Australian federal election, 2019

[greenhert]

Current seat totals (including seats in doubt, at this stage it is unlikely they will shift; changes are notional due to redistribution):

Liberal: 78 (+3)
Labor: 67 (-4)
Green: 1 (+0)
Centre Alliance: 1 (+0)
Katter's Australian Party: 1 (+0)
Independents: 3 (+1)

[greenhert]

In non-Coalition, non-Labor news:

Greens have fallen back significantly in Cooper (fka Batman) and Wills where they were relatively close behind Labor. Still third in Macnamara (fka Melbourne Ports) despite increase in first preferences by 2.2%. Greens take second place in Kooyong but finish third in Higgins despite Jason Ball being their candidate once again. In the redrawn Canberra division (much of the old one has gone to the new Bean division) they achieved one of their best results with 23.5%, and Adam Bandt secured over 50% of the first preference votes in Melbourne for the first time (53.1%).

Centre Alliance (fka Nick Xenophon Team) collapse in Barker and Grey, the only two divisions besides Mayo they contested. Absence of Centre Alliance candidates helps Greens indirectly in South Australia.

United Australia Party failed spectacularly to make any impact despite AUS$65 million being spent on its campaign.

[greenhert]

May 18, 2019 16:16:20 GMT pragmaticidealist said:

Hunter is potentially worth keeping an eye on, as Antony Green said earlier. There's an outside chance that One Nation could get into second place, which would put the seat into play as the Nationals are preferencing them above Labor.

www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2019/guide/hunt

One Nation finished third and Labor retained this division.

[jamie]

Anybody got the current/predicted TPP?

[Andrew_S]

May 18, 2019 22:30:10 GMT jamie said:

Anybody got the current/predicted TPP?

Was just about to post it.

Current figures:

Coalition 5,198,463 (50.89%)
Labor 5,017,509 (49.11%)

tallyroom.aec.gov.au/HouseDefault-24310.htm


Last time there were 13.6m votes altogether, so around 3.5m to 4m more to be counted as far as 2PP is concerned.

[Andrew_S]

"A couple of days ago I made the following statement:

I must admit that the under-dispersion of the recent polls troubles me a little. If the polls were normally distributed, I would expect to see poll results outside of this one-point spread for each side. Because there is under-dispersion, I have wondered about the likelihood of a polling failure (in either direction). Has the under-dispersion come about randomly (unlikely but not impossible). Or is it an artefact of some process, such as online polling? Herding? Pollster self-censorship? Or some other process I have not identified?"

marktheballot.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2019-05-09T08:04:00%2B10:00&max-results=7

[timmullen1]

May 18, 2019 23:05:09 GMT Andrew_S said:

"A couple of days ago I made the following statement:

I must admit that the under-dispersion of the recent polls troubles me a little. If the polls were normally distributed, I would expect to see poll results outside of this one-point spread for each side. Because there is under-dispersion, I have wondered about the likelihood of a polling failure (in either direction). Has the under-dispersion come about randomly (unlikely but not impossible). Or is it an artefact of some process, such as online polling? Herding? Pollster self-censorship? Or some other process I have not identified?"

marktheballot.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2019-05-09T08:04:00%2B10:00&max-results=7

William Bowe (pollbludger) has shared some similar thoughts. Interesting last sentence as well about the lack of transparency in Australian polling.

www.pollbludger.net/2019/05/19/the-morning-after/

[timrollpickering]

May 18, 2019 22:33:54 GMT Andrew_S said:

May 18, 2019 22:30:10 GMT jamie said:

Anybody got the current/predicted TPP?

Was just about to post it.

Current figures:

Coalition 5,198,463 (50.89%)
Labor 5,017,509 (49.11%)

tallyroom.aec.gov.au/HouseDefault-24310.htm

Did you see Antony Green's on air rant about this? The seats that were selected for non Coalition/ALP 2CPs are far more Coalition than Labor on the 2PP (only one of the crossbench seats had Labor winning the 2PP last time) and so the AEC total is a seriously misleading figure until traditional 2PPs are conducted in those seats.

[Andrew_S]

May 18, 2019 23:54:53 GMT timrollpickering said:

May 18, 2019 22:33:54 GMT Andrew_S said:

Was just about to post it.

Current figures:

Coalition 5,198,463 (50.89%)
Labor 5,017,509 (49.11%)

tallyroom.aec.gov.au/HouseDefault-24310.htm

Did you see Antony Green's on air rant about this? The seats that were selected for non Coalition/ALP 2CPs are far more Coalition than Labor on the 2PP (only one of the crossbench seats had Labor winning the 2PP last time) and so the AEC total is a seriously misleading figure until traditional 2PPs are conducted in those seats.

Yes I did see that, it was an interesting point.

[timrollpickering]

May 18, 2019 22:27:41 GMT greenhert said:

Greens have fallen back significantly in Cooper (fka Batman) and Wills where they were relatively close behind Labor. Still third in Macnamara (fka Melbourne Ports) despite increase in first preferences by 2.2%. Greens take second place in Kooyong but finish third in Higgins despite Jason Ball being their candidate once again. In the redrawn Canberra division (much of the old one has gone to the new Bean division) they achieved one of their best results with 23.5%, and Adam Bandt secured over 50% of the first preference votes in Melbourne for the first time (53.1%).

As noted upthread, Labor disendorsed their candidate in Melbourne. In general this suggests that Labor is starting to beat off the Greens in inner Melbourne, although I suspect that's not the biggest of consolation prizes if it's left them weakened on the right flank.

Centre Alliance (fka Nick Xenophon Team) collapse in Barker and Grey, the only two divisions besides Mayo they contested. Absence of Centre Alliance candidates helps Greens indirectly in South Australia.

And CA has also crashed and burned in the Senate, losing the seat they had up. This really was just a Xenophon personalist vehicle and Rebecca Sharkie is effectively an independent. They still have two Senate seats not up until 2022 but those could end up being the first major test case for how the same party replacement rules apply if a party collapses in the interim.

[pragmaticidealist]

Anthony Albanese has declared his candidacy for the Labor leadership.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

May 19, 2019 8:54:50 GMT pragmaticidealist said:

Anthony Albanese has declared his candidacy for the Labor leadership.

Good.

[uhurasmazda]

May 19, 2019 0:16:31 GMT timrollpickering said:

May 18, 2019 22:27:41 GMT greenhert said:

Greens have fallen back significantly in Cooper (fka Batman) and Wills where they were relatively close behind Labor. Still third in Macnamara (fka Melbourne Ports) despite increase in first preferences by 2.2%. Greens take second place in Kooyong but finish third in Higgins despite Jason Ball being their candidate once again. In the redrawn Canberra division (much of the old one has gone to the new Bean division) they achieved one of their best results with 23.5%, and Adam Bandt secured over 50% of the first preference votes in Melbourne for the first time (53.1%).

As noted upthread, Labor disendorsed their candidate in Melbourne. In general this suggests that Labor is starting to beat off the Greens in inner Melbourne, although I suspect that's not the biggest of consolation prizes if it's left them weakened on the right flank.

Centre Alliance (fka Nick Xenophon Team) collapse in Barker and Grey, the only two divisions besides Mayo they contested. Absence of Centre Alliance candidates helps Greens indirectly in South Australia.

And CA has also crashed and burned in the Senate, losing the seat they had up. This really was just a Xenophon personalist vehicle and Rebecca Sharkie is effectively an independent. They still have two Senate seats not up until 2022 but those could end up being the first major test case for how the same party replacement rules apply if a party collapses in the interim.

Wouldn't Steele Hall's replacement count for this? He was elected for the Liberal Movement, which promptly collapsed, and then defected to the Liberals and resigned his Senate seat to contest a lower house electorate. SA appointed Janine Haines of the Australian Democrats as his replacement, on the grounds that the minuscule continuing portion of the LM, of which she was a leading member, ended up merging into the ADs. This meant that the Democrats were deemed the institutional successor of the LM - despite the fact that most LM members had followed Hall back into the Liberal Party.

[The Bishop]

May 18, 2019 14:45:50 GMT mboy said:

May 18, 2019 14:06:53 GMT Sibboleth said:

The ALP should have already learned by now that Australia's culture war presents not opportunities but the opposite. A grimly predictable sort of electoral upset; the sort where everything has a certain hideous logic. Don't even seem to have been close in the places they thought they could flip that way, well done, very well done.

A lesson the US Democratic Party needs to learn quickly...

Australia is arguably an almost uniquely right wing country in the developed world, neither ourselves or the US are totally comparable IMO.

[curiousliberal]

May 18, 2019 14:45:50 GMT mboy said:

May 18, 2019 14:06:53 GMT Sibboleth said:

The ALP should have already learned by now that Australia's culture war presents not opportunities but the opposite. A grimly predictable sort of electoral upset; the sort where everything has a certain hideous logic. Don't even seem to have been close in the places they thought they could flip that way, well done, very well done.

A lesson the US Democratic Party needs to learn quickly...

A culture war does present the US Democratic Party some opportunities - not so many in 2020, but more in 2024. It's part of what makes the Sunbelt Strategy viable.

[timrollpickering]

May 19, 2019 9:30:46 GMT uhurasmazda said:

May 19, 2019 0:16:31 GMT timrollpickering said:

As noted upthread, Labor disendorsed their candidate in Melbourne. In general this suggests that Labor is starting to beat off the Greens in inner Melbourne, although I suspect that's not the biggest of consolation prizes if it's left them weakened on the right flank.

And CA has also crashed and burned in the Senate, losing the seat they had up. This really was just a Xenophon personalist vehicle and Rebecca Sharkie is effectively an independent. They still have two Senate seats not up until 2022 but those could end up being the first major test case for how the same party replacement rules apply if a party collapses in the interim.

Wouldn't Steele Hall's replacement count for this? He was elected for the Liberal Movement, which promptly collapsed, and then defected to the Liberals and resigned his Senate seat to contest a lower house electorate. SA appointed Janine Haines of the Australian Democrats as his replacement, on the grounds that the minuscule continuing portion of the LM, of which she was a leading member, ended up merging into the ADs. This meant that the Democrats were deemed the institutional successor of the LM - despite the fact that most LM members had followed Hall back into the Liberal Party.

IIUC the amendment did not apply to Steele Hall's vacancy and so couldn't be challenged in court if anyone wished to. Parties were not registered in the 1970s so a court would probably be more interested in the fate of the registration than in how the Liberal Movement scattered.

The main incident under the amendment was a vacancy for Tasmania in 1987. The state parliament refused to appoint the Labor nominee and Labor refused to nominate anyone else. The state premier argued the parliament was not obligated to chose whoever Labor put up. (The federal Liberal leader gave Labor a pair for the vacancy.) The whole situation was heading to the High Court when a double dissolution overtook it all.

[Andrew_S]

"Winning the wealthy and losing the workers: how Labor's Victorian vote transformed

Results from Australia’s most progressive state show the party is at risk of losing its heartland"

www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/19/winning-the-wealthy-and-losing-the-workers-how-labors-victorian-vote-transformed

[pragmaticidealist]

May 19, 2019 10:31:38 GMT ntyuk1707 said:

May 19, 2019 9:35:07 GMT The Bishop said:

Australia is arguably an almost uniquely right wing country in the developed world, neither ourselves or the US are totally comparable IMO.

To be fair the UK hasn't voted for a left-wing government since the 1970's. 

In the democratic era we've never had a government to the left of the centre-left or to the right of the centre-right. The Labour Party was of course keener on economic control etc a few decades ago, but then so was the Conservative Party, and it's silly to define left/right purely in such terms anyway. 

[timmullen1]

May 19, 2019 9:15:20 GMT ntyuk1707 said:

Wentworth has been called for the Liberals taking them to a total of 75 seats with 5 left in doubt.

Labor have emerged as the favourites to win Lilley and Cowan while the Liberals are on track to take Boothby.

This would take the L/NP to 76 seats with a majority of 1.

Macquarie is on 50.4% ALP - 49.6% LIB with 84% of votes counted.

Chisholm remains a tight race at 50.1% LIB - 49.9% ALP with 74% of votes counted.

Bass is also back in doubt, Labor now have a 437 lead with a start on counting postals to begin tomorrow. The ABC are quoting a local political analyst as saying on the national swing he expects Labor to scrape over the line.

[Deleted]

The psephologist Kevin Bonham has a post up on the remaining tight seats: kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2019/05/2019-house-of-reps-postcount.html?m=1

He expects a general drift to the Coalition and thinks Macquarie may end up very tight, based on the move to Liberals on postals there last time.