Federal Election Predictions

[Hondo]

It seemed to me that Rudd tackled one huge issue too many. He did the health system and tried on an ETS and then a new mining tax. The last 2 were complex issues that proved easy for an opposition and the business community to work against. I understand the ideology of change that came with Rudd 2007 but perhaps it lost it's way with too much change at once.

It was similar to Workchoices that became a very easy issue for Labor and the Union movement to work against for political mileage.

Hadd Rudd stayed on and run against Abbott I wonder if the coalition would have their majority already? It seemed labor were on target to lose a lot of seats in WA while Rudd was there and, as it's turned out, if that had happened Abbott would be PM.

Obviously, Rudd would have delayed the election to buy time to turn the polls around so it's all hypothetical.

[redandblack]

None of those things make the government bad, dedja.

They make the Labor party's political strategy a failure.

The result is very poor for Labor, especially from where they were a year or two ago, but it's only a good result for the LNP on the same basis: ie, where they were a year or two ago.

As for the campaign, do you really think the LNP would have got close if the NSW and Qld State Governments weren't so toxic? Even the Libs booth posters featured Anna Bligh.

Labor did very well in Victoria, SA, Tassie and regional NSW, so their loss can't be just put down to being a 'bad government'.

It could be put down to their own political stupidity, though.

As for the LNP, I called it early on here last night that I thought they would form government, but it's not as good a result as is being seen ATM. With the voters carrying baseball bats for Labor in Qld and Sydney, they still couldn't get a majority of seats at this stage.

I agree with most of Hondo's post and I also think the biggest mistake (among many) that Labor made was to rush to the polls instead of giving Julia Gillard some time for people to get used to her as PM.

Finally, IMO, both leaders performed well during the campaign and showed they could both be good PM's, given the chance.

[dedja]

OK, we are so hung that no major party can govern in their own right.

So the reality is now that the electoral result doesn't really mean a cracker.

It's now up to both Labor and Coalition to convince the Governor-General that they can form a stable government.

Labor gets the first stab at this, and if they can't convince the G-G, then the Coalition has a go.

Whoever can convince the G-G then has to prove it by a vote of confidence on the floor of the House when Parliament resumes.

As the recent Tasmanian election and resultant deal shows, sometimes this does not follow intuition.

Watch this space ...

[Psyber]

... As for Psyber's 'still spinning, R & B' statement, I was merely stating the psephological truth. There's no 'spin' there, Psyber, just the political fact that the ALP has over 50% of the 2PP vote. That's fact and not 'spin'. If you would like me to quote sources, let me know, there's thousands, starting with Malcolm Mackerras and Antony Green...

R&B,
To be semantic, my post was phrased as a question, not a "statement".
Both your statement about the 2PP vote and the one I quoted about the individual party votes were "psephological truth" - both equally related to Psephology, the study of elections.
Would you like to call it "selective emphasis" rather than "spin" to have focused on the 2PP over the first preferences?

According to the pundits there is nothing in the constitution to give 2PP priority over first preferences in the right to form a government in this situation.
I don't know whether the incumbent caretaker has any constitutional priority as dedja suggests
In the end as he said, it comes down to which party can make a deal with enough other elected members of the house to provide a stable government.
We live in interesting times..

[redandblack]

Thank you for that reply, Psyber.

I'll reply in hopefully the right spirit. Firstly, let me say I'm constantly amazed at your extensive knowledge on a wide range of subjects. One of the subjects I think I can rightfully claim to know more than most is psephology, as applied to Australian elections, with extensive experience over a long time.

I accept your point that, speaking semantically, you posed the 'spinning' as a question, but I'd respectfully suggest that it is not up to your usual standard (of asking for argument to be backed up by factual references) to use the vague and subjective term 'spin' when I post something absolutely accepted by psephologists as the standard of judging election voting results.

The concept of a 2 party preferred vote was pioneered by Malcolm Mackerras and has been followed ever since by all serious election analysts, right up to the current Antony Green. We have a preferential voting system, so the concept of just looking at primary votes is irrelevant, except as an item of interest. As you say, it's a psephological fact, but it means nothing in this context. If it did, I presume you'd accept that Labor should have won the numerous elections it lost on DLP preferences? On your reasoning, Bob Menzies wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes.

Of course, elections are won by the party winning enough seats to form a government, as you say. I totally agree and have never thought otherwise, but my post merely stated a universally excepted proposition.

Anyway, it's a good debate.

[Dutchy]

Dunno if its been mentioned before but why was there only a small turn up of supporters for JG last night?

[Media Park]

Did you hear Tony Abbott's supporters? Thought the front row were drunk yobbo's!

[ca]

It appears that Boothby is now in some doubt, as is Wilkie in Denison.

This is going to come right down to the last few votes in the last few seats.

Watch for Brisbane, Boothby, Hasluck.

If the ALP finish with 73 or less (inc Green), I think Abbott will govern.

If the ALP finish with 74 (inc Green), I think Gillard will govern.

Who knows??????????

In the immortal words of Mike Williamson, I tipped this, both pre-count and last night

(obviously a long way to go, still, though)

I don't think the Liberals have too much to worry about in Boothby at this stage. It's been fairly promising for the liberals and it would take something fairly dramatic to happen for them to lose it now.

[Jimmy_041]

Jimmy, I'm as entitled to my opinion as anyone else is to theirs, so nobody has appointed me as the fountain of political knowledge except you. If I've offended sojourner, I apologise to him, but I think I get as good as I give. Rephrasing then, sojourner, I vehemently disagree with your reasoning

As for Psyber's 'still spinning, R & B' statement, I was merely stating the psephological truth. There's no 'spin' there, Psyber, just the political fact that the ALP has over 50% of the 2PP vote. That's fact and not 'spin'. If you would like me to quote sources, let me know, there's thousands, starting with Malcolm Mackerras and Antony Green.

I am totally sure that amBays, CK and the other political observers on here would back me up 100% on that.

Yes you are entitled to your own opinion and so is everyone else on here, including Sojourner, without you telling them that they dont know what they are talking about. If you cannot see what you have said, then show someone this quote who can open your eyes to it, because you obviously have no idea what I mean when I say that you play the man and not the ball

Sojourner, you're a thoughtful poster on a number of topics and more strength to you, but politics obviously isn't one of your strong points based on that post.

[Psyber]

Thank you for that reply, Psyber.

I'll reply in hopefully the right spirit. Firstly, let me say I'm constantly amazed at your extensive knowledge on a wide range of subjects. One of the subjects I think I can rightfully claim to know more than most is psephology, as applied to Australian elections, with extensive experience over a long time.

I accept your point that, speaking semantically, you posed the 'spinning' as a question, but I'd respectfully suggest that it is not up to your usual standard (of asking for argument to be backed up by factual references) to use the vague and subjective term 'spin' when I post something absolutely accepted by psephologists as the standard of judging election voting results.

The concept of a 2 party preferred vote was pioneered by Malcolm Mackerras and has been followed ever since by all serious election analysts, right up to the current Antony Green. We have a preferential voting system, so the concept of just looking at primary votes is irrelevant, except as an item of interest. As you say, it's a psephological fact, but it means nothing in this context. If it did, I presume you'd accept that Labor should have won the numerous elections it lost on DLP preferences? On your reasoning, Bob Menzies wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes.

Of course, elections are won by the party winning enough seats to form a government, as you say. I totally agree and have never thought otherwise, but my post merely stated a universally excepted proposition.

Anyway, it's a good debate.

Fair comment, R&B.
IIRC there have also been other more recent elections that could have gone the other way on pure primary votes.

It is natural that, currently, the ALP would emphasise 2PP as they have, and the Coalition 1st preference and [at present] total seats won.
Either may change their position as the count is concluded, as it is all about emphasising their claim to power, not absolute truth.
The shuffling over the next week or so will be entertaining at least, as they battle to gain what really matters - the number of sitting members on their side.

[redandblack]

You have to be kidding, Jimmy

I'll wait for you to jump to my defence when I get something similar on a regular basis. Just apply the same standard both ways, mate.

Sojourner must have felt as if he'd been attacked with a warm lettuce leaf after that quote

[redandblack]

Thanks for that reply, Psyber.

I agree.

[Wedgie]

Dunno if its been mentioned before but why was there only a small turn up of supporters for JG last night?

I'm guessing because it was the worst result for a 1 term government since the depression!

[JohnnyG]

Thank you for that reply, Psyber.

I'll reply in hopefully the right spirit. Firstly, let me say I'm constantly amazed at your extensive knowledge on a wide range of subjects. One of the subjects I think I can rightfully claim to know more than most is psephology, as applied to Australian elections, with extensive experience over a long time.

I accept your point that, speaking semantically, you posed the 'spinning' as a question, but I'd respectfully suggest that it is not up to your usual standard (of asking for argument to be backed up by factual references) to use the vague and subjective term 'spin' when I post something absolutely accepted by psephologists as the standard of judging election voting results.

The concept of a 2 party preferred vote was pioneered by Malcolm Mackerras and has been followed ever since by all serious election analysts, right up to the current Antony Green. We have a preferential voting system, so the concept of just looking at primary votes is irrelevant, except as an item of interest. As you say, it's a psephological fact, but it means nothing in this context. If it did, I presume you'd accept that Labor should have won the numerous elections it lost on DLP preferences? On your reasoning, Bob Menzies wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes.

Of course, elections are won by the party winning enough seats to form a government, as you say. I totally agree and have never thought otherwise, but my post merely stated a universally excepted proposition.

Anyway, it's a good debate.

Fair comment, R&B.
IIRC there have also been other more recent elections that could have gone the other way on pure primary votes.

It is natural that, currently, the ALP would emphasise 2PP as they have, and the Coalition 1st preference and [at present] total seats won.
Either may change their position as the count is concluded, as it is all about emphasising their claim to power, not absolute truth.
The shuffling over the next week or so will be entertaining at least, as they battle to gain what really matters - the number of sitting members on their side.

Psyber - to emphasise 1st preference votes over the 2PP votes is simply incorrect under our electoral system. Indeed, any individual seat won is a direct function of the 2PP vote in that seat.
In the end of course, it is the actual total number of seats won that counts.

[redandblack]

Dunno if its been mentioned before but why was there only a small turn up of supporters for JG last night?

I'm guessing because it was the worst result for a 1 term government since the depression!

Don't believe everything you see in the media, Wedgie.

In terms of seats it was, but the honour goes to John Howard in 1998, who kept government with 49% of the 2 party preferred vote, winning office mainly on One Nation preferences.

[Wedgie]

Dunno if its been mentioned before but why was there only a small turn up of supporters for JG last night?

I'm guessing because it was the worst result for a 1 term government since the depression!

Don't believe everything you see in the media, Wedgie.

In terms of seats it was, but the honour goes to John Howard in 1998, who kept government with 49% of the 2 party preferred vote, winning office mainly on One Nation preferences.

Yeah mate, I was talking seats and they're the most important thing in our system.

[mick]

Dunno if its been mentioned before but why was there only a small turn up of supporters for JG last night?

I'm guessing because it was the worst result for a 1 term government since the depression!

Don't believe everything you see in the media, Wedgie.

In terms of seats it was, but the honour goes to John Howard in 1998, who kept government with 49% of the 2 party preferred vote, winning office mainly on One Nation preferences.

Yeah mate, I was talking seats and they're the most important thing in our system.

Don't forget Mike Rann is governing here with a reasonable seat majority despite losing the 2PP vote. Even though this causes some pain I still prefer our system in comparison to what they have in Germany and NZ. If that were the case here the bloody green would probably have 14 seats in the HOR.

[redandblack]

Dunno if its been mentioned before but why was there only a small turn up of supporters for JG last night?

I'm guessing because it was the worst result for a 1 term government since the depression!

Don't believe everything you see in the media, Wedgie.

In terms of seats it was, but the honour goes to John Howard in 1998, who kept government with 49% of the 2 party preferred vote, winning office mainly on One Nation preferences.

Yeah mate, I was talking seats and they're the most important thing in our system.

Convenient.

In that case, I'll say that John Howard in 1998 was the worst result since the depression

[Psyber]

Psyber - to emphasise 1st preference votes over the 2PP votes is simply incorrect under our electoral system. Indeed, any individual seat won is a direct function of the 2PP vote in that seat.
In the end of course, it is the actual total number of seats won that counts.

Sure, but that won't stop both sides pushing their own barrow, and, yes, in the end the most seats is what counts.
Where do you go as it stands now though with the ALP having the slight edge on 2PP, and the Coalition having [so far] the most seats?
Which one has the current high ground, since normally most seats determines the outcome?

[redandblack]

At this stage, neither of them has the most seats.

Also, in past elections, the LibNP have made up solid ground on postal votes, so the 2PP vote may finish up not far from 50/50, although I'd expect Labor to stay just in front.

For all the triumphalism from the Liberal camp, it's not a good result for either major party.

We now have 2 'coalitions' aiming to form a Govt.

ALP + 1 Green

Liberal - National - Qld Lib Nat - WA National-

Good luck, Independents.

One factor which might be very relevant is that Labor can point out that it will have a sympathetic Senate after next July. On the other hand, the Independents would be brave men to go against the conservative nature of their electorates.