11.28pm. Okay, one last thing – Geoff Lambert notes in comments that Labor’s surplus over the fourth quota for the upper house is going steadily down, which suggests it will be their preferences that decide the final spot. If so, it will go to the Greens rather than the third No Pokies candidate. Keep your eye on the comments thread, where Geoff will hopefully keep you posted on further developments.
11.26pm. That will do for me for now, although I might come back later to crunch some Tasmanian numbers. I believe the SEO has wrapped things up for the evening – on present indications, it seems my election guide called all seats correctly except for the independent victories in Mount Gambier (certain) and Mitchell (likely). Not a bad effort, if I do say so myself. No doubt that scoundrel Charles Richardson at Crikey (the only other person silly enough to publish seat-by-seat predictions, to my knowledge) went one better, but I cannot say because my Crikey email mysteriously failed to arrive on Friday.
10.58pm. Graham Gunn is now behind in Stuart by 1.0 per cent, on the reckoning of both the SEO and Antony Green. I’m guessing that the Port Augusta booths followed the broader trend more closely than the small rural and remote booths that were coming in earlier.
10.54pm. Antony Green has Liberal leading by 1.4 per cent in Unley, compared with 0.5 per cent at the SEO.
10.48pm. Finally, some new figures for Mitchell – the count is now up to 73.1 per cent after being stuck on 50.4 per cent for about an hour. The figures haven’t changed much – Kris Hanna is on 25.8 per cent compared with 20.8 per cent for the Liberals, with Labor on 40.7 per cent. Wisely, the SEO has scrubbed its old Labor versus Liberal 2PP figure, but it hasn’t replaced it with anything. Those still look like winning figures for Hanna to me. Antony Green’s computer still has "ALP ahead" on the basis of out-of-date figures. An ABC news report reveals Labor’s candidate sounds less than confident.
10.42pm. I’m still getting a seat for the Greens, and so are the default entries at Upperhouse.Info which have been updated on the basis on recent figures. Geoff is saying almost all Democrats preferences will need to go to the Greens if they are to stay against Labor’s fifth candidate and No Pokies’ third. As useful as the Upperhouse.Info calculator is, it suffers a weakness in that it assumes all Democrats votes will do so. In fact, the total number of candidates is much smaller than at the 2002 election, which means there will be more votes going below the line this time. I would think that more below-the-line Democrats voters would favour No Pokies than Labor – enough to close the narrow existing gap of 0.56 to 0.53, assuming most of them don’t favour the Greens. That third No Pokies candidate is not out of the hunt yet.
10.30pm. Geoff Lambert, who is way better with numbers than I am, questions my earlier calculation that the Greens are up for the eleventh upper house seat. Time for me to do another calculation I think.
10.20pm. I made a good call with my last-minute decision to provide live commentary. I believe we’ve broken a record for most comments on a Poll Bludger discussion thread.
10.12pm. SA: The SEO has the Liberal lead in Unley at only 0.5 per cent on 2PP. Antony Green’s computer, which is rarely wrong from 72.8 per cent of the vote, still has it down as Liberal retain. But could it be that it’s underestimating the strength of preferences to Labor? Does the SEO have actual rather than notional preference figures?
10.06pm. Tasmania: Interesting to hear the victory and concession speeches. Where these are usually given to the party faithful, in Tasmania they are conducted before a crowd of all comers at Wrest Point Casino, and hoots and jeers can be heard amid the amidst the applause.
9.57pm. SA: Things are strangely quiet on the Mitchell front, as far as News Radio and the SEO go. Does anyone know anything? Graham Gunn’s lead in Stuart has weakend to 0.7 per cent on 2pp.
9.44pm. SA: Second-hand reports say the ABC computer has upper house figures with more than 60 per cent counted, and the No Pokies vote has more than held up.
9.37pm. SA: I’ve done my own calculations on the upper house so the percentages make sense. Only two No Pokies now; Labor four; Liberal three; Family First one; Greens take the seat that went missing from No Pokies.
9.28pm. SA: About 18 per cent counted in the upper house – bizarrely, the SEO’s percentage figures add up to more than 100. I have tried plugging them into the Upperhouse.Info calculator regardless and I get THREE seats for No Pokies, who are on a spectacular 19.3 per cent, only three for the Liberals, four for Labor, one for Family First.
9.20pm. SA: Bob Such’s excellent performance in Fisher has been called to my attention. He’s on 49.4 per cent of the vote and the Liberals are in third place, and in no danger of closing the gap over Labor. The SEO’s 2PP figure is Such versus Liberal – understandable, but wrong.
9.17pm. SA: The SEO 2PP figures have added a bit more fat to Graham Gunn’s lead, now on 1.3 per cent. He actually trails 44.4 per cent to 46.6 per cent on the primary vote, but is obviously doing well out of preferences from Family First’s 4.0 per cent (or perhaps, is expected to do well – not sure if the preferences are actual or notional).
9.13pm. SA: They’re about to interview Rory McEwen on ABC Television. Dean Jaensch is pretty much calling Mount Gambier for him.
9.11pm. Tasmania: Another commenter notes that the Labor vote in Bass is boosted by Michelle O’Byrne’s left-wing support base, and that many of these votes will leak to the Greens. So Kim Booth’s position might be brighter than it appears at first glance.
9.09pm. SA: I misunderstood David Walsh’s earlier point. The significance of the high Greens vote in Kavel is not that they will have Family First last behind Liberal, but that they will feed preferences to Labor that will deprive Playford of second place.
9.07pm. SA: Dean Jaensch on ABC Television via News Radio notes a remarkably good overall performance for Family First and the Australian Democrats down by two-thirds.
9.05pm. SA: Hold the front page – a possible shock in Mitchell. Thanks for commenters for pointing it out, I haven’t heard it mentioned elsewhere. Independent incumbent Kris Hanna holds second place over the Liberals by 25.5 per cent to 21.0 per cent, with Labor on 40.7 per cent. Those look like winning figures for Hanna for me, unless Family First (5.1 per cent) and Dignity for Disabled (2.1 per cent) run very heavily against Hanna.
9.01pm. SA: The SEO 2PP from Mount Gambier is making more sense now. McEwen leads the Libs 56.1-43.9 – only 36.8 per cent counted, but it probably still answers my earlier question.
8.59pm. Both: A summary of remaining points of interest. Will Labor win a third seat from the Greens in Bass? Will the Liberals win one from Labor in Franklin? Will Graham Gunn hold Stuart for the Liberals against all odds? Will independent Rory McEwen hold Mount Gambier? What have I missed?
8.52pm. Tasmania: Haven’t heard much about Denison. Apparently Michael Hodgman will win the only seat certain to go to the Liberals. Peg Putt to be returned but her running mate Cassy O’Connor has not pulled a rabbit out of the hat, but the big Greens surplus will presumbly get a third candidate up at the expense of the Liberals’ second.
8.51pm. Tasmania: Someone on ABC Radio, I think Nick McKim, says he’s still confident Kim Booth will hold his seat in Bass.
8.49pm. SA: Maybe those SEO 2PP figures from Kavel were right after all – David Walsh notes in comments that the Greens are on a substantial 9 per cent in Kavel, and these are presumably running hard against Family First.
8.44pm. SA: I’ve been quieter lately because News Radio has been giving us the second half of a call-of-the-board from ABC Radio in Adelaide. Here we go: Labor swing of 5.1 per cent in Morphett. Antony Green says Rory McEwen is likely to retain Mount Gambier (damn – my only wrong call, but the look of it). Labor swing of almost 10 per cent in their safe seat of Napier. Swing to Labor of 12.9 per cent in the formerly Liberal seat of Newland. Labor swing of about 5 per cent in Norwood. Swing of 14.8 per cent in the safe Labor seat of Playford. Swing of only 4.0 per cent in safe Labor Port Adelaide. Mike Rann’s seat of Ramsay swings 7.1 per cent. Reynell, formerly not that safe, swings 14.0 per cent to Labor. Safe Liberal Barossa Valley seat of Schubert swings 7.1 per cent, with Labor’s primary vote up about 14 per cent. A surprise against the trend in Stuart, with Antony’s computer showing Liberal mega-veteran Graham Gunn holding his seat from an initial margin of barely 2 per cent (if so, another wrong call). It’s being noted that a solid One Nation vote from last time has disappeared. Safe Labor Taylor swings 8 per cent. Safe Labor Torrens swings 13.8 per cent. Liberal to hold Unley. Waite stays with the Liberals despite a swing of 8 per cent. Safe Labor West Torrens swings yet further. Marginal Labor Wright swings heavily to Labor.
8.42pm. Tasmania. Charles Richardson corrects me on Bass. It seems Labor are winning that seat from the Greens, not the Libs. The Greens will be down to two seats if so.
8.34pm. SA: Not sure how seriously to take these 2PP figures from the SEO (neither is one of the commenters), but Labor’s margin in the formerly Liberal seat of Light is 14.1 per cent.
8.27pm. While in SA, the star female performer has been Chloe Fox, who has won Bright with a swing of nearly 15 per cent.
8.25pm. Tasmania: At last – I can hear Antony Green on News Radio (they’re flitting around from radio to television coverage, and Antony’s on the latter). It indeed looks like the Liberals might drop a seat to Labor in Bass. He seems to be backing Labor to win a seat off the Liberals in Bass and is not writing off their third candidate in Franklin. The star of the evening looks to be Michelle O’Byrne, who might just end up being responsible for an increased Labor majority despite an overall 2 per cent drop on the primary vote and a 4 per cent increase for the Liberals. Christine Milne sounds very unhappy about the Exclusive Brethren business.
8.22pm. SA: Commenter Scott says Kevin Foley has said Labor leads every booth in the marginal Liberal seat of Morialta on the primary vote. An extraordinary result – Labor had put it about earlier in the campaign that they weren’t doing so well there.
8.19pm. SA: You may recall talk of Tom Playford, Family First candidate and son of the legendary Liberal Premier, might win the seat of Kavel. The Liberals are on 47.0 per cent, so it’s not likely, but he is at least looking good to clear the first hurdle as he leads Labor 20.0 per cent to 19.6 per cent. I’m not sure about these SEO 2PP figures – they have the Liberals leading Playford 64.4-35.6. Still, there’s only 11.2 per cent counted and maybe they’re factoring in booth variations. Yet more talk of extrordinary results for Nick Xenophon in the upper house.
8.17pm. SA: Nationals candidate Kym McHugh has faded in Finniss and now trails Labor 20.6 per cent to 29.4. The SEO 2PP has McHugh ahead of Liberal 1.9 per cent, but it’s looking like the final contest will in fact be between Liberal and Labor, with McHugh’s preferences giving it to the Libs.
8.15pm. SA: The SEO has Labor ahead just 50.1-49.9 on 2PP in Stuart.
8.13pm. SA: Does anyone know anything about Mount Gambier? The SEO has the Liberals leading Rory McEwen 55.1-44.9 on 2CP, but that’s not my reading from the primary vote with McEwen well ahead of Labor and only slightly behind the Liberals.
8.11pm. SA: First, very small figures from the upper house reportedly show an extraordinarily high vote for Nick Xenophon and the Liberals, in the words of Chris Schacht, possibly struggling for a fourth seat – an unprecedent failure if correct.
8.10pm. Tasmania: Big figures now up in Franklin, with nearly 70 per cent counted. Labor’s primary vote is now down to 47.0 per cent while the Liberals are on 31.2 per cent – so Labor are 3.0 per cent short of a third quota and Liberal are 2.1 per cent of a second. I personally would not be writing off Labor from holding off a third seat, but that doesn’t seem to be the general perception.
8.04pm. Tasmania: ALP apparatchik David O’Byrne says Labor is likely to win a seat off the Greens in Bass because the popularity of his sister, Michelle O’Byrne, is likely to bring another member across the line at the expense of Kim Booth. That member would almost certainly be Steve Reissig. So the most likely overall outcome as far as I can see is that the Labor loses a seat to the Liberals in Franklin and gains one from the Greens in Bass, and the total goes from 14-4-7 to 14-3-8.
8.00pm. Tasmania: Taking a step back, the only variation from the status quo that anyone is discussing is the possible loss of a Labor seat in Franklin. So unless I’m missing something, Labor look likely to retain their majority.
7.58pm. SA: Newland is clearly a shocker for the Liberals – a third of the vote counted and Labor on 61.2 per cent of the primary vote.
7.57pm. SA: It’s certainly not clear that Labor will win Stuart, from what I can see. The website has 16 per cent of the vote counted and Graham Gunn on 51.9 per cent. But that could be because the big Port Augusta booths are not in yet, and the tide will turn heavily when they are.
7.55pm. SA: Early figures from Mount Gambier, 6.0 per cent, and independent member Rory McEwen is doing better than expected with 46.2 per cent of the vote. It’s hard to see how he could lose from there, given that Labor are on 22.3 per cent. The ABC computer apparently predicts two independents, which I gather does not include Karlene Maywald. It also has Labor on 29 seats, which suggests that one of my calls for Labor is not looking certain. No idea which one though.
7.53pm. Tasmania: Finally more figures from Franklin, the count up to 17.9 per cent. Labor are down to 48.9 per cent, so still at least some chance of retaining three seats, although Paula Wreidt is definitely in danger. The Greens’ Nick McKim looks secure. Vanessa Goodwin would most likely be a new Liberal member.
7.51pm. Tasmania: The ABC says the swing against Labor is fading from about 4 per cent to 2 per cent, with the Liberals up 4 per cent, with the Greens down 2 per cent.
7.51pm. SA: Clearly my guess about that early Unley booth was on the money. Commenter Scott says the swing is only 3 per cent (from just 3.2 per cent of the count) and Dean Jaensch is saying Liberal retain.
7.5opm. Tasmania: Bearing in mind that the ABC has twice as many votes counted as are being published on the Electoral Commission site.
7.49pm. Tasmania: Labor’s vote is coming down in Bass, now down to 48.9 per cent. A 2-2-1 result is looking more likely, but 3-1-1- is still possible.
7.47pm. Tasmania: Results are slow to come through in Denison and Franklin. ABC Radio says 26 per cent is counted and Labor’s total vote is down about 4 per cent and the Liberals up about 6 per cent.
7.45pm. SA: A commenter (onya Scott – anyone else out there?) says the swing to Labor in the marginal Liberal seat of Mawson is a relatively subdued 5 per cent, still enough to cost them the seat.
7.44pm. SA: Only 3.2 per cent counted in Unley, but Labor leads 47.0 per cent to 40.5 per cent. Maybe this is from the Labor-leaning Goodwood area of the electorate. Liberal Hartley MP Joe Scalzi is on ABC Radio and doesn’t sound too confident. One of his interviewers is telling him he’s lost.
7.42pm. SA: Antony Green’s computer says the overall swing to Labor is 8.4 per cent, and their commenter is talking of 30 seats which is what I had predicted.
7.41pm. SA: Chris Schacht is only talking of a maximum of 28 seats, although he may be restraining himself. He says Hartley is not in the bag.
7.40pm. SA: The Liberals are all but conceding defeat in Norwood, which had been the subject of excited talk of a Liberal gain in the past few days.
7.36pm. Tasmania: Greens member Nick McKim says they are confident they will hold their seat in Bass.15 per cent in from Lyons – Labor holding up well, down only 1 per cent, but the Liberals are up 7 per cent. Perhaps this is where that overall swing is coming from. Labor will win three seats if they stay above 50 per cent, so it’s possible that the Greens will lose their seat despite a solid 14.2 per cent. A second Liberal winner would most certainly be Geoff Page. Someone has just said on ABC Radio that the Greens will not win a seat in Braddon, the only electorate where they do not do so currently, and that it will again by three Labor, two Liberal.
7.33pm. ABC Radio is talking about an overall Liberal increase of 7 per cent, which is more than what I’m seeing.
7.32pm. Tasmania: We’re now up to an almost meaningful 16.5 per cent of the count in Bass. The Liberals have only picked up about 1 per cent from Labor and the Greens are down 1 per cent. Last time the Liberals were very lucky to win two seats here, and may only narrowly do so again. If there is a third Labor winner it is likely to be Steve Reissig. On the Liberal ticket, Peter Gutwein leads former party leader Sue Napier 1386 to 990, with Napier having an uncomfortably narrow lead over David Fry, a former member who lost his seat in 2002.
7.30pm. SA: A talking head on ABC Television (I’m hearing this from News Radio so I can’t see who it is) is stalking as if Liberal veteran Graham Gunn is going to lose Stuart. The figures on the website have Gunn on 55.4 per cent, but that’s from 6.2 per cent of the vote and probably from booths away from the big towns.
7.28pm. Tasmania: About 5 per cent counted in Denison and the Greens are leading the Liberals, by enough to put a second Greens candidate (Cassy O’Connor) well into contention if it keeps up. Labor’s vote has plunged from 51 per cent to 39 per cent, but it’s too early to reach definite conclusions.
7.25pm. A closer look at Finniss: the Nationals are ahead of Labor, 19.9 per cent to 17.9 per cent, and presumably will pull in most of their preferences. The Liberals are on 41.2 per cent, still a winnable position, but this seat is one to keep an eye on.
7.23pm. Chris Schacht says there is a double-digit swing to Labor in Newland, held by the Liberals by about 5.5 per cent. Clearly we have a massacre on our hands here.
7.23pm. A bombshell from Finniss: Chris Pyne says Nationals candidate Kym McHugh is taking it right up to the Liberals.
7.22pm. Antony Green now on ABC Radio reeling through consistent Labor swings across various electorates of between 6 and 14 per cent.
7.20pm. SA: Stuart (the outback plus Port Augusta) reportedly swinging only slightly to Labor. The margin’s roughly 2 per cent, so this one could be tight.
7.17pm. Tasmania: 5 per cent now in from Franklin, and Labor’s primary vote is actually unchanged on 51 per cent despite the talk from earlier exit polls. Also little change for the Liberals (up about 1 per cent to 24 per cent) and the Greens (up about 1 per cent to 21 per cent). So talk of either Paula Wriedt or Lara Hiddings losing their seat may have been premature. Hiddings leads Wriedt, so the latter is indeed likely to be the casualty if there is one.
7.15pm. Pyne concedes the booth in question (the info here is from scrutineers, so these figures are not through yet) is quintessential middle class, and Chris Schacht says Labor has not won it in 20 years.
7.13pm. Federal Liberal MP Chris Pyne says there is a double-digit Labor swing in the marginal Liberal seat of Bright. Goodnight Irene.
7.13pm. South Australia: talk of a 7 per cent Labor swing in the marginal Labor seat of Croydon.
7.12pm. Still no meaningful results from Franklin in Tasmania, but now up to 7 per cent in Lyons. That exit poll’s looking good – Labor is indeed down by 5 per cent, but the Liberals are up 7 per cent and the Greens are down 1.5 per cent, but again, these are probably conservative booths. The distribution of the Labor vote among the candidates has remained the same.
7.09pm. Only 2.6 per cent counted, but in South Australia’s safest Liberal seat, Flinders, the Nationals vote is doubling from about 8 per cent to about 16 per cent. But Liberal member Liz Penfold is still well over 50 per cent.
7.05pm. In South Australia (I’m using Tasmanian time here, I’m afraid), former Labor Senator Chris Schacht says the Collinswood booth, in the only area of Enfield that is not extremely safe for Labor, is widely seen as a litmus test, and has swung heavily to Labor.
7.03pm. 2.73 per cent counted in Lyons. Labor incumbent Heather Butler is only slightly ahead of the other two Labor candidates, whereas Michael Polley and David Llewellyn look sure to be re-elected. Incumbents from the other parties (Rene Hidding for Liberal and Tim Morris for the Greens) comfortably lead their tickets. Overall, Labor are down 4 per cent, Liberal up 9 per cent and the Greens down 3 per cent, but these are probably conservative booths.
7.00pm. With 2.45 per cent counted in Braddon, there is no indication yet that either of the two Labor newcomers overcoming sitting member Brendon Best, as has been suggested. The main story in this seat is whether the Greens can win a seat, which they did not do last time. Overall, Labor is well down here and the Liberals well up, such that the Liberals lead 47.2 per cent to 40.5 per cent, but this is almost certainly because the results are from small conservative rural booths.
6.54pm. Results are starting to trickle in in Tasmania, though only 1.04 per cent counted. Michelle O’Byrne leads out of the Labor ticket in Bass with sitting member Jim Cox second and daylight third. On the totals, Labor are down about 3 per cent to the Greens with the Liberals stable. No idea where these booths are unfortunately.
6.48pm. Liberal Senator Guy Barnett is conceding Labor is likely to retain three seats in Denison, as they will need an extra 10 per cent of their vote. So the return of Labor’s David Barnett and Graeme Sturges and Peg Putt seems a foregone conclusion. There will be intra-party contests between a number of Labor candidates and Michael Hodgman and Fabian Dixon of the Liberals.
6.46pm. That exit poll reportedly has Labor down 5 per cent across the state and the Liberals up 3 per cent.
6.35pm. What the hell, I’ll do live commentary. I might get bored and give up, but we’ll see how we go. Polls closed in South Australia five minutes ago, and in Tasmania 35 minutes ago. ABC Radio says exit polls show Labor will lose one of their three seats in Franklin. The talk is that Paula Wriedt is more likely to lose her seat than Lara Giddings – obviously Paul Lennon is safe. If Labor loses two seats, they will lose their majority.
113 Comments
If Collinswood has swung to the ALP, the Libs can pack up their bat and ball and go home already.
Dean Jaench looks more like Abe Lincoln every election. I’m half expecting him to come out with ‘Four Score and …”
It was probably Kevin Foley on ABC television.
Thanks for that Scott. Keep ‘em coming, I’m definitely following your comments.
Massive swings all through SA on early numbers, e.g, Norword 10.7%, but still only on 1% of the vote counted. But… geeze these are looking hot numbers for the ALP.
5% swing to ALP in Mawson, a Liberal seat, could be another Lib loss.
Whoops, sorry Joe Scalzi (not! )
Unley, 3.2% vote, ALP swing only 3% so far, Jaench thinks a Lib retain.
In Cape Town, Jacques Kallis is out, South Africa 75 for 4.
Mike Rann’s seat, Ramsey, has a 9% swing to the ALP.
Appears to be almost typical 3rd election result for State Labor (WA being the exception).
That is, in South Australia.
Early numbers in Hartly, Scalzi (Lib) 56%, ALP, 28%, but no indication of the booth or swing.
Okay, Dean Jaench says that is a 4% swing in Hartley. Scalzi on television looks peeved.
And a big swing to the ALP in Morialto, 6.7%, so bye bye Joan Hall, Newland has a swing of 12% on 40 percent of the vote counted, so it’s a real swing.
On minor parties, Democrat vote has halved, while Family First has a solid result right across the board, getting about 4% or so everywhere. This will have an effect in the Upper House. (Carn Nick X!)
And all the ALP marginals are now safe as houses.
Kevin Foley says that the ALP have won every booth in Morialta on the primary vote.
I am loving the SEO website. It’s so variable. Some seats you’d think there had been Liberal swings one minute, then Labor swings the next. No doubt some of this is due to different types of booths, but occasionally, the total % of votes won by candidates adds up to things like 150% and this must indicate bugs somewhere.
In Bright, Chloe Fox has, to quote Simon Crean, “Shitted it in”
Crows are 21 points up in the football, South Africa are 4 for 92 and in Mawson the swing is now 7.2% on 46% of the vote counted.
Yeah Fox might not have to go to preferences.
Surely you’re forgetting the solid Green vote (9-10%).
Statewide vote has a 10% swing to the ALP. 12% swing in metro Adelaide.
Stick a fork in Kerin, he’s done. I’m going to watch cricket for an hour.
Hi William – Great effort as usual. In Bass Labor is winning a seat from the Greens, not the Libs, at least on the ABC’s figures. That’s probably the only change, altho Franklin & Lyons are still doubtful.
Also, have you had a look at Mitchell – remarkably good effort from Kris Hanna.
Did Michelle O’Bryne get a sympathy vote from former Greens after losing because of the forestry package? That would be ironic if the Greens lost because of this. Overall are the Greens in Tasssie down a bit because the Liberals looked a bit more like a alternative this time round? SA: would the Libs want a by-election in Frome?
I always felt the Greens vote would come down in Tasmania because the last election was a high-water mark. Unless you buy the line that they’re marching towards a takeover as the second major party, which I don’t advise, this is actually a very good result for them. They only won one seat in 1998, and it was thought then that this was what the future would hold for them.
Looks like Kris Hanna will win Mitchell? Nothing abotu this on any coverage.
25 for hanna. 22 for libs, 40 for labor. you’ld think the lib preferences will flow to hanna. but the abc website still has TPP between alp and lib.
The result in Bass will no doubt come down to leakage from O’Byrne’s surplus. O’Byrne, being from the left, will leak to some degree to the Greens’ Kim Booth who has as high a profile in the electorate as O’Byrne.
Actually I was taking issue with the “first hurdle” bit. The Green vote will surely catapult Labor into second place. Meaning the electoral office chose the wrong candidate for their provisional run-off. (Not that a seat like Kavel really deserves this much fuss
I’m a tad surprised the ALP hasn’t threatened any “safe” Liberal seats. Seems nearly all of the big swings have occurred in Labor electorates.
TAS: Well done on your very astute anaylsis regarding Greens vote.
It looks to me that the ALP is certain of winning 3 seats in Bass, Braddon, Denison and Lyons, giving them 14 seats, but are more likely than the Liberals to win the fifth seat in Franklin. This would give the ALP 15 seats, the Liberals 7 (2 in Bass and Braddon, 1 each in Lyons, Franklin and Dension) and the Greens 3 (Denison, Franklin and Lyons).
So after much all the swings and roundabouts the final result is likely the Government gaining one seat from the Greens, with the Liberal opposition unchanged (despite a 4.4% swing to them). The ALP likely to increase its majority despite a swing of over 2% against it
Stuart: has Labor’s predicted vote improved because the swing has been uneven with Port Augusta swinging more strongly than the bush?
wow checked Fisher lately
Bob Such is bolting it in
Libs coming third there- a real ‘barry crocker’ for them.
Nick Xenophon still has over 2 quotas…
what the…
Nick Xenophon’s figures are astounding. “Good” doesn’t quite fit.
He’s polling over 18%, with 2.2 quotas.
I punched the figures into http://www.upperhouse.info, and got this result:
4 ALP
3 Liberal
2 No Pokies
1 Family First
1 Democrats
So we have a very neat Upper House with:
8 ALP
8 Liberal
2 No Pokies
2 Family First
2 Democrats
It’s interesting with the Democrats. They manage to leapfrog up and up.
They are originally fifth behind ALP, Liberal, Family First and Greens after primaries elect 4 Labor, 3 Liberal and 2 No Pokies.
Family First gets elected fairly early. Then the Democrats leapfrog over the Liberals with HEMP preferences (among others), then over the Greens with Liberal preferences, and win with Greens preferences.
Ben, you’ll be pleased to know that my latest effort on the calculator gives the Greens the 11th seat.
The Democrats could end up taking this final vacancy from Labor – although things seem to be trending to Labor now enough to secure their fifth seat. This Xenophon results is just astounding though – how far they are above their second quota will be crucial here…
Also, it’s worth noting how low the Greens LC vote is compared to the HA. We’re polling just over 6% in the lower house, 3% in the upper house.
I’ve just realised that the count isn’t anywhere near as high for the LC as I thought. The ABC is saying it’s 66%, whereas it doesn’t seem to be anywhere near that high.
Oh, and Xenophon is up to 20%
Democrats must look at Xenophon and think that is where all their vote has gone, so there would be some justice if Reynolds was elected by Xenophon. A big night for independents as shown by Such, if you count the Nat as a quasi-independent the same.
Ben – what seepage do you think is happening to your LC vote because of Xenophon? In other words, who do you think your lost vote from the HA is going to?
mmm still no updates for mitchell
I assume they having an intersting time allocating preferences…
I don’t know really Chris.
I’m not a South Australian, and I’m just an observer. I don’t know much about SA politics.
Xenophon is climbing very fast. He’s just gone from 20.1% to 20.5% in the last few minutes. It also appears that the Greens vote is going up.
Yeah I know that Ben… you’re one of these shady USyd types
(because of course I’m not an embittered Melb Uni type).
It’s pretty eye-opening stuff though – I just couldn’t imagine anything like this happening in Vic… or NSW for that matter!
2.3 quotas is the latest- astounding!
The “% counted” on the ABC for the Legislative Council is out of whack. It’s saying 71%, but it’s clearly not anywhere near that amount. It’s actually roughly 20% (about the same as the SEO has).
That could be because the larger booths are reporting.
Family First has dropped half a percent also
I agree with Ben about the percent counted on the ABC website. The total number of voters is far too low.
It seems very important for the Democrats chances that they stay ahead of the third No Pokies candidate so that they’re not eliminated, and that when No Pokies #3 is, they then receive half those preferences plus a few others that are then freed up from No Pokies. If they’re behind Xenophon at the penultimate stage of the count, it’s the Greens seat.
Is it me or is Unley now become close…..
Yup Unley’s close.
Who’s the No Pokie #2 that seems to have got elected then?
The second No Pokies candidate is Ann Bressington. I can tell you that she is a “drug rehabilitation pioneer”. What’s this about Unley? Antony’s computer, which is rarely wrong from 72.8 per cent of the vote, still says “Lib retain”.
Okay, I now see that the SEO has the Unley 2PP at 50.5-49.5.
Is ALP-turned-Ind Terry Cameron MLC in SA’s 147 votes (0.01%) the worst re-election result ever?
Haha, probably Graeme. The one I’m more interested in is if Xenophon’s result is the best ever for an Independent in a state or federal Upper House…
Definitely yes Chris, although remember state-wide PR councils exist only in SA and NSW. The overall Council result might be the lowest major party combined vote since parties emerged, excluding Tasmania.
Most comments on a thread ever eh?
what was the swing
oh…and Frome numbers look a bit weird…maybe a bug?
The ones that I see as things to watch over the next few days:
-The last seat in the upper house. It will be a race between Mark Parnell, Kate Reynolds and the fifth Labor candidate.
-Mitchell is interesting. With a few booths yet to report, Hanna is on 48.5% of the 2PP vote.
-Bass will go to the line. Michelle O’Byrne has 1.4 quotas, Kim Booth will be hoping to pick up over 0.3 quotas from the other Greens candidates, and then will be about 0.1-0.2 quotas short, and could conceivably get there with O’Byrne leakages.
9.37pm. SA: I’ve done my own calculations on the upper house so the percentages make sense. Only two No Pokies now; Labor four; Liberal three; Family First one; Greens take the seat that went missing from No Pokies.
Must be something wrong there. Latest SEO results 2150 show quotas or quota excesses as
LIB 0.06
ALP 0.56
XENO 0.53
GRN 0.47
DEM 0.21
DEM->GRN flow will have to be very tight to put Parnell above ALP & Xeno’s excesses.
ok..yes it was a bug…
but now seo has alp in front in Stuart
It looks like the SA SEO is using real TCP figures. That last booth in Stuart was Davenport and made a huge difference!
Congratulations Poll Bludger on an excellent commentary. I’m in NSW and only have the net to rely on. Well done.
Couldn’t the Dems put the Greens ahead of Xenophon, then Xenophon puts the Greens ahead of Labor?
LC votes seem to be trending against FFP, which could destroy the Democrats chances for the final vacancy – the longer FFP are in the count, the longer it takes the Dems to get some preferences freed from FFP, increasing the likelihood that they will be eliminated before that time. The upward trend in the Greens vote is less relevant to a point than how much the FFP vote drops – if it starts to rebound upward, I’m thinking the Democrats could get home.
A third No Pokies spot – while very unlikely – is also not inconceivable.
I forgot Terry Cameron was even running! That’s what a high profile will do for you. Must say I am delighted about Nick Xenephon’s vote though.
It looks as if that stunt with the goat might have paid off.
No kidding..
As far as the race for the final position.
Assuming the Democrats can’t overtake the Greens (which is a question for another post), then the Dems have 0.2 quotas to give away, with the Greens only 0.04 behind Labor #5 and 0.1 behind Xenophon #3. Now, the Greens receive preferences from both Labor and Xenophon, so if it turns into a Labor/Greens or a Labor/Xenophon race for #11, the Greens will be in front.
I’m about to punch the latest SEO figures into the Upperhouse calculator to see what I get.
A hit! A very palpable hit!!
I’ll miss Rob Kerin, who always struck me as a good bloke, but just lacking the ‘bastard’ quality that you need to be an effective leader.
Kinda the reverse of Federal politics, where I like Kim Beazley too, but would never vote for him either.
So who’s going to lead the local Libs now? I don’t know the ins and outs of the Liberal party well enough but I gather that Ian Evans and Vicky Chapman are the likely front runners. Got any goss as to what they are like?
Re LC
I never cranked up my own calculator, but, by hand, assuming the usual 2/3rds DEM is ATL and leakage is to XENO LIB ALP , elimination goes DIGNITY, NAT, LIB, DEM, leaving
FF 0.78
ALP 0.64
GRN 0.60
XENO 0.64
and GRN goes out. Close though
re evan vs chapman
the ultimate factional and family based rivarly..
my guess is it will be very messy…
What time do they stop counting for the night?
Here’s what Upperhouse gives me:
4 ALP, 3 Lib and 2 Xen elected on primary.
Before the microparties are eliminated, the numbers are:
FF 5.10
ALP 5.07
XEN 4.83
GRN 4.00
DEM 1.70
The next significant stage is the election of Dennis Hood (FF). At this point only Peter Lewis is left, out of the microcandidates:
FF 8.50
ALP 5.17
XEN 4.93
GRN 4.00
DEM 2.96
After Hood is elected you get:
ALP 5.19
XEN 4.96
GRN 4.2
DEM 3.64
Then after Lewis (with 1.2%) is eliminated:
XEN 5.77
ALP 5.21
GRN 4.4
DEM 3.84
So all of a sudden Xenophon’s #3 is in the lead. But then the Democrats are knocked out (half a % behind the Greens), and the Greens leapfrog into the lead:
GRN 7.51
XEN 6.5
ALP 5.21
So then, with the ALP in last place, they flow strongly to the Greens, electing Mark Parnell.
So Geoff, to extrapolate that, you’re saying spot 10 to Labor and spot 11 to FFP? I’d all but written off Labor’s 5th and thought it would be FFP easily home in 10th and then a battle between the Dems, Greens and Xenophon 3 (sounds like a planet on Star Trek or something), with the winner still very much yet to be decided depending on the ebb and flow of a couple of tenths of a percent.
Following on from Geoff: if the Greens are narrowly eliminated, as those figures suggest, their above-the-line preferences will go to No Pokies and deliver a seat to their third candidate, one John Darley – who surely thought he was only there to make up the numbers.
Unless Chris Jermyn is understanding Geoff better than I am. Geoff?
Ben, one that I find interesting is that if you swing 0.3% from the Greens directly to the Democrats, it gets the third Xenophon candidate elected quite easily ahead of the Democrats. Yet, if that 0.3% goes directly to Xenophon, the Greens retain the seat. It seems like it’s just so unbelievably difficult to pin down that last seat – primaries don’t necessarily affect the result in the way you’d expect right now. I’d still have Mark as favourite right now though, as compared to my thought that the Dems would take the final vacancy about a third of the way through the count. Things just keep changing sporadically, but it’s addictive page-refreshing action nonetheless…
Nope, my stuff-up William – I automatically assumed Greens preferences to go to Labor, forgetting that they’d actually go to Xenophon first.
I think he is suggesting #10 to FFP and #11 to Greens.
It’s very clouded, one needs to configure one’s programs with a whole slew of “Notional Tickets” that estimate the BTL flows. This would be particularly necessary for the minnows at or below 0.05Q. It is normal to see the Greens creep… creep… creep up as these are carried out, but the leakage also means that Xeno, ALP and FF also creep up. The Greens have to GAIN on them in this creeping race. After that, when it comes to the DEMS cut-up (they will probably be cut up at about 0.4Q, but only 0.2Q will be their own), their own leakage will still be crucial. If their ATL is at least 75% of their total and their BTLs favour GRN, then GRN can get there.
Labor preferences Xenophon ahead of Greens? I didn’t realise it. Well, that makes it harder for the Greens and easier for Xenophon 3.
Oh well, this is “too close to call”, if I’ve ever seen it.
Addendum…. they would do this on either the ALP or the Xeno cut-up, but Family First could be a spoiler if they fall to 4th place behind ALP/XENO/GRN- they would then give Xeno a 3rd seat.
At 2320 AEDST, ALP’s excess is now less than GRNs and going steadily down .48Q vs 0.46Q. If this keeps up, it would give GRNS the seat, because about 93% of the ALP will be ATL
No, actually I’m wrong there Ben, they don’t… I don’t know where I got that idea, I must have misread. I’m making too many errors here – I need a Red Bull!!
Actually, no I’m not… I was referring to the Greens preferences going to Xenophon above ALP
Night folks, thanks William for your efforts tonight, as with the other posters, it’s been fun.
Aussies need 95 to win so I’m going to cheer the lads home.
Keep your eye on the comments thread, where Geoff will hopefully keep you posted on further developments.
Nah… off to bed.
But, keep in mind that BTLs from INDs can derail everything… this happened to the Greens’ Louise Crossley in Tas in 1998.
Also, (I’m assuming they exist in SA) Declaration, Absentee and Postals can skew the picture markedly when results are close. This also happened in Tas in 2004 Federal.
I’m shattered. A day handing out how-to-vote lib cards, followed by scruitneering and then a trip to party headquarters for the wake. It is a massacre. I’m getting that Graham Gunn will hold Stuart and Pisoni will hold Unley but it’ll go down to postal votes.
Going to bed now. Thanks for the commentary pollbludger, it was good to get an end of evening overview.
I’m so happy that Family First has won another seat.
Great site Mr Bludger.
It is a shame that family first and Xeno got any seats at all.
Both Parties contain the devils spawn, Ann Bressington is of obvious concern, and if you voted for Family First you have not seen the lies on their website.
It is a same there are so many un-educated people in South Australia.
We were once such a cultured state.
No Upper House means absolute power to the ruling party.
When it comes to Dictatorships Iraq ain’t seen nothing.
Great job to all involved and good to see Scalzi gone, my goodness how did xeno get 2 quota’s, well and the crows lost what a great weekend
At close, the LC excess quotas, in descending order are as below.
ALP has dropped 0.1 of a quota behind GRN, and will now be cut up ahead of GRN or XENO, thus electing GRN. Probably-probably- FFP will get the remaining seat, but could be XENO
Family First Party 0.59
Independent Nick Xenophon – No Pokies 0.58
Australian Greens 0.49
Australian Labor Party 0.39
Australian Democrats 0.21
One Nation 0.09
The Nationals 0.08
Independent Hemp Help End Marijuana Prohibition 0.08
Shooters Party 0.07
Dignity for Disabled 0.07
Independent Principles People Reform Before Parties 0.07
Liberal Party 0.06
Independent Animal Liberation No Battery Hens 0.03
Independent Animal Liberation Ban Live Exports 0.03
Independent for Recreational Fishers 0.02
Stormy Summers Reform Party 0.02
Independent Mick Dzamko 0.02
Independent for Rural/Regional SA 0.01
Independent Terry Cameron 0.01
Independent Andrew Stanko for Community Action 0.01
Independent for Social & Environmental Justice 0.01
Independent for Aboriginal Representation and Reconciliation 0.01
Independent Ralph Clarke Buy Back ETSA 0.01
Independent Laury Bais No Drugs 0.01
Independent Savebabe.com 0
William, thanks for the excellent coverage, as always!
Assuming Kris Hanna holds Mitchell, I think we could count it as a virtual Labor hold anyway(would Hanna be an Independent Labor Member?).
Stuart – the postal vote to come will no doubt be very much in the Liberal Party’s favour, but I think Labor might just hold on there by less than 100 votes.
Any chance still of an upset in Unley?
And, note the large swing against Kerin in Frome.
Chloe Fox’s win in Bright – the largest swing against the Liberals in the state.
One thing that seems to be certain after this results… bye bye Democrats… mind you 2007 and 2010 seem to be the ultimatum’s for the Democrats [when the next Federal and SA Elections are to be hold and to see whether the 4 Senators or one MLC will remain in power]….. who knows the Democrats might have one little bit of magic left [Go Xeno - he certainly proved that!].
I guess the dems should run a 2010 election with a ‘we’re back’ slogan – perhaps trying to emulate ‘it’s time’ Labor slogan [worked well in 1972 - failed in 2004 - what was latham thinking?]
As for Family First Party… it’s pretty scary to think they will have the balance of power!
Oh and thanks to the Pollbludger and Antony Green for their updates – awesome as usual – and well and truly kept up with the efforts of two state elections at one time….. I wonder when the final results will be in for Stuart and Mitchell as well as those ‘likely’ seats for Labor in Tasmania.
Well… according to my computer this is the 94th Comment… let’s see if we can break the 100 mark
and perhaps set long standing record.
I would like to contribute to this ‘100 post’ record…
I was thinking this morning of Nick Xenaphon and the fortunate postion he now founds himself… and the danger the Labor party is in because of it.
First of all… lets do the unthinkable and ASSUME that Nick (Or should we call it No Pokies???) seizes a third seat this election.
That is a MASSIVE amount of power, when you consider the Liberals (who will oppose anything Labor) has 8 seats… combined with Nick thats 11 seats already against Labor.
They will have to buy Nick off… and that may not be as easy as it was to buy off Family First. He will truly hold the balance of power. Whilst this may cripple progress, it is probably very good for the State when you consider Labor can now do exactly as it please in the Lower House (they could have 3 or 4 of their own oppose a bill and still succeed.)
Which brings me to my next point: The government has said it wants to abolish the Legislative Council. It could not have picked a worst time to do this given:
- The Liberals will claim it is an ‘arrogant’ government trying to seize all power (wrongly when you consider Rann suggested it when he had a hung government) Nevertheless if they do their job right, they can run an excellent scare campaign.
- The Democrats will furiously fight it as it is their last avenue of making any sort of contribution to politics
- Nick Xenaphon… well… he will shut down the city with massive protests of people marching with goats to stop this happening.
Labor has absoulutely no chance of succeeding at this stage.
Now lets consider for a minute the implications of this. Nick X is a cunning bastard. If the electorate becomes totally pissed off with the idea of Labor’s proposal, he will come out with a campaign saying something along the lines of
‘Show the Labor party we need the upper house… vote No Pokies at the next election’ (of course, it would involved a lot more stunting (is that a word?) then this!)
If he keeps the same appeal as he did for this election, he will have an excellent shot at winning one or even two more seats, depending on the backlash to the governments proposal.
He could end up with 4 or 5 seats in the Upper House in four years… think of the power that would wield. Nobody could do anything without his parties approval
Obviously this is all just wild speculation… but surely it isn’t that unbelievable. For one man to seize TWENTY ONE PERCENT of the primary vote is absoultely unbelievable. Think about it… thats 160 000 who voted for him. Amazing.
*for the record I didn’t vote for him (I tried Democrats…lol…) but I think he is doing a very good job.
I have said my piece
A few interesting elements.
One is, what will happen to the No Pokies Party, and by that I don’t just mean Xenophon. Clearly, in the past it has been one of those shells of a party basically run as a one-man operation, which we see so many of in NSW.
But it is now more interesting. Has anyone actually considered the possibility of Ann Bressington (or even a third No Pokies MP) having a mind of their own, and also whether there will be an effort, successful or not, to turn it into a real party, or will they just disperse as independents?
The other thing is in regard to a referendum on abolishing the upper house. Wouldn’t such a referendum need to be approved by the Upper House? Family First, the Democrats, No Pokies and the Greens (if we elect someone) will all oppose it, and Nick Minchin last night sounded pretty certain that the Liberals would oppose it too.
So in that case, does it really matter what the dynamics of a referendum are? It’s just not going to get that far.
I disagree… if the Labor party pushes long and hard enough to get even a slight amount of public support for the referendum, then the upper house wouldn’t dare oppose it. This would lead to scorning from the Labor party in regards to
“Not allowing the people the choice and freedom to decide what they really want, decide what is best for our great state”
Can anybody see Mike Rann quote that last line? I can. Easily. Word for word…
That and a whole lot of other garbage that is, in context, true. It is not up to the upper hosue to decide this, it is up to the state.
Besides, I reckon Nick would love the challenge…
Mark my words, if Labor want this badly enough then it will go ahead… the only question is whether the public will support it. That is yet to be seen (although I highly doubt it)
In relation to Ben’s question of whether the upper house will need to pass any bill to abolish the same, yes, according to (s 10 I think) the State’s Constitution, abolition or alteration to its the parliament’s current form requires a bill to be passed by both house of parliament.
Then it has to be approved by a majority of voters at a subsequent referendum.
In relation to the numbers of the upper house and whether it would get through, Kevin Foley’s (Treasurer) invitation to Nick Minchin for the SA Liberals last night on the ABC coverage to support such a bill indicates the Rann Government knows it wouldn’t get the bill past the first hurdle without their support.
Got to break that 100 mark, so here’s an interesting question: Where did Nick Xenophon get his money and manpower from?
He told me about six weeks ago his campaign was flat-strapped – although any pol would.
He also announced that he would not take donations over $100 – yet had at least two designs of coreflutes, t-shirts on polling booth workers, TV advertising…
South Australia’s electoral laws do sod-all for disclosure. Going by the way he polled, it’s quite possible that Xenophon got his funds from small donations, but that’s a stressful way to run a campaign.
Nick believes in openess etc. Should he be expected to present some sort of financial report? Any thoughts, poll-pickers?
The abolition of the Upper House will be the first weapon a toothless opposition will try to throw at the huge Rann government. It will be used to paint a government of arrogance which desires absolute power. If the Liberals play this one right, and if we go on past performances they sadly won’t, they could actually make major inroads into Labor in 2010.
damn i missed the elusive title of having the ‘100th post’. 101 is still good
I reckon the upper house won’t get abolished the numbers seem to be far against labor’s odds and the fact that everyone likes a well paying 8-year job…not bad for one election… but even some of the labor upper house members could vote against it if they weren’t persuaded with another job – mind you they probablywant to do it for the better good if it gives Labor control of just one house in 2010…………. Labor successfully got rid of the upper house in QLD [1922 for memory] but failed in NSW [1924 for memory] when the members preferred their cosy seats………………… now that the debate has started up in SA it will be interesting to see how it plays out – but as the aforementioned above – Rann was able to sway the public and media to his side – perhaps he could do that in re: abolition of upper house
Maybe the proposal will be to abolish the upper house and have a PR compnent in the lower house, eg NZ and Scotland.
If it was say of 11 members or even 9 members that might make it interesting, pasrtic if it meant that balance of power in the upper house could be turned into real power in the lower house
I think that Rann would like to get rid of the upper house, but I think that he would also be prefectly happy if he could reduce the terms to 4 years. Think of the LC if all positions were up for election, and thus the quota halved, 5 to xenophon, labor pushing for a 9th, the liberals at 6, family first with 1 and the dems wiped out, they are the sort of figures that labor politicians dream about
reducing the quota to 4.15%ish (which is what would happen if the terms were halved) would have one really bad side effect. A party could get voted in with as low as 1% of the vote.
if the upper house is reduced to 4 year terms, multi member electorates should be created to require atleast a reasonable level of support for a party to get elected, and not a good set of preference deals.
either that or reduce it to 16 members or something to keep the quota reasonable.
If Rann proposed introducing PR in the lower house, I’d expect you’d get the support of at least the Greens, Democrats and probably Family First (who would do well in South Australia under such a system). But I can’t see the ALP doing such a thing.
As far as the quota being too low, it’s true that under ticket voting it would cause the same problems we have in NSW, where the quota was 4.5%. But if you get rid of ticket voting, the effects of “preference harvesting” are mostly eliminated, and you see parties needing far more votes to win.
I see the ‘Tiser claim FF did particularly well in Hartley when it was out polled by the Greens and had a swing against it.
I’d hate to be obvious and break the ice here but…
Labor hasn’t fully secured a majority yet and looking at some of the results for the seats [updated 4pm today] it looks like they could be in some trouble… I would say 13 if they’re lucky… yet all the media is going on about a majority government like it’s a given! So why is that so? Is everyone really confident they get a majority?
So labor are going to lose 15 seats on declaration votes? That would make X’s 2.5 quota look normal!
While its unlikely that labor will win unley and stuart once all the declaration votes have gone through, i cant see the liberals making up the difference.
Hartley 1.5k (last election liberals made up 450 in DV)
Norwood 1.2k
Mawson 900
Light 800
its just not going to happen, espically given that the advantage the liberals tend to have with DV would be reduced by the general swing to labor.
ahhhh…
I just realised ur talking about the tassy election… wheres that delete post function.
That’s ok Cameron – just not more alcohol next time before you post a comment.
But to comment… I would like to see how Labor comes close in Unley, Stuart and Mitchell [I'm impatient I want to know who wins it now!] but more interestingly will be what happens at the 2010 election… esp. Mitchell… if it remains in Kris’s hands as an independant it could well end Labor dominance on the seat or unless it’s one of these one term independants that buck the trend. To Stuart… if Labor does win it this time – it’ll be interesting to see how much Mike Rann’s popularity holds up in 2010 as Stuart has been a Liberal seat for a long time and even if Labor does win it – it’ll probably fall back into liberal hands – unless Rannkeeps to his promises and Mr Jervis gets in touch with the electorate…….. as for Unley – although it was held with a 9% margin before the election… I’m pretty sure it will stay Liberal…. although it would be an unexpected and utter surprise if Labor wins it.
Breaking news… [as from ninemsn.com.au]…
It looks like Natasha Stott Despoja and Andrew Murray are considering not running for the 2007 election for the Democrats. This definetly is a blow to the party! And further the article mentioned Natasha not running for the leadership again.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=92507
Bah. She’ll run
Curious about her predictions regarding the Senate though. I never really considered that. There is surely no chance that the government will get a majority again… if the backlash is powerful enough the Labor could strip the government of its power all over again.
Alarming thought. SHOULD the two mentioned Democrats not run, they are pretty much done and dusted, which means FF or the Greens will take the balance of power. Anyone else see problems with this?
There’s plenty of chance when all the Coalition need do is repeat its 2001 election result. (Which wasn’t a thumping win by any means.)
And I love this six year commitment stuff. As if senators never give the game away mid-term.