Wheel of fortune: episode two

I am finally extracting the digit with respect to the Senate tickets, and will add extra states to this entry as I complete them. Acknowledgements are due to Antony Green’s easy-to-use group voting tickets and most excellent Senate calculator. In other Senate news, Malcolm Mackerras makes his bold predictions for the Senate in an articule from The Australian which I can’t find online. He predicts the Greens will take an Australian Capital Territory seat from the Liberals, 3-2-1 results favouring Labor in New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania, 3-2-1 favouring Liberal in Western Australia, 3-2 favouring Labor plus one for Nick Xenophon in South Australia, and three-all in Queensland.

Queensland: The People’s Front of Judea-style schisms among the right should scatter the micro party vote, preventing any chance of an upset. That extends to Pauline Hanson, who has no chance at all despite media reports she has been “boosted” by preferences. The real significance of Hanson is that her preferences will, eventually, end up with Labor’s third candidate ahead of the Greens and the Coalition’s number three, Nationals Senator Ron Boswell. The remaining preferences will split in an orderly fashion – religious, populist and recreation parties go to the Coalition, while the Democrats, Climate Change Coalition, Socialist Alliance and What Women Want (along with the Carers Alliance) go to the Greens. Once those three blocs are added together, it will be a question of which out of Labor, the Coalition and the Greens misses out on one of the final two seats.

Preference tickets can be summarised as follows:

WHAT WOMEN WANT: Greens; Democrats; SA; Labor; DLP; Carers; CCC; SOL; LDP; Fishing; Coalition; CDP; Shooters; Lifestyle; One Nation; Pauline Hanson; Family First; NCPP; CEC.

LIBERTY AND DEMOCRACY PARTY: Fishing; Shooters; One Nation WA; Lifestyle; NCPP; DLP; SOL; Carers; Pauline Hanson; CCC; CEC; WWW; Greens; Family First; CDP; Labor; Democrats; Coalition; Greens; SA.

CLIMATE CHANGE COALITION: Democrats; Greens; Pauline Hanson; Labor; Family First; NCPP; Shooters; Lifestyle; Fishing; SA; Carers; LDP; Labor; SOL; WWW; DLP; One Nation WA; Coalition; CDP; CEC.

CARERS: Greens; Pauline Hanson; Family First; SA; Democrats; WWW; CDP; Lifestyle; CEC; NCPP; DLP; CCC; Fishing; LDP; SOL; Shooters; One Nation; Coalition; Labor.

SENATOR ON-LINE: Carers; CCC; WWW; LDP; Fishing; NCPP; Democrats; Labor; Greens; Coalition; DLP; Family First; Lifestyle; SA; One Nation; Pauline Hanson; CEC; CDP; Shooters.

SOCIALIST ALLIANCE: Greens; WWW; Labor; Democrats; Carers; CCC; SOL; Coalition; LDP; NCPP; Fishing; Lifestyle; DLP; Shooters; Family First; CDP; CEC; One Nation; Pauline Hanson.

FISHING PARTY: Coalition 3; LDP 9; CDP 10; NCPP 11; Carers 12; Family First 13; Shooters 14; SOL 15; CCC 16; WWW 17; One Nation WA 19; SA 20; CEC 24; Pauline Hanson 30; DLP 31; Lifestyle 38; Labor 59; Democrats 61; Greens 63;

FAMILY FIRST: Lifestyle; Carers; CDP; One Nation; DLP; CCC; Fishing; Shooters; NCPP; Coalition; SOL; Pauline Hanson; LDP; WWW; SA: CEC; Labor; Greens; Democrats.

DEMOCRATS: CCC; Carers; WWW; Greens; SA; LDP; SOL; Lifestyle; Labor; Coalition; Fishing; DLP; Family First; NCPP; Shooters; CEC; CDP; One Nation; Pauline Hanson.

COALITION: Family First; Lifestyle; Fishing; CDP; NCPP; Shooters; Carers; LDP; WWW; CCC; SOL; CEC; SA; Democrats; Greens; Labor; Pauline Hanson; One Nation.

SHOOTERS: Lifestyle; Pauline Hanson; CDP; Family First; Coalition; One Nation; DLP; NCPP; CEC; Carers; CCC; SOL; WWW; LDP; Fishing; Labor; Democrats; Greens.

GREENS: Carers; WWW; CCC; SA; LDP; SOL; Democrats; Labor; DLP; Fishing; Lifestyle; CEC; NCPP; Shooters; One Nation; CDP; Family First; Coalition; Pauline Hanson.

LABOR: Greens; Democrats; SOL; CCC; Lifestyle; WWW; Carers; Shooters; SA; DLP; CDP; Family First; LDP; Fishing; NCPP; Coalition; CEC; One Nation; Pauline Hanson.

AUSTRALIAN FISHING AND LIFESTYLE PARTY: Family First; Coalition; Shooters; Pauline Hanson; Fishing: Labor; CDP; One Nation; NCPP; LDP; Carers; DLP; SOL; CCC; WWW; CEC; SA; Greens; Democrats.

ONE NATION: Family First; Fishing Party; CEC; Carers; WWW; Shooters; SA; CDP; NCPP; Lifestyle; DLP; SOL; LDP; CCC; Coalition; Pauline Hanson; Democrats; Greens; Labor.

PAULINE’S UNITED AUSTRALIA: One Nation; CCC; Carers; Shooters; Lifestyle; CDP; NCPP; Fishing; CEC; WWW; Family First; LDP; SOL; Democrats; DLP; Labor; Coalition; SA; Greens.

CEC: Coalition; Democrats; CDP; One Nation; Pauline Hanson; Fishing; Shooters; Carers; NCPP; SOL; WWW; Family First; Lifestyle; DLP; SA; Labor; LDP; CCC; Greens.

CDP: Coalition; DLP; Family First; NCPP; Carers; Shooters; Lifestyle; Fishing; Pauline Hanson; One Nation; LDP; CEC; CCC; SOL; Democrats; WWW; SA; Labor; Greens.

NON-CUSTODIAL PARENTS PARTY: Pauline Hanson; Carers; half (Family First; Fishing; One Nation; CDP), half (Fishing; CDP; Family First; One Nation); CCC; SOL; CEC; Shooters; DLP; LDP; Lifestyle; Coalition; Labor; Democrats; SA; WWW; Greens.

DLP: CDP; Coalition; Family First; Shooters; Fishing; NCPP; Labor; Lifestyle; LDP; Democrats; Pauline Hanson; One Nation; SOL; Carers; CCC; Greens; CEC; WWW; SA.

Western Australia: The Greens seem to have emerged a loser from the Western Australian Senate preference tickets, owing to extremely tight preferencing for the Christian Democratic Party from every right-of-centre player in the league: One Nation, Family First, the DLP, the Citizens Electoral Council, the Non-Custodial Parents Party, Conservatives for Climate and Environment, the Liberty and Democracy Party and even the Nationals (ahead of the Liberals), plus the curiously anti-left Carers Alliance. The CDP will also get any Coalition surplus, although this would be a small-change leftover after the Coalition wins a third seat. This raises the possibility that the Greens will be excluded after falling behind the CDP, at which point their preferences would secure a third seat for Labor. The other difficulty facing the Greens is that Labor’s vote will be much higher than its 32.5 per cent from 2004. Labor’s third candidate will thus inherit a bigger surplus over the 28.7 per cent needed for the first two seats, presenting a bigger hurdle for the Greens to clear. If they fail, it will be WA’s first minor party lockout since 1980 (which was the last five-seat half-Senate election).

NATIONALS: CDP; Liberal; Greens; Family First; DLP; Democrats; One Nation; Carers Alliance: NCPP; CCE; CCC; LDP; SOL; WWW; Campbell; SA; Labor; CEC.

CITIZENS ELECTORAL COUNCIL : Liberal; CDP; Campbell; One Nation; NCPP; Carers; WWW; LDP; SOL; DLP; Democrats; Nationals; SA; CCC; CCE; Family First; Labor; Greens.

CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY: Carers; DLP; CEC; Family First; CCE; One Nation; Campbell; NCPP; Liberal; Nationals; CCC; SOL; WWW; SA; Labor; Greens; Democrats.

NON-CUSTODIAL PARENTS: Family First; Campbell; One Nation; CDP; SOL; DLP; CCC; CCE; Democrats; LDP; SA; Carers; CEC; WWW; Nationals; Liberal; Labor; Greens.

DEMOCRATIC LABOR PARTY: CDP; Family First; Liberal; Nationals; Carers; NCPP; Campbell; One Nation; CEC; LDP; SOL; WWW; CCE: CCC; Labor; SA; Democrats; Greens.

LIBERAL: Nationals; CDP; Family First; DLP; LDP; Campbell; Carers; CCE; NCPP; Democrats; Greens; WWW; SOL; CCC; CEC; Labor; SA; One Nation.

DEMOCRATS: Carers; CCC; WWW; CCE; Greens; half (Labor; Nationals; Liberal), half (Nationals, Liberal, Labor); SA; Independent; Family First; SOL; NCPP; CEC; Campbell; LDP; One Nation; DLP; CDP.

ONE NATION: NCPP; CEC; Family First; CDP; Campbell; SOL; WWW; LDP; DLP; Carers; SA; CCE; CCC; Nationals; Liberal; Democrats; Greens; Labor.

FAMILY FIRST: LDP; NCPP; Carers; CCE; CCC; SOL; DLP; CDP; One Nation; Liberal; Nationals; Campbell; Labor; Democrats; CEC; SA; WWW; Greens.

SENATOR ON-LINE: Carers; CCE; CCC; WWW; LDP; NCPP; Democrats; Greens; Labor; Liberal; Nationals; DLP; Family First; SA; CDP; One Nation; CEC; Campbell.

CARERS ALLIANCE: Democrats; CDP; WWW; One Nation; CEC; LDP; NCPP; CCE; Campbell; SA; SOL; CCC; DLP; Nationals; Liberal; Family First; Greens; Labor.

LABOR: Greens; Democrats; CCC; SOL; LDP; DLP; WWW; SA; Carers; Nationals; CDP; Family First; CCE; Liberal; NCPP; CEC; One Nation.

CLIMATE CHANGE COALITION: WWW; Democrats; CCE; Family First; Carers; Campbell; SA; NCPP; DLP; One Nation; SOL; CDP; LDP; Greens; CEC; Nationals; half (Liberal; Labor), half (Labor; Liberal).

SOCIALIST ALLIANCE: Greens; WWW; Labor; Carers; CCC; Democrats; CCE; SOL; Liberal; Nationals; LDP; DLP; NCPP; Family First; CDP; CEC; Campbell; One Nation.

CAMPBELL: CDP; NCPP; One Nation; CEC; Carers; Family First; DLP; Nationals; Liberal; Labor; Democrats; SOL; WWW; LDP; CCE; CCC; SA; Greens.

WHAT WOMEN WANT: Greens; SA; Labor; Democrats; SOL; Carers; CCC; DLP; Campbell; CCE; Liberal; CDP; Family First; One Nation; LDP; Nationals; CEC; NCPP.

CONSERVATIVES FOR CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENT: SOL; CCC; Carers; Democrats; Family First; WWW; CDP; One Nation; NCPP; DLP; LDP; Liberal; Nationals; Greens; Labor; CEC; Campbell; SA.

LIBERTY AND DEMOCRACY PARTY: CCE; NCPP; CEC; DLP; Carers; WWW; SOL; CCC; Family First; One Nation; CDP; Campbell; SA; Democrats; Nationals; Labor; Liberal; Greens.

GREENS: WWW; SA; Carers; CCC; SOL; Democrats; Labor; CCE; Nationals; CEC; One Nation; NCPP; DLP; CDP; Family First; Campbell; Liberal.

NOTE: Feel free to use this thread for general discussion.

COMMUNITY SERVICE NOTICE: Larvatus Prodeo is operating at a new address while technical problems are ironed out.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

154 comments on “Wheel of fortune: episode two”

Comments Page 2 of 4
1 2 3 4
  1. “This may be a minor thing, but photos/headlines of Kevin Rudd with a winning bet on the Melbourne Cup are probably worth a tonne of positive editorials.

    Petty, but possibly true!”

    Also petty but true, is the fact that John Howard backed an international horse.

  2. sondeo @ 53/54… where does this someone come? assume that 36 coalition senators from dec 07-jun 08 leaving 36 non-coalition senators [ie act lib senator replaced by alp or greens] then they [lib/nat/clp] can still block bills including supply… the only situation it would seem to stop blocking supply would the libs not to do it as i discussed – or the clp senator PLUS the act lib senator are defeated by alp and/or greens leaving the coalition 1 short of blocking power [i doubt any minors would block supply] or a death or retirement of a coalition senator during the aforementioned time period

  3. MALCOLM MACKERRAS, ELECTION ANALYST: I believe that the result of this election in the Senate will be that we’ll finish up with 34 Coalition, 33 Labor senators, seven Greens, one Family First, and one senator, Nick Xenophon, independent from South Australia. The Greens are the new third force, and will be in a very powerful position in the Australian Senate, and in the States


  4. One point about the Climate change rabble. No chance of more than .5% anywhere.
    Now that we have that out of the way, Follow the Preferences.
    Why did the ALP do this spectacular Senate/HOR deal with the Greens, Why is the Liberal Party running around trying to make the 2010 election anything other than a 6 year whitewash,. They have better, more definative polling than the rest of us poor mortals. This is the massacre that Howard had to have.
    There have only been four changes in Government since the second world war. Usually it was based on ‘Its time” , “sacking” “baseball bats” OR Liberals out of touch who deserve all the above. Each election rolls along, most of the Australian electorate are not engaged, when they turn, they turn. They are no fools and the polls are showing all the signs of a massacre,.
    Prediction, interest rates up, you will be able to feel the atmosphere, when the electorate are about to smack someone they go quite,. SHHHHHH can you hear it.

  5. William, as a Crikey fan from way back, I have to agree that this site is more user-friendly. Have been reading your articles for some time but never bothered to read the posts until recently…and now I’m hooked.
    Fabulous site -congratulations!

  6. …with re-election for the Territory Govt due in 2008.

    Territory elections are not due until mid 2009. We have 4 year terms, and the last election was in mid 2005. As it currently stands it is very unlikely the CLP will be elected anyway, regardless of what happens on the federal scene.

  7. The higher the ALP/Grn vote in the senate, the higher the chance of turning the Senate, What are the areas where the Greens will support the APL, just about everywhere where the tories won’t. Family First were spectacularily lucky, they were working around in the dark and did the job. As Sir Humphries said about losing Ministers, ‘Once is bad luck, twice is careless,’ the boys down at head office really didn’t like the feeling.
    Re the northern territory, the CLP, God bless them only have three members and they managed a split this year, no serious.

  8. **Quick Thread Change**

    Hey i just saw one of those “look out for susspicious activity (we mean be scared about terrorists)” ads on SBS.

    I thought govt advertising was banned during the campaign?

    If not, then why have those objective and very educational workchoices ads (with the real blokes at a pub and the real woman at the help centre) disappeared?

  9. 63
    Politics_Obsessed Says:
    yeah what darryl said

    Ahh, my mistake, I thought you were referring to the NT (obviously). The NT is generally called ‘The Territory’ by locals.

  10. Adam,

    You might want to consider what the Nats will do in the Senate if the Libs are not in Government. I think it would be a mistake to consider them as a homogenous block with the Libs. They will be out to prove their separateness and may be co-operative with Labor.

  11. I also just saw a Quarantine ad. While the terror ads are authorised by the AFP, perhaps dodging the convention that Govt ads cease during campaigns, the ad I saw was authorised by the Commonwealth Govt. Perhaps they are trying to push the limits and provoke a response from Labor. To which they can say, how unAustralian to question the need to protect our agriculture from foreign disease.

  12. I don’t know why everyone here is predicting such a ridiculously high Green senate primary vote. All the lower house polls point to them sitting well below their 2004 result. I doubt the Green vote will collapse in the lower house and rise to stratospheric levels in the upper house. That seems illogical.

    But then again, we have tossers predicting a 110 majority for Labor so I guess I shouldn’t be too surprised.

  13. GG good point! yay discussion 😛 Should be interesting to see who leads charge…. or if any more defections occur. Does anyone see the Nats vote going up or down at this election? At the Vic 2006 election their vote went up and so did the no. of seats they held altogether in Vic Parliament significantly.

  14. Politics_Obsessed @ 56

    I understand where you are coming from and with the present numbers they could block supply but only if the staus quo remains, and they retain their Territory Senators. If they lose one of those Senators then the Senate is tied until July,when the other Senators elected take their place. If a vote is tied in the Senate it is lost. They would need someone to cross the floor to vote for it ( Block Supply ).

  15. Queensland is very interesting. I was looking at it for a while. Since I can’t find Antony’s analysis on this, here’s what I thought.

    Looks like 3 seats on the left & 3 on the right.Labor & Libs will easy get 2 each.

    On the left, Green & Dem pref each other, the leader taking the combined vote for a race with the 3rd Labor. Whichever is then in front will get the 3rd seat on the left.

    On the right, I notice that though Hanson prefs her old party One Nation, they don’t return the favour, instead sending them to Family First. So FF gets the combined vote of these three (minus some of the micros they’d picked up) and is then in a race with the Nats – again, whichever is in front wins the 3rd seat on the right.

    However, since ON collects prefs from both Hanson and FF, if they can get ahead of one of them, they get the combined vote of three (like FF above). This total won’t get near a quota, and since the coalition put ON down the bottom, the Nat votes go over to the Greens, assuming they are still in the count. So we have the irony of coalition preferences electing four Left senators, while ON has the rest of the conservative votes locked up.

  16. I think there has been an agreement with Labor about which government advertising is non-partisan and can therefore continue during the election campaign. There is no law on this, it is entirely a matter of convention. Labor voted for the anti-terrorism legislation and supports its enforcement, and ditto the quarantine laws.

    I agree with A-C that some estimates of Green support are far too high. My view is still that the Green vote will fall. However it is possible that Labor will poll so well that it has substantial surpluses to pass on to the Greens, and that might get them elected even if their vote falls. In NSW, Vic and Qld you have three possible scenarios:
    *Labor polls well but not too well: Labor 3, Coalition 3.
    *Labor polls very well and gives surplus to Greens: Labor 3, Coalition 2, Greens 1
    *Labor polls extremely well, and Greens are eliminated: Labor 4, Coalition 2

  17. hey in the case of hung parliament 74, 74 and 2 independents, why wouldn’t the 2 ind form government with the coalition? Aren’t they both traditionally right wingers or am I missing something?

  18. 65 & 68

    I just called a mate who works for a senator and he said it is the convention that these ads can continue with oposition support (which they have).

    The two ads in particular are the security hotline and the quaruntine ads, i believe these are the only two and they wont be played excessively like the workchoices tax payer funded Lib propaganda ads.

  19. Also worth noting that there is a good chance that FF will win the 3rd seat on the right off the Nats thanks to Green & ALP prefs. Another irony there. The Greens realise that minor party disunity is a major reason the coalition got 4/6 in Qld last time.

  20. Sondeo (44),

    The Coalition does not have the balance of power to lose. There is currently no balance of power in the Senate – just power. If the Greens win in the ACT, the Coalition will still have 38 senators and be able to block anything it wants to all by itself and carry anything it wants to with the support of FF.

    It is in the long-term interest of the Labor Party for the Coalition to retain sufficient numbers to block the repeal of WorkcalledagainChoices as this would lead to a double dissolution, which would probably lead to a more manageable Senate from Labor’s point of view.

    Do people really see Labor dropping below 42.9 per cent in any state other than WA? If not, that means three Labor senators from every state but WA.

    Do people really see the Coalition plus their krill dropping below 42.9 per cent in any state other than Tasmania and SA? If not, and the Greens do not win in the ACT, they will not have the unshared balance of power.

  21. Sondeo (74),

    The blocking of supply – which isn’t going to happen – requires only 38 votes, not the passing of a specific motion to do so.

  22. Centaur #77: Tony Windsor loathes the Nats and would just love to put them out of office. Katter has said he will support whoever offers his sugar-growers the biggest bribe (eg, ethanol made mandatory in petrol). No doubt Labor can grit its teeth and offer them a bribe of some sort. In practice however I think he will follow Windsor. Remember Katter’s dad started out in the ALP and he still has some Old Labor sympathies. If Priestley wins Calare he will take the same line as Windsor. If Brunning wins Forrest I expect he would support the Coalition.

  23. Re Matt Price’s article today on Howard and the behind-the -scenes shenanigans……..Hewson said Howard wouldn’t go willingly. Intransigence personified.

  24. Hung parliament- Do you guys read this site?

    I agree this is an interesting discussion.

    But discussion about a hung parliament is about as useful as discussing Richmonds AFL grand final bid for 2008- not totally impossible, but hardly realistic anough to bother talking it up.

    Just to keep it alive anyway, Mike Rann and Steve Brackks seemed to know a bit about using conservative independants to form government.

  25. 84 Megan,

    Megan Says:
    November 6th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
    Re Matt Price’s article today on Howard and the behind-the -scenes shenanigans……..Hewson said Howard wouldn’t go willingly. Intransigence personified.

    Heading to bed soon, can you post the URL for this story and I will find it and read it in the morning? Thanks much :):)

  26. Sam, Penny Wong was whinging about a tech college ad appearing in the campaign, as breaching the convention. Because TAFE vs Tech college is an election issue – but the college was just advertising for students.

    The problem is that governments (state and federal) now even insist that organisations dependent on govt funding ‘co-brand’ with the govt. Eg Arts Council recipients have to print not just the Arts Council logo but the ubiquitous ‘Australian Govt’ label and coat of arms.

    It gives the game away that the point of all this branding is feelgood effect for incumbent governments. College ads aren’t political and don’t need any authorisation. And if they want to make grant recipients feel publicly grateful, they could say ‘project supported by taxpayer assistance’.

  27. Does anyone have any connection out there with the RBA board (you know mistress, friends with the family etc) that can confirm an interest rate rise.

  28. centaur @ 88 I heard on the evening news (can’t recall which one) that the RBA has already decided to lift rates, someone tipped them.

  29. centaur, I think if anyone had that privelige they would be insane to publicise it. It would be like insider trading on the grandest of scales.

  30. re “65 Big Blind Dave Says: Hey i just saw one of those “look out for suspicious activity (we mean be scared about terrorists)” ads on SBS.”

    yep, they are back, and I reckon, regardless of bipartisan support, they will look dodgy for the LNP, more rope for the foppish fools.

  31. Julie,
    Can’t find article now and suspect I may inadvertently have read an outdated piece…….admit I was baffled by changing of deckchairs again at this late stage! (Was rather excited by the prospect however!)

  32. Adam, from memory Galaxy got it right last election. Galaxy has Greens on 9%. i would say that is quite high when the “it’s time factor” has kicked in.

    Only Newspoll is recording 5% for the Greens. That’s quite considering they only give people the option of saying Labor or Liberal. I wonder how much Labor or Liberal would drop in % if people were asked who would you vote for Labor or Green?

    I think Galaxy is right. All my Laborite friends are voting Green in the Senate and Labor in the house. It amazes me that the pols are showing the Greens close to 8-9% even with a lot of people thinking this way.

  33. The Liberals are currently polling in the low 40s in the House of Reps, primary vote, and have fallen into the 30s at various points in time. I think it is eminently reasonable to think that, with all the attention on the Senate, at least one of the four bigger states could also see the Libs drop below 40 and thus be at risk of only picking up 2 senators.

  34. Truly appalled by allocations from so-called Climate Change Coalition and also the Carers Alliance in preferncing Hanson above Labor – makes the ALP idiocy with Family First last time look principled and smart

  35. Eric, I think the Greens have put FF above the Liberals not because of a worry about minor party “disunity”, but rather a decision that, considering FF’s positions on WorkChoices, refugees, war, and a number of other issues, topped off with the “rescue the Senate” campaign priority, Family First is preferable to the Liberals.

  36. It wouldn’t be 75-75 with only major parties, as everyone agrees that Tony Windsor and Bob Katter will be re-elected. If it’s 74-74-2 the two indies will probably go one way or the other together to avoid a tie. If it’s 75-73-2 one way or the other it would be necessary for the two indies to go the way of the party with 75 seats, but they would still have a lot of sway over that party.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 2 of 4
1 2 3 4