Facebook Google Menu Linkedin lock Pinterest Search Twitter

Advertisement

Sunday, April 13

This is probably my final update, since the result is well and truly beyond doubt. On the raw votes, the ABC calculator produces a result at the final count of 194,282 (14.86%) to Linda Reynolds and 179,150 (13.71%) to Louise Pratt, and my own projection is hardly different (14.91% to 13.66%). As Antony Green points out on Twitter, Labor below-the-line votes are producing the very unusual result of the second candidate, Pratt, outpolling the first, Joe Bullock, the current numbers being 1285 to 1039 with a great many more still to be apportioned, although it seems unlikely Pratt’s lead will be overturned. A precedent for this noted by GhostWhoVotes is that Barnaby Joyce outpolled George Brandis as the respective second and first candidates of the Liberal National Party Senate ticket in Queensland in 2010, the circumstance here being that Nationals loyalists who opposed to the LNP merger expressed their displeasure below the line.

Friday morning

Antony Green and Kevin Bonham are both calling it for Linda Reynolds, and I’m not going to argue. Yesterday saw the addition of another 13,530 postals and 2034 absent votes from Brand (on top of the 1653 that had been counted there already, these being the only absent, pre-polls or provisional votes entered into the count so far), together with more rechecking. My projection now has Reynolds’ lead over Louise Pratt at the final count at 190,430 (14.57%) to 183,002 (14.00%), or 7428 votes, which is lower than yesterday because of some tinkering I’ve done with the model. Putting the raw vote into the ABC calculator, Reynolds now leads 189,988 (14.54%) to Pratt’s 183,443 (14.04%), increasing the margin to 6545 from 3407 yesterday. The postal results have been consistent with the contention that the Joe Bullock story breaking the day before the election caused a shift in support from Labor to the Greens, Labor’s postal vote (24.64%) being higher than its ordinary vote (21.83%), while the Greens are much, much lower (6.98% compared with 15.78%).

Thursday morning

The addition of 11,138 out of what should be at least 90,000 postal votes has blown a hole in Labor’s hope that votes cast earlier in the piece will be relatively favourable for them, making a Louise Pratt victory look increasingly unlikely. With numbers reported from Brand, Curtin, Durack, Hasluck and Perth, the results respectively show the Liberal vote 11.1%, 11.1%, 10.3%, 13.4% and 9.6% higher than the ordinary vote, equalling or exceeding the similarly large differentials in September. Putting the raw votes into the ABC calculator previously showed Pratt in the lead, but now Linda Reynolds holds a lead of 3407 votes (0.26), or 188,421 (14.42%) to 185,014 (14.16%).

On the model I’m using to fill the gaps in the count, Reynolds finishes 8499 (0.65%) clear with a lead of 190,963 (14.61%) to 182,474 (13.96%). For pre-polls, postals and provisionals, the model assumes parties’ vote shares will differ from ordinary votes to the same extent that they did in September, producing percentage figures which are applied to estimated totals based on declaration vote data published by the AEC (1653 absent votes were added today from Brand, but as absent votes tends to bounce around depending on where they were cast, I will continue using the aforesaid method until a large number of votes are in). For postals, the party vote shares recorded so far for each of the five electorates for which votes have been counted are extrapolated to an estimated total, likewise based on the AEC data. For electorates where results have not yet been reported, the method is the same as for pre-polls, postals and provisionals.

The Liberal margin will come down by perhaps around 3000 if Palmer United’s position improves to the extent that it doesn’t need HEMP preferences to get elected, in which case HEMP votes will be passed on to Labor at their full value rather than a much-reduced transfer value. However, the improvement in PUP’s position needed for that to happen is a not insubstantial 0.3% going on the modelled figures.

Wednesday morning

I’m not going to do serious number crunching until we start seeing pre-polls, absents and postals, but the Liberals gained at least 1500 votes on yesterday’s re-checking and the addition of special hospital results as such, Kevin Bonham putting their lead at 2504 based on the current numbers. Kevin also observes that Labor’s position might improve by “thousands of votes” depending on the arbitrary fact of whether Palmer United reaches a quota after Liberal Democrats preferences are distributed, or whether the job still needs to be finished with the subsequent exclusion of Help End Marijuana Prohibition. In the latter case, HEMP will go into the mix of votes to be distributed as the Palmer United surplus at a fraction of their value. Otherwise, their preferences will transfer at full value to their next party of preference, namely Labor. However, the odds are in favour of the Liberals on either scenario.

Tuesday morning

Rechecking and perhaps a few delayed booth results yesterday added 2161 votes in Durack, 1076 in Forrest and 152 in Hasluck, to the extremely slight advantage of Labor. The West Australian reports counting of postal votes “may get under way today”.

Monday morning

Nothing new on the counting front yesterday, which the AEC presumably devoted to very carefully transporting votes to the divisional offices where the primary vote totals will be rechecked over the coming days. Ben Raue at The Tally Room observes that “the numbers of absent, provisional and pre-poll votes have dropped to 20-33% of the 2013 levels, while the number of postal votes has increased” – which would seem to bode ill for Labor, given how heavily postal votes traditionally favour the Liberals (47.6% in September compared with 38.8% on ordinary votes).

Sunday morning

For those of you who have just joined us, the WA Senate election result looks to be two seats for the Liberals, one each for Labor, the Greens and Palmer United, and with the last seat a tussle between the third Liberal, Linda Reynolds, and number two on the Labor ticket, Senator Louise Pratt. Both major parties were well down on the primary vote to make way for a surge to the Greens and Palmer United. Scott Ludlam was handsomely re-elected off a quota in his own right, while Palmer United’s Zhenya Wang will get there with preferences from a range of sources, the most handy of which are HEMP, Shooters & Fishers and Family First. The following quick summary of the results shows the raw percentages, and how I’m projecting them to look after pre-polls, absents and postals are added. There follows projections of the race for last place as derived by plugging both raw and projected results into Antony Green’s Senate election calculator.

As I write, 38 booths out of 814 are still to report results. The only electorate where all booths have reported is Moore, where 69,323 ordinary vote have been cast compared with 72,507. This makes turnout difficult to calculate, but it seems to me to have not been as bad as some were suggesting. The number of ordinary vote cast in Moore amounts to 70.14% of enrolled voters, compared with 74.59% at the election last September. In Brand and Fremantle, which in each case have had all booths report but one, the totals are 70.6% and 69.8%, compared with 77.7% and 75.1% at the election.

Saturday

11.39pm. Back from my ice cream break to find the count at 937,396 (63.3%), with 62 out of 814 booths still to report. The latest projection puts the Liberals on 33.8% and the Nationals on 3.2%, Labor on 21.3%, the Greens on 16.0% and PUP on 12.2%. On the ABC computer, third Liberal Linda Reynolds’ lead over second Labor Louse Pratt at the final count has narrowed to 14.84% to 13.73%.

10.05pm. Count up to 661,954 (44.7%). My statewide projections are the same as Antony Green’s, so I’ll drop the metropolitan model and work off those instead from now on. I’m projecting 39.2% for Liberal, 3.4% for the Nationals, 21.1% for Labor, 16.1% for the Greens and 12.2% for Palmer United. Plugging that into the ABC calculator has third Liberal Linda Reynolds beating second Labor Louise Pratt at the last exclusion 15.1% (1.0553 quotas) to 13.49% (0.9446 quotas). Kevin Bonham and Truth Seeker think Labor are doing a little better than that: I’ve no idea about their methods, but I suspect it’s because they’re going off the raw vote totals, whereas I’m going off swings.

9.36pm. Count up to 526,235 (35.6%), Liberal projection down a shade to 2.93, Labor up to 1.57. But Labor’s position in the race for the final seat hasn’t improved since my 9.00pm update, because the Greens vote has come down slightly and reduced the size of the surplus available to Labor.

9.24pm. To explain all that in vote terms, the Greens vote is variously projected at 17% or 18%; Labor’s at a bit below 21%; Liberal at 34.5% plus Nationals at 3-4%; PUP at around 12%.

9.15pm. I have two models on the go here: the one I’ve been quoting, which extrapolates metropolitan swings across the rest of the state, and one which looks at the swings of all electorates, the problem with which is that non-metropolitan electorates should improve for Labor later in the night as bigger booths from regional cities report. But with the count now up to 367,945 (24.9%), the difference between the two seats of figures is diminishing – apart from the Greens, who are on 1.24 quota in the statewide model and 1.34 in the metropolitan-only model, and PUP are a bit higher in the former (1.18) than the latter (1.12). But both pretty much have the Coalition about 0.03 short of a third quota, and Labor on about 1.55.

9.00pm. With the same caveats applied in my 8.43pm comment, I’m now having Labor narrow the gap a little: Liberal 2.94 quotas, Labor 1.55, Greens 1.36, PUP 1.13. With the Greens surplus pretty much all going to Labor and PUP pretty much all going to Labor, the score at the final count would have Liberal winning 1.07 to 0.91, but with the numbers still certain to keep shifting around as the count progresses, and perhaps still the outside chance of both losing out to a micro-party boilover.

8.55pm. Antony observes current numbers in fact find that final vote going to Voluntary Euthanasia, but the statistical chance of that sticking would be low. Nonetheless, it should be emphasised that the final seat which I’ve been representing as a race between third Liberal and second Labor could be less predictable than that.

8.43pm. The picture isn’t getting any better for Labor as the count moves up to 121,082 (8.2%). My present projection based on metropolitan area swings has the Liberals on 2.96 quotas, Labor on 1.51, Greens on 1.36 and PUP on 1.14. That would easily get the Liberals to a third seat when the PUP surplus was distributed. Still plenty of room for caution though: the swing may be quite different outside Perth, and the swings I am calculating are derived not from booth-matching, but by extrapolating from the current electorate totals from metropolitan seats with their results from last September.

8.33pm. “Most of my modelling is based on the Perth vote”, suggets Antony, indicating my belated idea to run off the metropolitan swings gels with what he’s doing. With over 5% counted, very big transfer from Labor to Greens looking sticky.

8.23pm. Count up to 47,611, or 3.2%. Metropolitan swing projections: Coalition down 7.1%, Labor down 5.7%, Greens up 8.6%, Palmer United up 6.3%. Applying metropolitan swings to 2013 statewide results is the best rough guide I can come up with, because metropolitan booths do not have the issue with regional ones that a relationship exists between their size and their partisan tendency (i.e. these booths that are reporting early from O’Connor, Durack and Forrest and very conservative rural booths). Doing so confirms the picture noted previously, with a very close race between third Liberal and second Labor for the last seat.

8.11pm. Sam Dastyari concurring with my assessment that it’s likely Liberal 2, Labor 1, Greens 1, PUP 1, with the last seat a battle between a third Liberal and a second Labor.

8.08pm. Antony Green projecting a perilously low Labor vote, but the data available to him isn’t as good as usual and there’s still on 2.2% counted. My crude early projections for the metropolitan area are a 5.4% swing against Labor, 7.0% swing against Liberal, 6.2% towards Palmer, 9.3% towards Greens.

7.57pm. My early indications are of a 7.0% Palmer United swing in the metropolitan area, and all on the ABC News 24 are talking of a Scott Ludlam win as an accomplished fact. So you might start punting on a 2-2-1-1 result, unless Labor ends up doing badly enough that it comes in at Liberal 3, Labor 1, Greens 1, PUP 1.

7.34pm. With the count up to 5718, my PUP swing projection is now at 6.7%, which is a winning score for them. I’ll be interested to see what Antony’s next projection for them says. The lower micro-party vote is making a HEMP win look unlikely.

7.26pm. Antony Green’s data-matching off the earliest fraction of the vote – which is still a lot cruder than what he’s usually able to do – concurs with a drop in the micro-party vote.

7.18pm. Count now up to 2459. We’re at least getting evidence of a lower micro-party vote: I’m crudely projecting solid drops for parties such as the Liberal Democrats, Australian Christians and Fishing & Lifestyle.

7.11pm. To illustrate that point, an increase in the vote count to 1586 has been enough to push my PUP swing projection up to 4.0%.

7.07pm. Vote count up to 1216. The least useless of my projection figures based on the available data is the Palmer United swing, which I have at a less-than-expected 2.9%. Still pretty useless though.

7.03pm. Keep in mind that big unwieldy Senate ballot papers are slower to count than than lower house papers, so it’s to be expected progress will be slower than we’re used to.

6.56pm. Five small booths in from O’Connor, which would not even be representative of that electorate never mind the rest of the state, since they offer no insight on the larger towns. Also a booth from Pearce, for a grand total of 355 votes counted. Much talk from political operatives about a drop in turnout of about 15%, putting it in the high seventies.

6pm. Polls have closed in Western Australia’s Senate election. Absent any media commitments, I’ll be closely following the results as they come in on this post. I’m still unclear as to whether the AEC will be publishing booth results, but at the very least will be able to analyse the figures based on crude matching of reported results at the division level to the 2013 figures. Antony Green will be covering the results on ABC News 24, but I’m not exactly clear what format that will take.

Advertisement

Advertisement

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola

1024 comments

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
democracy@work
Guest
[There’s been plenty of talk on the system of preferential voting in the wake of the Western Australian election rerun. But mathematics masters student Casey Briggs says we should focus on the method of counting itself.] http://www.crikey.com.au/2014/04/14/counting-votes-the-wright-way-what-the-aec-should-be-looking-at/ What can I say… I highly agree, we need to review the counting rules and the way the vote is counted. T^he system that is in place was designed to facilitate a manual count. It is a trade off of bad practice short cuts designed to reduce the time taken to count the vote not to reflect the voters intentions. With computerized counting… Read more »
Disasterboy
Guest

Any expectations for when the button will be pressed?

Utopia
Guest

[absolutetwaddle
Posted Sunday, April 13, 2014 at 6:23 am | PERMALINK
What an absolute shocker of a result for the ALP. Largely self-inflicted and might I say RICHLY deserved.]

Can I suggest that the reason Bullock put himself there was he thought he would get away with it.

The exact reason why is in your very post:

[ And boy, have I held my nose for Labor sometimes – this is not a Green or a Trotskyist saying this.]

Get it?

absolutetwaddle
Guest
What an absolute shocker of a result for the ALP. Largely self-inflicted and might I say RICHLY deserved. There’s no way, NO WAY, a supposedly progressive, modernist, moderate party can put a homophobic dick like Joe Bullock at the top of any ticket and not pay the price. I’m not surprised at all Ludlum got in, I would have voted for him in a heartbeat over whatever detritus the SDA sees fit for pasture. And boy, have I held my nose for Labor sometimes – this is not a Green or a Trotskyist saying this. A missed opportunity, a profound… Read more »
bug1
Guest

(imagine if they had lost some ballots)

bug1
Guest

Freemantle hasnt been updated since Monday night, all other divisions last updated today.

Is it unusual for a division to be 4 days behind in the counting ?

Compact Crank
Guest

KB @1016

HUZZAH!

Compact Crank
Guest
hairy (should that be Harry?) @1014 Disagree. Unlike the people who visit this blog – the average punter (even most of the rusted on party voters) pay liitle or no attention to elections, let alone the WA Senate rerun until the last couple of days and without that last birst of sunlight on Bullock they would have been none the wiser of who he is, why he is #1 for the ALP and what is views are – most of them don’t know who the SDA/Shoppies are. A number of regular posters here from the left of politics declared their… Read more »
Kevin Bonham
Guest

I’ve called this now and so has Antony.

Kevin Bonham
Guest

At the moment the Green vote is running much worse in postals compared to ordinary votes than in the same electorates in 2013. If that lasts, that might be the Bullock factor – it might show voters (a few percent) moved from Labor to Green late in the campaign. After all if someone is concerned about Bullock they’re most likely left-wing and they are hardly going to shift to the Coalition over it.

However maybe this pattern will change and there could well be other explanations in terms of differences in postal effort level.

hairy nose
Guest

Never understood why an appraisal of the ‘Joe Bullock effect’ was seen to depend on whether postal votes were more favourable to him or not. It didn’t take the publicity over ‘that speech’ for voters to realise he was a currant – they already knew that.

When postals are just as bad just watch all the dinosaurs grab that as proof he was really a great candidate, it was the (mining tax) (carbon tax) (Shorten) (blah blah) anything but that nice Ol’ Joe…..

ifonly
Guest
Last time the postal and prepoll went strongly to the right whilst provisional and absentee was more even. Absentee is the smallest of these and probably won’t change much. Provisional is when you aren’t on the roll so I would expect these to be down if many of the problems from 6 months ago are resolved. Whilst I don’t think it is going to happen, there would be a funny side if the Greens got 17% of the ordinary vote (say 75% of the total) and only got 8% of the remaining 25% and they came up with 14% and… Read more »
Compact Crank
Guest

That’ll be the Joe Bullock factor – apparently.

Kevin Bonham
Guest

Lib postals up 10-13 points on Lib booth votes in five different and disparate electorates. I now have Libs up by over 1000 even if the tipping point is triggered – which the way this is going it won’t be, BTLs notwithstanding.

The Liberals must be in an extremely strong position based on these postals and the likelihood that that sort of pattern will continue. I can’t see what hope there is for Labor after seeing this.

Antony GREEN
Guest

First postal vote counting is good news for the Liberal Party.

Kevin Bonham
Guest

Fixed a small issue with my calculations arising from the two ungrouped independents. I currently have Labor up by 492 if the tipping point helps them; I doubt this will last through the postcount.

Kevin Bonham
Guest

This count is slooooooooow.

Antony GREEN
Guest

Whether the impact is 1800 or 3600, the point I’m making is it’s nothing like the 75,000 votes distributed at that point.

Kevin Bonham
Guest
At the 69.51% mark (1734 Brand absents added) I have Labor ahead by 790 if they cross tipping point, but this is not indicative as the only non-ordinaries added so far are absents from a friendly electorate. So while Labor are notionally just in front (and may become more so if more absents go in) I still expect them to probably be blown away later on. My assumption for the tipping point was to give PUP enough extra primary votes to reach quota, hold all their feeders constant, and reduce everyone else proportionally. This compares to a margin of 1295… Read more »
Kevin Bonham
Guest
Antony GREEN@1004 William, the impact of Palmer United being elected before HEMP is distributed is much smaller than keeps being suggested. It only effects about 2,000 ballot papers, around 1300 Australian Democrat votes and 700 Katter’s Australian Party votes. If Palmer United is elected with HEMP preferences, these ballot papers go to Labor worth about 200 votes. If Palmer is elected before HEMP preference are distributed, the ballot papers are worth around 2,000 votes instead. The effect was wiped out by yesterday’s counting. These votes don’t just go onto the Labor total though; they also go off the Liberal total… Read more »
Antony GREEN
Guest

William, the impact of Palmer United being elected before HEMP is distributed is much smaller than keeps being suggested. It only effects about 2,000 ballot papers, around 1300 Australian Democrat votes and 700 Katter’s Australian Party votes. If Palmer United is elected with HEMP preferences, these ballot papers go to Labor worth about 200 votes. If Palmer is elected before HEMP preference are distributed, the ballot papers are worth around 2,000 votes instead. The effect was wiped out by yesterday’s counting.

sprocket_
Guest
an insiders tale from Ludlam’s campaign [It’s four o’clock on election day, and Scott Ludlam is dead to the world. He’s due on the ABC at 6pm and the results will start taking shape an hour after that, but until then he’s asleep on the office couch, which is about thirty centimetres shorter than it needs to be. Jess McColl, the adviser on loan from Rachel Siewert’s office for the campaign, is holding the fort — fielding calls from the occasional nutbag, calming panicky booth captains, trying to put out any fires before they start. She’s the one who has… Read more »
Kevin Bonham
Guest

Assuming the re-entries are done now, Labor’s position has still markedly worsened tonight.

Kevin Bonham
Guest

Antony GREEN@999

By the way, the mystery of the 8 votes that appeared before 6pm on Saturday has been solved. It was the Eucla mobile. Eucla operates on a different time zone to the rest of Western Australia so the eight votes were counted before the rest of the state’s polling places closed.

I wondered if it might be something like that. Thanks.

sprocket_
Guest

ALP 217,764 +1,396
LiB 336,778 + 473

Antony GREEN
Guest

By the way, the mystery of the 8 votes that appeared before 6pm on Saturday has been solved. It was the Eucla mobile. Eucla operates on a different time zone to the rest of Western Australia so the eight votes were counted before the rest of the state’s polling places closed.

Antony GREEN
Guest

Labor’s vote went down while they re-entered all the mobile booths in Durack. The Sports Party and Sustainable Population will lose about 10% of their vote tomorrow when a keying error in one booth is fixed.

fredex
Guest

Am I imagining stuff or did the vote counted go from 996,271 earlier today down to 995,194 currently shown?
ALP from 217,443 down to 216,368, Libs 336,318 to 336,305?

Kevin Bonham
Guest

Really serious ugliness for Labor in the last hour or so. The overall turnout has gone marginally down and Labor has dropped 1500 on the calculator bottom line. PUP have moved closer to the tipping point but it doesn’t matter because on current figures if PUP cross before the tipping point, Labor still loses.

I assume this is formality checking doing this. If that’s correct then the chance would be if they’d formality checked some parties and not others before updating figures. Otherwise Labor are going to start the non-ordinaries behind.

Kevin Bonham
Guest
Bad day for Labor today; unfriendly hospital votes perhaps. They’d still win on current primaries because BTLs would put PUP over at the tipping point. Alaric at the Tally Room estimates PUP’s BTL gain at the tipping point to be 2800-4300 votes. I’m also trying to model this but pretty busy with other stuff at the moment and battling computing power/ability limitations. At the moment PUP would need to gain 1145 which would certainly happen, but looking at the projections of where PUP will be after postals, the target figure is likely to blow out to seven or eight thousand… Read more »
hairy nose
Guest

What does Shane Wright’s tweet refer to William?

Wakefield
Guest

Willaim – do you know if they have started counting any pre-polls or postals. AEC still showing about 35 “booths” not reported yet which seems a bit surprising? Could be a long wait.

Wakefield
Guest

Sprocket – those suggested votes are not consistent with the extra votes appearing on the AEC website. Even if they were correct for a parcel of votes – previously Labor plus Greens was 37.6%. Labor plus Greens on your figures are 37. And Libs 40 cf 33.7 count to date is a gain for Libs. So overall gain to Libs?

sprocket_
Guest

[@swrightwestoz: Since WA Senate close Sat, Lib picking up 40% of fresh ballots, ALP 32%, Greens 5% and PUP 9.2%]

Big uptick for ALP at 32%, maybe the last 2 days Bullock hysteria cost 10%

C@tmomma
Guest

PTMD,
I don’t think you’ll be able to hold back the tide of attempts to modernise the electoral process after the AEC WA 2013 election debacle, so I was just trying to get ahead of the curve to see if there’s a way to make it an open, honest and transparent process.

C@tmomma
Guest
Rod Hagen, You obviously didn’t read my comment sensibly and resorted to the cheap shot. I think everyone, and not just those who can afford it, a la the US where Photo ID=Drivers Licence or Passport, and is used as a tool of disenfranchisement, can be provided with electoral ID when they enrol to vote. I even have one from a time when these things were sent out to voters in the mail. Even the homeless, the technologically illiterate (nice bit of reverse snobbery there) and the elderly, NESP and the remote voters, all of whom I canvassed in my… Read more »
Rod Hagen
Guest

Even far more basic things , like demanding photo ID a la Qld, can disenfranchise significant sections of the community – see our submission on the Qld proposals at http://indigenousbirthreg.org/Indigenous_Birth_Registration/Our_Publications.html for example. Imagine what a need for mobile phones & computers would do!

Puff, the Magic Dragon.
Guest
Puff, the Magic Dragon.

Interesting C@tmomma
Or we could just give everyone a pencil, a souvenir of voting. Something along the lines of, “AEC. I voted in 2014 :)”

Some things are better for not being modernised, imo.

Rod Hagen
Guest

Sounds like a way of even further disenfranchising the poor, the technologically illiterate, remote indigenous voters, the elderly, NESP, the mobile phoneless, the computer less, etc etc., I’m afraid, Catmomma.

C@tmomma
Guest
I have come up with the Electronic Voting system to beat them all! If we must be forced into having one by the Conservatives who love their system opacity. 1. All voters vote electronically. Postal voters need to register well before, say 21 days, before they will be departing our shores or heading into hospital, or whatever. This triggers the AEC to send out a flying squad, complete with EFTPOS type machine to record their vote. Once the voter has entered their unique PIN sent to their mobile when they registered their intention to vote early, then they can vote… Read more »
Utopia
Guest

[Everything
Posted Friday, April 4, 2014 at 5:55 pm | PERMALINK
Is LNP 3 ALP 1 PUP 1 GRN 1 possible?

555
Everything
Posted Friday, April 4, 2014 at 5:55 pm | PERMALINK
…as in a reasonable possibility (of course, anything is possible)]

How good was that question?????

Did anyone else consider this scenario?

In reality this is 5 from the right to 1 from the left……not a good result for the ALP :devil:

Paddy O
Guest

small update by AEC. 68.98 counted. slight improvement for ALP

Utopia
Guest

Ah….that explains why I couldn’t find any progress!

Thanks.

shellbell
Guest

[For whatever reason..]

What is possibly or probably unusual in the WA Senate Count makes one a wee bit nervous.

wpDiscuz

Advertisement

Telling you what the others don't. FREE for 21 days.