A more lucid analysis will have to wait for tomorrow. For the moment I can only offer some swing breakdowns: 5.6 per cent in Sydney, 5.5 per cent in the rest of New South Wales; 5.4 per cent in Melbourne, 4.7 per cent in the rest of Victoria; 7.8 per cent in Brisbane, 8.5 per cent in the rest of Queensland; 1.4 per cent in Perth, 4.1 per cent in the rest of WA; 5.8 per cent in Adelaide, 9.2 per cent in the rest of SA (Mayo, Barker and Grey); 2.5 per cent in Tasmania; 1.7 per cent in ACT; 2.8 per cent in NT.
I think I can also manage an overview for the Senate, which has produced a surprisingly strong result for the Coalition and a number of disappointments for the Greens. Kerry Nettle is gone in NSW, with three seats each for Labor and the Coalition. It’s looking like the same result in Victoria, although Greens candidate Richard di Natale might yet take the final seat from the third Liberal candidate Scott Ryan. The Greens also seem to be falling short in Queensland, their candidate 2.4 per cent behind Labor’s third for the final seat. Better news for the Greens from Western Australia, which turned in its expected result of three Liberal, two Labor, one Greens, and South Australia, where their candidate looks likely to just keep ahead of Labor at the second last exclusion and win the final seat on their preferences. Tasmania is a clear three for Labor, two for Coalition and one for Greens, and Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory split one Labor and one (Country) Liberal as normal.
Assuming the Greens don’t get up in Victoria, and unless my late night/early morning arithmetic leads me astray, that points to 18 seats out of 40 for both Labor and the Coalition, three for the Greens and one for Nick Xenophon. Combined with ongoing Senators, that means 37 for the Coalition (one short of a blocking majority) and 32 for Labor, with the balance consisting of five for the Greens, one Family First and one Nick Xenophon. The Greens will thus not hold the balance of power in their own right, with the Coalition being able to stitch together a blocking majority with Fielding or Xenophon or an absolute majority with them both. Interesting times ahead.
1,248 Comments
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 … 25 » Show All
As a “union thug”, last night was incredible.
All I need to say.
I still think Kerry Tucker is in with a chance. If the rest of the count and postals and pre-polls have the Liberals under 31% that could bring them under quota on the total count. That and BTLs can make the difference. I think ACT has a fairly high BTL count historically. I expect we’ll have to wait a couple of weeks. I hope Kerry Tucker gets in. That way the Greens can embarrass the ALP into undoing Workchoices. Also make sure they sign Kyoto.
What a classic line from Jim Middleton: “It’s as though John Howard crashed the car, and handed Peter Costello the keys.”
Morning bludgers…oh my head!
How many seats to Labor… oh my head.
Much work to do….
Oh well, tomorrow is another day.
Happy it was a good win for the lower house, disappointed over the Senate and that the extra green seat didn’t get up in the ACT.
Gary Humphries was popular with older age groups, the “grey vote”, from his years in local politics.
The Senate falls on quotas, (I think) and with only 2 Senate seats, they only need to get a third of the vote, which is about what Liberals get in the ACT generally with a rough 60/30 Labor/Liberal split. The green Senate candidate we were hoping would oust the Liberal, actually needed to steal votes from the existing Liberal support base.
There was still around 2% to Labor, but that swing was supposed to go to Greens – such Labor safe seats, didnt need the extra swing.
As for cutting the public service, well thats an age-group thing, and a time-in-service thing, and where-in-service thing. Every change of govt does that, but for those of us older pubes, who have been through such changes, we *know* that the Coalition are far more vicious and politicised and scary than Labor.
Labor only get rid of the dead wood of the ‘old guard’ (some of whom have already cut-and-run in these last weeks anyway).
many older pubes, in line policy portfolio agencies (not the administrative ones), have been waiting a long time to actually start doing *real* work again – ie start working on sensible policies, programs etc in health, education, transport, communications etc – to rebuild neglected and deteriorated infrastructure and services.
Younger age-groups, with less service time, knowing no different, are terrified. They’ll learn in time, it aint so scary
The rest of the Labor support in the ACT, I think comes from the rather large and growing private sector. Coalition govts tend to really punish the city and its micro-economy. Some of us who lived through the smashing of the city’s microeconomy in 96-98 remember!. Howard’s refusal to live in the Lodge, is just an outward ‘F*ck You’ symbol of that, and it got worse when we shifted to a Labor ACT govt. Local businesses, even major companies with their head offices located here have been pissed off.
Hey William, our 87 seats isn’t looking all that shabby at the moment.
Forde is interesting. I said a couple of days ago that it may be a possible ALP gain, given that it was a three-cornered contest, with both the ALP and Nationals running candidates. With a candidate having the aesthetic appeal of the National’s Hajnal Ban (http://www.hajnalban.com.au/), surely some votes would have gone her way. Anyone know whether this split the conservative vote and delivered the ALP victory?
I didn’t place any monetary bets (more fool me), but I still have something to collect on:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/507?cp=all
42
Just Me Says:
July 14th, 2007 at 3:30 am
Steven Kaye Says:
“Simply put, a booming economy combined with a popular PM will see the Government re-elected. Mark my words, kiddies.”
Bookmarked for future reference. Question is, if your bold prediction is wrong, do you have sufficient humility and decency to turn up here and face psephological reckoning?
Well, do you?
128
Steven Kaye Says:
July 15th, 2007 at 2:19 am
Just Me asked of me the following: “Question is, if your bold prediction is wrong, do you have sufficient humility and decency to turn up here and face psephological reckoning?
Well, do you?”
Of course I do. Do you?
Hello? Steven? Where are you?
Yeah, petty and immature of me, I know.
But damn it feels good.
••••••••••••••••••••
37
Geepee Says:
I got $700 on Maxine @ $3.65 months ago.
Now that’s a nice bonus. Spend it wisely. Or don’t.
disasterboy: the problem with the large proportion of BTLs in the ACT is they’re not going to do the Greens any good at all; since Humphries won’t get a brass razoo above the line, anything below the line that gets to him is a lost vote for the Greens. So Humphries would need to drop not just fractionally below a quota, but significantly below it, to lose. Although I predicted Humphries to win despite the widespread belief he would go, I am still not calling ACT Senate – the Greens improved their position in Tasmania on postal votes in 2004 and I do not assume that it cannot happen again.
Jen #45 – the Senate isn’t bucking the trend. It’s just that 53-47 is enough of a majority to win lots of lower house seats, but in reality it’s not that different from 50-50. 53-47 always divides the seats 3-3.
I just read one of Grattan’s articles
Michelle Grattan
And if Costello does take the leadership he’s going to have a very big problem: Namely that he can no longer call on Treasury – he needs to do the work himself.
59
Kevin Bonham
What you say makes sense to me, except for Liberal BTLs that start with their lower candidate(s) in the group. I don’t expect many of them, so they don’t really count.
disasterboy: Unfortunately, Humphries is back. He’s already got the necessary quota.
I have to say that I’m a bit bemused by these results. The Greens actually did really well in the ACT, lifting their primary vote quite substantially (pretty much a best-case scenario IMHO), and in line with the Senate polls that had Tucker winning. What I didn’t see coming is the surprisingly low Labor vote – Kate Lundy’s only polled about the same as in 2004, and Humphries hasn’t dropped much. I’d have expected that to be much higher, thus taking down Humphries’ primaries and passing surplus preferences onto the Greens, but it didn’t eventuate.
My guess at this point would be that the pledge to slash the public service might be the cause, because I simply can’t see any reason why the swing to Labor was lower than anywhere else in the country at a time when the Liberals are badly on the nose here.
Actually, the Coalition didn’t do particularly well in the senate this time around – they got three seats fewer than Labor+Greens.
The problem is that they did spectacularly well in the senate last election, so the six-yearly elections are going to leave us with a Howard/Latham legacy in the Senate for another three years.
The Greens can’t ever hold the BOP the way the Democrats used to – in the Senate they are effectively to Labor what the Nationals are to the Coalition, since most people who vote Green would otherwise vote Labor. So in a 50:50 TPP election I would expect equal numbers in the senate for Green+Labor and Liberal+National+possible FF/CDP/other right-wing minors.
The end of the Democrats in this election was entirely expected but still entirely depressing.
William Bowe
Did you get the greenie?
If you run short, you know my addy.
Great site and I thank all that contribute.
To help clear the hangover. A little bit of analysis on average swing in different types of seats
Seat Average Swing (%)
Safe ALP seats (>5%) 4.7
Marginal ALP (<5%) 4.9
Marginal Lib (Tier I) (<5%) 5.3
Marginal Lib (Tier II) (10%) 5.1
There might be a more pronouced effect if you control for state effects. But, on there numbes there is not a lot of evidence that the swings were different in the marginals.
mmm tables don’t post so well. I’ll try again
Safe ALP seats (>5%) ——– 4.7
Marginal ALP (<5%) ———–4.9
Marginal Lib (Tier I) (<5%)—–5.3
Marginal Lib (Tier II) (10%) ———— 5.1
Still not right
Safe ALP ——- 4.7
Marginal ALP — 4.9
Tier I Lib/Nat—-5.3
Tier II Lib/Nat—6.2
Safe Lib/Nat —5.1
i’m waiting for the ‘jilted lover’ to come on at 9am (here in sunny Griffith!)
So which state government will be the first to fall?
So John Hewson got it right after all: Howard has to be carried out of Kirribili House in a CAGE
Good riddance! I might as well throw in a walking stick for him as a departure gift.
Good riddance, indeed
the one with a state liberal exec that can get its act together.
disasterboy: yep, those that are BTL for the other Liberal candidate can indeed leak against Humphries. However, she probably won’t have more than 1000 votes and he would be unlucky to lose anything over 100 or so out of that.
If he drops below a quota as postals are included I’ll rig up a BTL calculator spreadsheet (as I did with Milne vs Petrusma for Tassie in 2004) to follow roughly what proportion of the other BTLs he needs to get elected. I don’t expect that this will happen, but who knows?
Rebecca: Humphries only has a provisional quota based on the votes counted so far. As more votes go in, the quota rises, so if, once prepolls and postals are added, his percentage of the vote drops, he can still slip below a quota (and, in theory, lose if he goes down far enough).
Another pretty disappointing Senate result for the Greens the way things are looking at the moment. I cautioned that they would not get the swag some were predicting, but I expected four or five and it looks like they only won three.
Does anybody know what this means:
The national two-party preferred swing to Labor of 6.3per cent was the second-largest since World War II, bettered only by Gough Whitlam in 1975. Labor looked certain to secure 86 of the 150 House of Representative seats and hoped for 90 – a gain of at least 30 seats.
It’s from here
Surely she means AGAINST whitlam. Ye Gods.
Interesting figures Albert F.
So with a TPP of 53.4 (as just reported on Insiders), this is the largest Labor TPP in history. I was informed that the swing under Fraser was larger – but does this mean that this majority is now “swing-proof” through the next election? Has there been enough of a movement of the pendulum to keep it on the Left-of-Centre for six years?
And, do we know how many Labor seats are owed to Greens preferences?
Ha! where’s paul kelly…. not on insiders…. hahaha.
Geez, Andrew Bolt has been on the road to Damascus, he made a lot of sense this morning.
Poor old Dolly, he is on his way to resigning, that much was obvious from his responses this morning, oh well, back to the family pile, bloody good riddance too!
Loks like Maxine has secured Bennelong inlatest counting http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-13745-105.htm move by 1% on 2PP overnight
Where does this result leave Gerard Henderson who was not prepared to put forward a prediction, except that no one would take any noticed of the polls in future. I think the polls have done well?
Tears of joy rolled down my face last night (couldn’t help hit) @ Suncorp. It doesn’t get any better than this. Kjin with respect to Wayne Goss I shook hands with him last night & told him “I got share’s in Ausenco & I love it” – he laughed. He’s on the board.
For those who don’t know Ausenco is a engineering based in Brisbane that has up to $10 billion of current & future work set for the next 5 years world wide. I bought in the day after it listed in May 2006 – ($1) next day $1.47. On Monday 19th it reached a high of $16.11. Its gone down since then on share market trend but its been a solid above average performer & just powers onwards & upwards.
The evil dwarf is DEAD & so is his government. To day is a beautiful day & I can rest. Thank you all.
OH GEEUZZ I was wanting to go to 53.4 but thought Id stick with 53.7!!
We’re now in uncharted waters, watching Howard concede last night I couldn’t believe it was happening.
aussieguru01. oh what a night! brilliant.
So how about the purportedly “Christian” microparties!
CDP & FF both lost Senate votes.
Bucking the trend:
Family First 0.59% increased +0.03% in NSW. CDP lost more than that, there.
Family First 2.61% increased +0.73% in Vic: benefits of Steve Fielding?
Christian Democrats ran in Queensland (not having ran there last time). FF lost more than CDP’s 0.24%
Christian Democrats ran in SA, as in Queensland FF lost more than CDP’s 0.14%
In the HoR CDP picked up slightly. I have not checked but they may have just run more candidates than last time. FF drop by even less than CDP picked up.
FF did (from a dodgy count on my part) get over 4% in the HoR in 17 seats. Thats more money than getting just over 4% in the Senate in WA. Not bad for a net drop in vote.
On a separate note.
I expect Adam Carr will analyse the Australian Democrats vote in absorbing detail
A little confused guys – is Maxne in? When will we know for sure? When can we open the bottle of bubbles?
A bigger swing than 96 and almost identical TPP. Perhaps there were some baseball bats out there after all …
just a little clarity pls
79, razz, I am getting more optimistic about my $100 on maxine as the day goes on, nice margin now.
Morning bludgers. Nursing a monster hangover. Some observartions (apologies if they were made on last night’s threads.)
1. The myth of the marginal seat campaigning needs to be put to rest for all time. Like I tried to explain to the nervous nellies – and weren’t there a few of those after Galaxy and newspoll? – if you get 52%, you win big.
2. Maxine McKew is a star. Whoever had the idea to put her in Bennelong is a genius.
3. Big, big thanks to Jackie Kelly. Her “it was just like a chaser stunt” interview cost the PM his seat. Congratulations Jackie. You’ve made history.
4. Tony Jones is a c*nt. He should be strung up by his thumbs.
Paul Kelly gave great commentary on insiders
Spiro
Why tony Jones???
Ditto Gerr… this election has been a fine result for Australians and goes a fair way to restoring my faith in the public after ‘04.
The absolute rejection of John Howard, with him looking likely to lose his own seat is a rejection of the race-based politics he has employed since his successful Tampa ‘01 election. We can thank Jackie Kelly for something at least…
I look forward to analysis from right-wing pundits of where it all went wrong for them…
Spiros. what prompted point 4?
gerr. he hasn’t shown up the QLD version yet. Jim Middleton did the opening overview.
Saw a post earlier saying that our government would now be cold-shouldered by the Village Idiot. Oh good, does that mean that they wont expect any more of our young men and women to go and die in their filthy greed driven wars of opportunism. BTW, if the Democrats ever get any balls, they will impeach the Idiot and the Prince of Darkness Cheney anyway soon.
If costello was leader the loss would probaly have been greater, however this is a great victory for all Australians and the direction of Australia has now been altered for the better, it will take time for the new Government to bring about changes, however it is important that the LNP extreme policy direction has now come to a screeching halt with the new ALP Government able to now steer the country in a new direction.
We will still have to live and reap what JWH has sowed but at least his sowing has come to an end and Rudd can now start sowing new seeds to alter the future of Australia.
WB:
Thankyou for the this site, it is credit to you, I appreciate all your hard work that has made this site a great success.
Sarah, Bennelong has moved overnight. Now up to 5.97% swing – should be enough to do it, 51.84 of the vote. Moneys will be paid out with the declaration from the AEC of the winner – don’t know when that will happen.
Can’t really think of anythng much to say……
a) You better believe it.
b) This is one for the non-believers.
c) We’re back
d) All of the above.
And I hope we’re charging market rates for Kirribillie House from this morning. Like to see the Rattus family at Centrelink looking for emergency rental assistance on Monday morning, ‘What do you mean my $100K+ pension disqualifies me!’
Bolt on Insiders was very interesting. He was making a case for Turnbull to be Op. leader and couched it in the need for the Libs to get back to their small L liberal progressive background. If he thought that was so important then why didn’t he (and the Lib progressives) speak out on Hansonism, Tampa, Siev X, Rau etc. They might be getting their epiphany now but it’s a bit late for the party.
Really? Middleman? Ok, I came in late, is downer being interviewd?
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 … 25 » Show All