I will use this post to provide ongoing commentary of late counting in doubtful seats over the coming days/weeks.
UPDATE (27/3/07): Christian Kerr points to a slow count in today’s Crikey:
The ever-protracted count for the NSW Legislative Council election is likely to be even slower this time, with the Australian Electoral Commission refusing to authorise any more overtime for the AEC staff engaged for the count. There have been unprecedented levels of cooperation between the AEC and the NSW electoral authorities this election, but after just two days of preparing for the Upper House count over the weekend, the AEC has gone into a panic about the likely level of overtime, and has literally ordered its workers to take a “rest”. Counting will now finish each day at 5pm, with no approval for overtime to complete the count. With Easter imminent, this delay is likely to push back the announcement of the Upper House results substantially. The NSW Electoral Commission is understood to have expected the AEC to finish the Legislative Council count by Wednesday. The AEC told staff that the Electoral Commissioner has been informed that he will have to adjust his timetable. No amended timeframe for the conclusion of the count was suggested. A major outcry from furious Government, opposition and minor parties about the delay in finalising the count for the Upper House count in 2003, marred by slow counting and a total meltdown in the computer software used for calculating the results, saw new procedures adopted for the 2007 election. Efficiency was supposed to have been increased by the use of AEC staff in the count.
Legislative Council
| Roy Smith (Shooters) | 83,320 | 0.61 |
| Trevor Khan (Nationals) | 57,727 | 0.43 |
| Arthur Chesterfield-Evans (Democrats) | 50,335 | 0.37 |
| Janey Woodger (AAFI) | 46,332 | 0.34 |
| Robert Smith (Fishing) | 45,460 | 0.34 |
Sunday 3pm. I’m not doing too well here – I now realise the Legislative Council Summary figures I was just getting excited about have been little changed in the past week. They tell us of 3.3 million votes out of roughly 4 million in total, including 293,240 "other" votes that include (I believe) both informals and below-the-lines. The progressive totals figures show us the destination of 13,566 out of a probable total of about 80,000 below-the-line votes; from these the Democrats have polled 5.6 per cent and the Coalition 17.2 per cent, bearing in mind that not all of these votes will stay within the party ticket. Using these figures to extrapolate the as-yet-uncounted votes, I have the Democrats with a fractional lead over the Nationals’ Trevor Khan, but the margin is far too close (and the method far too crude) for anything to be stated with confidence.
Saturday 11pm. Okay, turns out all that effort on the previous entry was wasted. Because as well as the daily PDF file update, the NSWEC also has on its main page a different count with 3,278,467 votes. This includes 293,240 "other" votes, which probably means about 200,000 informals plus yet-to-be-counted below-the-line votes. There would be about 700,000 further to come. These figures show that the Shooters Party are home, while the gap between the Coalition and the Democrats has narrowed considerably. If the Coalition’s share continues to decline at the same rate as it did between the 1.9 million count and the 3.3 million count, the outcome will be very close indeed.
Saturday 10pm. A further 765,023 votes have been added, bringing the total to 1,938,396 out of a likely 4 million. This has resulted in a significant shift in the aggregate vote from the Coalition (down from 35.4 per cent to 34.4 per cent) to Labor (up from 40.4 per cent to 41.4 per cent). If there was reason to think that trend would continue, Labor’s number 10 candidate Barry Calvert might still be out of the hunt. However, aggregate lower house figures (Labor 39.0 per cent, Coalition 37.0 per cent) suggest that won’t be the case, even when taking into account the Coalition’s traditionally lower vote in the upper house (33.0 per cent against 35.0 per cent in 2003). In the meantime, the drop in the Coalition vote has reduced their surplus over the seventh quota from 0.78 to 0.56, almost enough to return the Nationals’ Trevor Khan to twenty-first place, with the Shooters Party up from 0.53 to 0.55.
Friday 8pm. The NSWEC has published a group and candidate votes report, based on the results of 1,168,246 group votes and 5,127 below-the-lines. The totals in 2003 were 3,721,457 and a bit over 70,000. Ben Raue says the two combined suggest the Nationals’ Trevor Khan has moved up a spot from 20 to 21; if this continues, the final spot looms as a race between the Shooters Party (0.53 quotas), Unity (0.35), the Democrats (0.35) and AAFI (0.30), with the Fishing Party slowly but surely headed for the exit (don’t let the door hit your arse on the way out, Bob Smith).
Friday 3pm. Props to Upperhouse.info for pointing out the following message from the NSWEC: "Legislative Council progressive totals will be provided daily in this directory from the evening of Friday 30 March 2007".
Sunday 5pm. The raw numbers at present look straightforward enough: Labor 9, Coalition 8, Greens 2, CDP 1, Shooters Party 1. However, Stephen L in comments cautiously offers that the Democrats (and perhaps also AAFI and the Fishing Party) might do well enough on below-the-lines and preferences to stay in the hunt against the Nationals’ Trevor Khan, eighth Coalition candidate and Poll Bludger fan.
| Greg Piper | 12,913 | 30.3 | 18,656 | 50.1 | ||||
| Jeff Hunter | 17,294 | 40.6 | 18,550 | 49.9 |
Wednesday 2am. One more change of lead in the final strait has given Greg Piper a 106-vote win after the full distribution of preferences.
Monday 2.30pm. Another 940 absent votes have produced yet another change of lead, Jeff Hunter now ahead by 65 votes. Antony Green notes in comments that the closest outcome in modern times was the Liberals’ eight-vote win in Coogee in 1973; this was overturned on a legal challenge, and Labor won the ensuing by-election by 54 votes.
Monday 1.30pm. The lead changes again after the addition of 496 further absent votes, which have put Greg Piper 44 votes in front.
Friday 5pm. In an exciting late-count development, Greg Piper has done very poorly from the addition of 1,988 absent votes (23.7 per cent compared with 30.7 per cent overall), which have turned Labor incumbent Jeff Hunter’s 272-vote deficit into a 22-vote lead.
Thursday 10pm. More than 3000 postal votes and about 700 further pre-polls added; still no absent votes. Greg Piper’s lead has changed little, from 263 to 272.
Wednesday 9pm. Excellent account of today’s slow progress from Sally McEwan in comments, along with informed talk of deep Labor pessimism.
Tuesday 4.30pm. Very good call yesterday from Sally McEwan – the second batch of pre-polls has been very similar to the first, barring a slightly higher primary vote for the Liberals. This boosted Greg Piper’s lead by 243 votes; however, 122 "Dec Inst" votes have reeled him in slightly, going 59-15 in Labor’s favour. Piper’s lead is now 263, but with well over 5000 postal and absent votes pending, it’s still too close to call.
Monday 11.30pm. Sally McEwan corrects my previous description of Carey Bay as a conservative area: "Carey Bay pre-poll is different from Carey Bay conservative lakeside waterfront booth … The remainder of the pre-poll votes will favour Piper in the same proportion or greater".
Monday 10pm. Partial pre-poll results have been posted, 999 votes out of what scrutineer Sally McEwan says is about 2000. These votes are "a mix of Cooranbong and Carey Bay", which is to say they include the much touted Seventh Day Adventist community, along with another conservative area. As expected, these votes have strongly favoured Greg Piper, whose 158-vote deficit has turned into a lead of 64. This sounds a little disappointing from Piper’s perspective, because the remainder of the pre-polls will presumably be strong for Labor. Next comes about 3000 absent votes and 2250 postals – these differed only slightly from the polling booth results in 2003, though Labor’s vote was notably a little lower and the "others" a little higher.
Monday 2.30pm. Looks like those Dora Creek votes for Piper stayed missing – his tally there has gone from 533 to 508. No word yet on pre-polls.
Monday 4am. A scrutineer at the count, Sally McEwan, says in comments she can "confirm the expected advantage to Independent Piper from the pre-poll votes from Cooranbong". These votes "will be counted and distributed tomorrow". McEwan also reports that "24 or so Piper votes" from the Dora Creek booth are "missing", "leading to extra State Electoral officers being called from Sydney for a reconstruction of the Dora Creek booth tomorrow".
Sunday 5pm. Labor incumbent Jeff Hunter leads independent Greg Piper by 158 votes. That would normally be difficult to close, given Labor’s organisational efficiency with respect to pre-poll and postal voting. However, Lake Macquarie has the quirk of the Seventh Day Adventist community at Cooranbong, which produces a big flow of mostly conservative pre-poll votes due to its observation of the Sabbath on Saturday. In 2003, Labor polled 795 votes (34.2 per cent) to the Liberals’ 1173 (52.4 per cent) on pre-polls, compared with overall totals of 54.9 per cent and 30.7 per cent. Pre-polls accounted for 5.1 per cent of the total vote; also still to come are the less quirky absent (7.3 per cent) and postal (5.3 per cent) votes. The latter might go a little better for Labor than last time, as consciousness of their danger might have resulted in a better organised postal vote campaign.
| Craig Baumann | 17,894 | 42.5 | 19,375 | 50.1 | ||||
| Jim Arneman | 17,544 | 41.7 | 19,311 | 49.9 |
Wednesday 2am. The margin widened to 64 votes after completion of the full preference distribution.
Friday 3pm. The notional preference count has been completed, and it points to a 19-vote Liberal victory. However, a "proper" preference count will now follow, and these can turn up anomalies. For example, the primary vote recount cut Chris Baumann’s vote by five votes and Jim Arneman’s by six (UPDATE: And more pertinently, as Geoff Lambert points out in comments, there were variations of up to five votes at individual booths).
Thursday 10pm. Absent and postal votes are now coming in at a fair clip, and while it’s still extremely close, the trend has been with the Liberals. Antony Green’s regular updates show how Labor candidate Jim Arneman’s lead narrowed and then disappeared in late afternoon counting, with the Liberals’ Chris Baumann currently ahead by 56 votes.
Tuesday 8pm. Not much progress today: polling booth re-check completed and 213 "Dec Inst" votes added, increasing the Labor lead from 76 to 86.
Monday 10pm. Either Port Stephens has had an extraordinarily high number of section votes, or the pre-polls have been entered on the wrong line – I will assume the latter. There are 1,244 of them and they have tipped the see-saw back towards the Liberals, whose deficit has narrowed from 153 votes to 76. However, the 2003 figures suggest Labor should do better on absent and postal votes. Slow progress on the polling booth re-check for some reason.
Monday 4am. The Daily Telegraph reports confident noises from a Liberal scrutineer, as "many votes were exhausting because of a decision by the Greens not to preference Labor". Conversely, the Australian Financial Review reports that "Labor strategists are sounding increasingly confident".
Sunday 5pm. Labor’s Jim Arneman was 153 votes behind the Liberals’ Chris Baumann at the close of counting last night, but is now 111 votes ahead. Pre-poll and postal figures from 2003 are probably no guide, as the seat was less fiercely contested last time.
| Jodi McKay | 12,951 | 31.2 | 13,793 | 50.7 | ||||
| John Tate | 10,003 | 24.1 | 13,430 | 49.3 | ||||
| Bryce Gaudry | 8,774 | 21.1 |
Friday 9.30pm. Those two-candidate figures quoted in the Herald have now been posted on the NSWEC site.
Thursday 10pm. Yesterday, the Newcastle Herald told us that "an Electoral Commission notional distribution showed Ms McKay on 13,793 votes and Cr Tate on 13,430". Today it reported that "preliminary counts show that Cr Tate would gain more than 2000 votes on McKay once preferences are distributed". On present indications, that would leave him about 700 votes in arrears.
Tuesday 2am. The NSWEC reveals nothing of the two-candidate preferred count that has evidently been conducted between Jodi McKay and John Tate, but the Sydney Morning Herald reports Tate conceding he is 700 votes behind. Morris Iemma is claiming victory.
Monday 4am. Yesterday’s recheck of first preferences from polling booths has increased Tate’s tally by 18 and reduced McKay’s by 12. The aforementioned Anthony Llewellyn says: "having reviewed the results in total now, my guess is a McKay win over Tate by around 500 … Gaudry will not pull ahead of Tate (of this I am now very confident)". The Sydney Morning Herald reports Labor "has become more confident".
Sunday 5pm. Still anybody’s guess as far as I can see. There is a 2.6 per cent gap between John Tate (24.1 per cent) and Bryce Gaudry (21.5 per cent), which might be closed with preferences from the Greens (11.2 per cent), who directed to Gaudry. Last night’s NSWEC notional preference count assumed Gaudry rather than Tate would finish second; if that is so, Labor’s Jodi McKay will win quite comfortably. If not, the race between McKay and Tate will come down to unpredictable preference flows. Last night, reader Anthony Llewellyn provided a preference breakdown from a booth at which he was scrutineering: if this is applied consistently, Tate emerges ahead with 12,792 votes to 12,327 (not counting preferences from the CDP and three other independents, who collectively account for 915 votes). However, Llewellyn also spoke of better preference flows for Labor at other less conservative booths.
| Pru Goward | 16,994 | 39.9 | 18,632 | 51.3 | ||||
| Paul Stephenson | 10,544 | 25.3 | 17,657 | 48.7 |
Thursday 8pm. Paul Stephenson has conceded defeat after being buried by absent and postal votes, widening the lead to 975. This entry, and the figures above, will not be further updated.
Tuesday 2pm. A further 670 pre-polls have gone rather better for Goward than the previous two batches, increasing her lead by 10 votes. Even better for her are the 154 "Dec Inst Votes" (declaration and/or institution?), which have run 70-31 in her favour.
Monday 10pm. I was mistaken to say all the pre-polls were in – it was in fact only about half. The newly added second batch was not quite as bad for Goward as the first, but it still cost her another 40 votes or so.
Monday 2.30pm. Pre-polls are in (all of them, or almost all), and they are surprisingly poor for Goward – she has polled 35.7 per cent compared with her 39.8 per cent of ordinary votes, while Paul Stephenson has 30.6 per cent compared with 25.1 per cent. If preferences follow the same pattern, this will narrow the gap by 134 votes to a little over 300. In 2003, pre-polls were 5.6 per cent of the total – still to come are absents (8.8 per cent), postals (5.6 per cent) and a few others (0.7 per cent).
Monday 4am. Yesterday’s recheck of first preferences from polling booths appears to have unearthed 38 extra votes for Stephenson and only one for Goward. It appears that Goward is better placed than it seemed on election night due to an across-the-board increase in "plumped" voting (numbering one box and then exhausting) at this election.
Sunday 5pm. An updated count (polling booths only) has seen Pru Goward’s lead after preferences increase from 311 votes last night to a fairly handy 455. Talk of the Labor candidate beating Paul Stephenson into second place on preferences has faded.
| Frank Terenzini | 14,819 | 39.7 | 16,741 | 50.9 | |||
| Peter Blackmore | 10,093 | 27.1 | 16,157 | 49.1 |
Friday 9.30pm. The NSWEC has finally unveiled its notional Labor-versus-independent two-candidate preferred, which shows Frank Terenzini a comfortable 584 votes ahead. That wraps it up for my coverage of this seat.
Thursday 10pm. This count has stayed on ice for some reason, at least as far as the NSWEC website is concerned, but the ABC reports Labor is more than 1,000 votes ahead.
Tuesday 2pm. Very slow progress in the count, but Morris Iemma has claimed victory for Labor.
Monday 4am. The Sydney Morning Herald reports Labor "has become more confident".
Sunday 5pm. As with Newcastle, this is one that will depend on preference flows we don’t know about yet because the notional count was Labor-versus-Liberal, rather than Labor-versus-Peter Blackmore. For what it’s worth, the primary vote figures (Blackmore 27.1 per cent, Labor 39.8 per cent, Liberal 20.1 per cent) are similar to those Pru Goward faces in Goulburn (Paul Stephenson 25.0 per cent, Liberal 39.9 per cent, Labor 22.4 per cent). The difference being that Blackmore will need a strong flow of preferences from the Liberals, while Stephenson will need them from Labor. Can anyone suggest if supporters of one party or the other are more dutiful with respect to how-to-vote instructions?
| Dawn Fardell | 17,158 | 41.9 | 19,270 | 50.9 | ||
| Greg Matthews | 17,518 | 42.8 | 18,590 | 49.1 |
Wednesday 8pm. With most postals and about 600 absent votes now in, any remaining doubt is now gone. Fardell’s lead has now widened to 680 votes, or 0.9 per cent. No further updates will be added to this entry.
Tuesday 4.30pm. Pre-poll figures are now up at the NSWEC site, and they tell a different story to the Financial Review – 2318 for Dawn Fardell and 2177 for the Nationals, widening Fardell’s lead to a surely unassailable 521.
Tuesday 2am. It falls to the Australian Financial Review to inform us that "two-thirds of the pre-poll votes have been counted, according to the returning officer. The results have favoured Nationals challenger Greg Matthews, who garnered 1495 of the pre-poll votes on offer while 1453 went to incumbent independent Dawn Fardell". These results are yet to appear on the NSWEC site. However, this makes only a modest dent in what had been a 401-vote lead.
Monday 2.30pm. Re-checking of polling booth first preferences has now been completed, giving a 42-vote boost to Dawn Fardell. Most notably, 37 votes have been deducted from the Nationals at the Forbes booth.
Sunday 5pm. Independent candidate Dawn Fardell leads Nationals candidate Greg Matthews by 401 votes. The precedent of 2003, when then-independent member Tony McGrane did somewhat less well on non-ordinary than polling booth votes (from a near identical vote total to Fardell’s), suggests this could yet narrow.
542 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 11 » Show All
Another thing to note is, in comparison to the Victorian Greens, they have gotten Liberal preferences in the inner-city seats in 2002 and 2006, while the NSW Greens did not get these in 2003 and 2007.
So clearly the primary vote position of the Greens in Balmain and Marrickville is substantially improved on Melbourne and Richmond, and if we were to get Liberal preferences at one election we would see that breakthrough. Although I don’t have anything to say that the Liberals would be any more likely to preference us in 2011.
Counting ballot boxes is cluster sampling not random sampling.
“Alex Turvey Says:
Trevor- are you Trevor Khan no 8 on theCoalition Upper House ticket? Were you elected ? Are you off to the National Party Meeting on Wednesday 28th?
Finally – when is the next letter opening to be held in Tweed?”
Sorry, I literally just got back from Sydney.
To your four questions the answers are:
1) Yes, one and the same;
2) No I am not elected yet, the count is very slow and extremely close. A media release has gone out from the Party that reads as if I have got there, but frankly, it is “premature”. Those who are snapping at my heels deserve the courtesy of seeing this play out before anyone claims victory.
3) Yes, I attended my first party meeeting yesterday. Interesting…..
4) Geoff is heading back to Tweed today I expect, so no doubt he will be in search of some mail upon his arrival.
Trev
# Antony Green Says: Counting ballot boxes is cluster sampling not random sampling.
Grateful thanks Antony. I thought of doing it that way, based on the swings rather than the TCP- according to Rod Medew’s “Matched Polling Places” theory, the swings show lower variability between clusters.
Based on the TCP yesterday afternoon, Port Stephens shows 55% probability of an ALP win. Sounds close to your number.
About an hour go Goulburn went into the decided category, and Miranda will tip over that way with the next update. Which leaves only Port Stephens and lake Macquarie.
Any further indication how they will fall?
2:33 update put Labor 32 votes up in Port Stephens now. No updates in Lake Macquarie since 10:22 when Piper led by 266 votes. No new figures released in Miranda for two days.
Two points about the interesting Greens discussion.
In reply to Stewart J’s question about the Illawarra and why Labor has improved there – mate, if anyone should know it’s you! Michael Organ won the Cunningham by-election in Oct 2002, 5 months before the 2003 election. With regional media, it was a huge focus and Labor was seen as being in terrible shape in the region. After Michael inevitably lost in 2004 it swung back the other way.
Re Greens ever winning Balmain and Marrickville, the key issue it seems to me is not whether the Greens can grow the vote, but why the Liberals are so stupid. All it will take is the Libs preferencing the Greens; in that scenario the Greens don’t need another primary vote. The last 2 polls the Lib tactic has been to paint Labor as too close to the loopy Greens, and so preferencing the Greens was unacceptable as it would have undermined their case. And hasn’t that tactic worked for them! By preferencing the Greens, for no real cost, they could force Labor to spend money and time defending otherwise safe seats. Seems like a no brainer to me.
MORRIS LEMMA???
Oh yes it is!
The Electoral Commission has him listed thus on its Candidate List…. but with a lower case “L”. Drives the spreadsheets nuts.
Since a “lemma” is “a proven statement used as a stepping-stone toward the proof of another statement” (Wiki), is the NSWEC trying to tell us something?
New update for Lake Macquarie just arrived, Piper on 50.3%, leading by 217 votes. Looks like the first batch of counted postal votes.
And new update for Port Stephens, Labor lead by 42 votes.
I think the Libs are doing the wrong thing by dropping Debenham.
Debenham’s concession speech had some fire in the belly in stark contrast to Iemma’s sonorific apple-pie statements. I agree with Kerry Chikarovski’s election night comments where she said that Debenham had earned teh right to stay on after weathering Labour’s vicious, multi-million dollar hate campaign.
Debenham capaigned poorly and is presently a shocking media performer, always looking like he is about to suffer spontaneous explosion of the head while speaking. he always looks harried and hurried and out of control of the interview.
Yet I thought his concession speech and at certain moments in the campaign he showed passion and steel. I say give him time to grow into the job.
I predict that as time goes by Iemma will be shown to be what he is – a big shiny vacant balloon of a politician. Nice looking but as light and insubstantial as fairy floss. I predict he will be progressively revealed as a totally vacant neuron-free zone in the months to come.
John Watkins is the NSW ALP Dick Cheney. The power behind the throne but too disagreeable to be put in the public light. Rarely has such an oily politician disgraced the cabinet room.
Barry O’Farrell looks like a Kim Beazley to me. Nice bloke, but too warm and cuddly to be a really effective leader and too plauged with self-doubt as to his ability. If the Libs elect him they will suffer the ‘Curse Of The Beazer’ – four close election losses on the trot, but all so close, they will think ‘Next time, next time…’.
Nah give us the Debber. Yes, he’s psychotic, but then so were Keating and Whitlam and they gave us….err…entertainment (and colossal interest rates).
4:15 update on Port Stephens, Labor ahead by 7 votes.
It looks like the postals and pre-polls are breaking the Libs’ way watching Labor’s lead slip like this …
5:15 update, Liberals now 56 votes ahead. This seat will require the official distribution of preferences to decide.
Update on Miranda:
ALP: 50.76%
Libs: 49.24%
The postal votes counted so far are extending Barry Collier’s lead.
Lake Macquarie: Postal votes have been completed, and Independent Piper maintains a lead of a couple of hundred votes.
The Carey Bay squash courts, where the count is being conducted, today became the scene of an ALP Séance, with ghosts of campaigns past such as Richard Face and Peter Morris joining John Mills and Don Bowman in earning their Parliamentary pensions. There were enough grumpy ghouls to scare the local wildlife out of the trees.
The final votes to be counted are the absentee votes, with the deadline for a final distribution in Lake Macquarie having been extended from next Monday to Tuesday.
It has been suggested that absentee voters generally pick the candidate with the name they recognise, usually the local member, but in this seat they also have the choice of the local Mayor. The preference flows from the Liberal and Greens candidates, if any, are likely to be less, disadvantaging Piper.
There are several thousand to be counted, and it is likely the lead Piper currently has will see-saw from large to small and back again several times over the course of the absentee ballots.
To my discussion earlier about the Greens… sorry Edward – clarification – I was saying that indeps have an impact of taking away the Greens vote and wanted to see in the electorate next time if more independents would lead to a decrease in the Greens vote or if the Greens can actually hold on – that would help explain the whole ceiling or not trend. I looked at the closest 2CP results for the Vic election [these being Melbourne, Richmond and Brunswick] and the same idea holds true. The Greens +5.1% was due to the removal of -4.9& of others. In Richmond they went backwards with the introduction of 1 indep but also PP and FFP. In Melbourne they increased by 3% with the removal of the alliance, CEC and others. Also to note, the 2CP between Labor and Green was an exact status quo of the previous election. So it would seem from the above that they have hit some sort of ceiling primary wise and perhaps on prefs in the Melb case. I’d like to see some analysis into that seat as to where the prefs went compared to last time and if it went for or against Greens. I guess time will tell if they’ve peaked or not, but with growing discontent with the majors, I wouldn’t say they’ve quite hit their ceiling but are close to it.
Goward’s won her seat.
Any news about the LC? Inquiring democrats want to know!
According to Antony Green’s update the ALP lead has extended marginally – 1.6% to 1.9% in the course of 5.5% extra vote counted – in Newcastle, representing the addition of the first batch of postal votes.
I am not sure if these are actual or modelled results as reports in the local paper report different 2pp outcomes.
I also cannot understand why the Electoral Commission persists with pusblishing an update of the notional distribution of preferences between McKay and Gaudry. If there are still Gaudry scrutineers watching the ballots they must either lack meaningful employment, have no social life or be as obsessed about elections as most of the bloggers (self included) on this site.
An examination of the primary data for the first batch of postals from the EC’s website shows that both McKay and Gaudry performed better (an extra 3% of votes) on postals versus normal and Tate worse (3% less of votes). The greens have done almost half as worse on postals and Libs slightly better.
Breakdown is as follows:
Normal votes % (excluding informal) ALP 31.14% Tate 24.14% Gaudry 21.56% GRN 11.16% LIB 9.34% OTH 2.65% – Non-ALP 68.86%
Postal votes % (excluding informal) ALP 34.99% Tate 21.56% Gaudry 24.86% GRN 5.96% LIB 10.88% OTH 1.75% – Non-ALP 65.01%
Thus McKay and ALP are almost 4% better on postals versus normals. Absent votes are also better for McKay than normal. I would assume that of the 3000 to 4000 odd votes left all are now postal – but if a mix of absent and postal the story is the same.
I can’t really think of a reason why the postals would reverse or be any different at this point nor why the preference flow would be remarkably different.
Explanation for this is probably the following: ALP campaign had 2 direct mail outs for postal votes. Tate 1. Gaudry nil. Party machines are generally more adept at organising postal votes. This probably explains why the Gaudry campaign also did beter as (although I can’t attest to it) one assumes that the local “Gaudry machine” were aware of the importance of postals and pushed the issue.
Of possibly lesser importance, I believe that McKay was the only candidate actually canvassing support door-to-door during the campaign. Again I can’t be sure of this but I certainly received no “sorry you were out when we came” material from anyone apart from McKay and had no reports of either Gaudry or Tate doorknocking.
Some people reckon doorknocking is overrated. I reckon they are wrong. Just ask Alex McTaggart in Pittwater. Apart from probably increasing your personal support vote by a few %age points, doorknocking provides the opportunity to enquire whether the elector will be out of the electorate on polling day and organise them a postal vote.
I’d also argue that collecting postal vote applications also has a morale-boosting effect for a campaign as it represents one of the few tangible pieces of evidence of one’s toil apart prior to election night.
Newcastle must be won by the ALP. Iemma claimed it on Monday but the real proof is that Centrebet has paid off on my 2 bets on McKay for a total $21.75 gain for total $15 waged.
This raises a potential provocataive and profane question.
Who is the more accurate? Antony Green or Centrebet?
Dembo, I can only tell you that the online count is proceeding at a snail’s pace, so I guess they’re getting the lower house out of the way first. Anyone else know anything?
Re Liberal’s preferencing of the Green
I agree totally that the liberal should not preference the greens.
If the Greens wants preference from the Liberal in the inner city seats so they can get elected, they will need to do a deal with the Liberal. If the Greens won’t even offer a split ticket in an electorate like Miranda, where they are against the desalination plant. The Greens are just a puppet of the Labor government (or has a secret preference deal, senate 2nd pref for preference in lower seats?)
Under that scenario I do not see any reason Liberal should preference Green, they are going to side with labor anyway, so some green candidate vs Labor condidate means the same thing. Better to make the Greens work for a seat
Have the Greens reached a peak, I suspect they have, sure they may win a seat here and there but our politics has always had two major parties with one or more minor parties winning seats.
While I’m not across NSW political history but if its like Victoria there always been that way, for its always been common for rural seats to have independents and in the inner city seats for they are normally very safe for one of the majors, a third party has polled well.
While the Greens like to see themselves more closely aligned with the ALP, its quite possible as the political landscape changes one day the Greens as there membership grows may move into relationships with the Liberals.
Now before you say never, would the Greens have got along well with Dick Hamer or a more “Liberal” Liberal after all the ALP and the Liberals both move around and the Greens are still a young party which itself will move with the political planets.
Today’s SMH says the Liberals are 7 votes ahead in Port Stephens.
“I don’t have anything to say that the Liberals would be any more likely to preference us in 2011.”
You would think that the second best outcome for the Liberals in any given seat is that their main rival is embarrassed and/or forced to put a great effort into the seat to make it safer next time. The Liberals should have resisted climbing onto the knee jerk Daily Tell-a-lie bandwagon and implicitly supported GRN candidates in seats like Balmain and Marrickville. GRN wins in such seats would not threaten them in parliament in the unlikely event that they ever win office or even in their own marginals but would cause the ALP much grief.
This proves how mad they are because principle isn’t in play here. I mean like this is NSW isn’t it?
This election saw the Greens preference the ALP in many more seats than 2003, and there were a few reasons for that. Firstly, Debnam was seen as worse than Brogden, and worse also than O’Farrell. Also, we are in the leadup to a federal election where ALP preferences may be key in deciding if we can get Kerry Nettle re-elected. Thus there was a greater impetus to preference the ALP.
In 2011 the election will fall after the federal election and I don’t expect the Liberals to be as scary to Greens members and supporters as in 2007. So while I’m not saying we would deal with the Liberals, and we certainly shouldn’t, our own preference decisions may mean that the Liberals are more likely to preference us in Balmain and Marrickville.
A question for the Green members could you see a situration where the Greens and Liberals swapped preferences
re Preferencing the Libs – given the current political climate (particularly in NSW) I’d say its unlikely, but that’s not to say that it mightn’t happen elsewhere, at either a state or federal level. Whether it happens in a marginal seat is another thing too – the Greens WA preferenced the WA Nats over the ALP & Libs in solidly conservative (rural) seats in a couple of state elections, but I suspect the best the Libs/Coaltion can expect currently is an open ticket (maybe a split ticket in some instances, but again very unlikely in NSW).
in reply to bmwofoz… “A question for the Green members could you see a situration where the Greens and Liberals swapped preferences”
For those of us that are naive enough to believe that issues matter, I would think that all the Liberals would need to do is get some good environment policies! (And keep the Nationals in check…) This election they had that opportunity, since Labor are as dead and black as a lump of coal environmentally, but they missed it… Issues do seem to be of little importance to most people who engage in politics though, so perhaps it wouldn’t happen. In Newcastle, most of the candidates sent preferences to candidates or parties they professed to be deeply antagonistic towards, and numbers-driven preferences seem to be the order of the day.
I’m not a member of the Greens, but if there are any on this blog, I can tell them that giving Labor preferences lost them votes at the polling booth I worked at (in a safe National seat) because voters who didn’t understand how preference allocations work were afraid that their vote would go to labor against their will…
Blokes and Blokettes,
Where can I find a swing by region ? e.g.
Western Sydney
Illawarra
North Shore
Hunter
etc.
Antony,
Who would you say is more likely to win Port Stephens?
The Libs have won Port Stephens by 21 votes – the final count of absents are in. Will be a recount on Tuesday.
I have unconfirmed reports from scrutineers in Port Stephens that Craig Baumann has just won by twenty-something votes. Can anyone else concur?
Ah… BenC beat me to it!
Electoral Commission figures give 19 votes, but they will not be the final distribution of preferences.
Antony, is the full distribution of preferences likely to affect the outcome? Surely after two counts there couldn’t be that many votes incorrectly counted to put Baumann back in danger?
The figures reported by the Electoral COmmission are indicative preference throws from election night, plus indicative throws for all declaration votes. They did not go through and completely re-count the indicative preferences from the booths, so there may be a few vote differences here or there. The final distribution will be the official count.
Update finally added for Port Stephens, plus a little note (at last) on the upper house.
“They did not go through and completely re-count the indicative preferences from the booths, so there may be a few vote differences here or there..”
In the primaries, the differences between Saturday and the check-count ranged from 1 to 8 votes. The grand total, though, did not alter. At a booth level, there were discrepancies of up to 5.
The scrutineers will be out in force looking at the cut-up.
Lake macquarie,
Absentees added and now notional preference allocation has reduced Piper’s lead to just 40.
don’t know if this is final count
Bruces:
On election night, Deputy Premier John Watkins made a comment to the effect that ‘Western Sydney ALP voters have come home’ and ‘Federal Liberal members in Western Sydney will be very worried after tonights result”.
The ABC website shows that nearly all swings in Western Sydney were away from the ALP. The exceptions were: Penrith = a correction from last election 2.5%; Lakemba – Iemma’s seat, a leader’s bounce of 5.2%; Auburn – Muslim anti-Liberal swing 2.4%; Parramatta and Strathfield – negligible at 0.1%.
What was Watkins talking about?
Does he have any justification for his comments at all ?
What happened in Charlestown? It looked to me like it should have been very close between Scarfe and the ALP, but the NSWEC is giving the wrong preference count
Election night notional preference counts are not 100% accurate – usually the last job on a very long day for tired booth staff. Just a 1% error rate on 6500 or so prefs is 65 votes and we can expect it to be a bit higher than that. Both seats have a way to go yet.
Bruce, I think Watkins meant to say they stayed with Labor – he was pretty tired too – and I agree with him that this result should worry Jackie Kelly at the very least.
I think I’ve got my own answer for Charlestown…did the Greens preference the ALP or Libs ahead of the independent? if they did so that’s appalling, and they deserve every coal mine and desalination plant they get.
Update added for Lake Macquarie, where Labor has snatched a remarkable late-count lead.
where did those votes come from William?
From the SEO site it looks as if the absent votes went strongly to Hunter. I guess the 7DAs may pre-poll and postal vote but one thing they don’t do is leave home on a Saturday.
Barry Collier now more than 600 votes ahead in Miranda: I think we can definitely give that seat to the ALP.
The counts in Lake Macquarie and Port Stephens: very exciting(though obviously nerve wracking for the candidates).
Pages: « 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 11 » Show All