-driven insights, such as the 2022 voter preference records, to illustrate the power of strategic voting.
– Share analytical workbooks detailing missed opportunities for X-Bench candidates.
3. Combating Misinformation
– Challenge misleading narratives, such as the notion that voting for independents is a “wasted vote.”
– Highlight the role of advocacy groups in manipulating preference flows for their advantage.
Building a Representative Democracy
1. Breaking the ALP-LNP Duopoly
Strategic voting disrupts the major party stranglehold, paving the way for policies that prioritise citizens over corporate interests.
2. Encouraging Accountability
A diverse Parliament, with a strong X-Bench presence, ensures greater transparency and accountability in decision-making.
3. Aligning Policy with Public Interest
– Increased representation of independents can lead to policies addressing climate change, social justice, and economic equality.
Summary: Empower Your Vote
Strategic voting is a notable change for Australian democracy. By understanding and utilising preference distributions, voters can:
– Dismantle the ALP-LNP monopoly.
– Empower independents and smaller parties.
– Shape a Parliament that truly stands for the will of the people.
Question for Readers
What do you think about strategic voting as a tool to reshape Australian politics? How do you plan to allocate your preferences in the 2025 election? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
Call to Action
If you found this article insightful, explore more about political reform and Australia’s monetary sovereignty on Social Justice Australia.
Share this article with your community to help drive the conversation toward a more just and equal society.
Click on our “Reader Feedback” menu. Let us know how our content has inspired you. Submit your testimonial and help shape the conversation today!
Support Our Mission
If you believe in holding corporations accountable and creating a more just society, consider supporting our work. Your donations help us continue producing in-depth, informative content and advocating for meaningful reforms. Every contribution, big or small, makes a difference.
Donate Here to help drive positive change.
Thank you for standing with us for a fairer, more equitable Australia.
This article is based on the work of Greg Bean
Find Greg Bean on X (Twitter): https://x.com/GregLBean
Watch Greg Bean’s Video here: https://x.com/i/status/1857267474678628581
VoteEasy: https://voteeasy.com.au/election-group/aus-federal-election/
The Political Compass: https://www.politicalcompass.org/aus2025
They Vote for You: https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/
Build a Ballot: https://www.buildaballot.org.au/
This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia
Dear reader, we need your support
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
![](data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,<svg height="400px" width="1000px" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.1"/>)
Recent Posts
Political Futures: Seeking Out Critical Media Coverage of Top End Problems
By Denis Bright Top End: Can Incompatibles Interact? Where savanna shores meet fragile Top End…
Why Reclaiming Public Assets Must Be Australia’s Next Step
By Denis Hay Description Australians demand a public-first future. Reclaiming public assets after the election…
Explaining The Election Result To My Wife…
My wife was expressing some amazement at the size of Labor's win in the election…
Comforting food
By Maria Millers The Indian summer we have been enjoying so far is coming to…
The unshakable entitlement of Donald Trump: how narcissism rewrites the rules
There’s a grotesque irony to Donald Trump’s worldview: a man who spent decades gilding his…
Sussan Ley’s Liberal Leadership Triumph: Did Trump’s Shadow Sink Taylor?
Sussan Ley’s defeat of Angus Taylor (29 votes to 25) in the Liberal Party leadership…
View Comments
Coalition and One Nation are finally swapping preferences.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-04-23/pauline-hanson-one-nation-preferencing-deal/105200748
While agreeing with most of this - One Nation and Palmer's mob should be rated under the ALP/LNP to ensure they don't accidently get a seat in Parliament.
Thank you Denis.
Interestingly I had this discussion with a person coming up to vote.
The person was complaining about the preferences on the how to vote leaflet I was handing out.
So I asked who they would prefer as their second choice, third choice and so forth.
It took a couple of minutes ut the person came back after voting and thanked me for helping understand the system.
It is not a party telling you how to vote, only you can decide that, but get to know what the parties represent.
Easy..... except that it means you have to make yourself aware of who is standing, what their agenda is .... be engaged with the system.
2353NM, exactly.
Coalition and One Nation finally getting together is a sign of desperation, but it could make a difference.
Jumped on board with the so far more than half a million pre poll voters today, politely swatting away the many blue t-shirted LNP flunkies, shook hands with the local member, a Labor pollie, a good bloke whom I've met a couple of times before, left my dog in the safe hands of a Greens pamphleteer whilst I was inside, and exercised my discretionary right to preference the outcome for Bennelong. Unfortunately, no high profile Independent candidate on offer, so the key task became that of ensuring the LNP candidate fails in his attempt to wrest the seat from Labor. It's tricky... he's Chinese, and Bennelong has a large Asian population. Fingers crossed. The incumbent seemed confident that he would retain the seat.
I have had not one item of information in my letterbox in the Gellibrand electorate of Victoria except from the sitting MP Tim Watts. I would have had no idea about any of the other candidates had I not looked them up myself. I read that this system of voting is good but - honestly- 8 boxes to number for HOR and 6 boxes for Senate , or possibly 12 if so inclined.
It really is the most complicated system - more so , as I have received no information about any of the candidates except a pro Labor leaflet from from Tim Watts which arrived today. No information, no voting advice just : Vote for me. Last election I had lots of information to choose from. I am grumbling because my obvious choice is Labor - Tim Watts - but I have to look at all the other people for preferences and I have received not an iota of who they are. It seems a shambles. The Senate names are worse and more confusing.
Apologies if I do not understand this electoral procedure.
Careful for what you wish for?
Voters, especially the majority who are low info, keep hearing the repetitive and glib 'they are both the same', to encourage a vote against the centre ie. ALP, when there are different policies avoided by the RW MSM.
It's one thing to dislodge and/or defeat suboptimal longstanding LNP & RWNJs, but a free for all is potentially dangerous in dislodging good ALP and other reps?
My wife gets our only paper, S M Herald on Sat., for the inserts and puzzles. It is a bonsai bullshit bastardisation now, overpriced, underdone, with slants, avoidances, gaps, overlookings, omissions, plays to the crass, spooorrrttt, obits, scandals and rumours. Yawnipoos and hohummery at that. Someone (Hartcher) who can write (english) writes (paid) shit. Who pays for the money for the fuel for the engine of the SMH??
I consider myself an aberrant labor voter, Denis.
Your
'Research all candidates in your electorate.
Rank independents and smaller parties (X-Bench) higher on your ballot.
Place ALP and LNP last, in the order of your preference.'
'All candidates' is good but your advice, being to discard two of them, regardless of the personal qualities, is drivel.
I look at the candidates in order to allocate the AEC cash with my first preference our labor candidate has got the record of cash twice.
ps this election we are required to mark preferences above the line or 12 below the line. I missed the arguments when this change was passed. I can guess it is to make aberrations like leyonhjelm difficult?
Whilst on face value breaking the duopoly might seem like a good idea IMO there are too many variables that just make this concept too dangerous. Any mistakes made (all too easy) can lead to unintended consequences like electing one or more Trumpets Of Patriots, One Neuron, Greens or even the really minor parties. History shows most of these tend to, most of the time, vote with the Lieberals. Witness the Trumpets, One Neuron, Jackie Lambie, etc.
Basically what I am asserting is that trying to break the duopoly is only going to benefit the Lieberals. And we do not want that in any shape or form.