I, personally, think the opposite is true.
To illustrate, let me take you back to my very first election.
It was a state election, and at that time I knew very little about politics, but knew enough to know that I supported the Democrats over the major parties and that One Nation was evil.
Come polling day, my card looked something like this:
Liberal (or was it National?) candidate
Shooter's party candidate
Democratic Labor Party candidate
Okay. I admit that I was dissappointed that there was no One Nation for me to put last, but the Shooter's Party was a pretty good scapegoat.
Anyway, it's embarassing to admit this, but thinking "Democratic Labor Party" was the full title of "The Democrats", I put them first.
My point, therefore, is that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Come election day, the Senate voting form is going to have sixty-odd candidates.
The ones from the major parties I will have no problem sorting (and I include the Greens & Democrats in this), but when it comes to independent candidates or minor parties I have to admit that I am still rather ignorant.
Because of this I won't know if a particular candidate is a decent liberal type of pollie, or an evil blood-sucking conservative.
Therefore, I think it is safer to vote above the line, for a party that you can trust.
But, aye, there's the rub: who can you trust?
Thankfully, I feel that I can still trust the Greens, and I'm sure-as-shit I can't trust any other party.
The only other option is to research every candidate and party, and number every box below the line, both of which are rather lengthy processes.
For example, can someone please tell me what Mr Harald E Dreger of Lancefield stands for?
Or, for that matter, what are the Australian Progressive Alliance all about?
Now answer that question for all sixty or so Victorian Senate candidates and I might consider voting below the line.