• I’ve variously heard it said that this election was Labor’s biggest ever win, and their biggest ever swing. I presume this is because nobody can be bothered looking past 1949, a benchmark year due to the expansion of parliament, the election of the Menzies government and the fact that the AEC’s historical two-party preferred figures don’t go back any further than this. However, John Curtin’s wartime victory of 1943 had it all over Rudd’s performance. Curtin won 66 per cent of the seats from a primary vote of 49.94 per cent, up 9.78 per cent from 1940. Rudd has won probably 58 per cent of the seats from a two-party swing currently at 6.5 per cent. I personally am not willing to call this a “slide”, be it of the land- or Rudd- variety, given the score on the primary vote is 43.95 per cent to 42.68 per cent (UPDATE: Coalition vote now 41.54 per cent). I was actually expecting the Labor vote to be slightly higher, hence my exaggerated expectations for the Greens in the Senate.
• It is a remarkable fact that there are two seats which the Liberals might gain from Labor, given that there were only four seats in the land which swung to them. The potential gains are the Perth seats of Cowan and Swan, the former of which has definitely been won while the latter is once again going down to the wire. The 2.2 per cent swing in Cowan can be readily explained by the popularity of retiring sitting member Graham Edwards, but rapid suburban expansion in the seat would also have been a factor. The swing in Swan, while only 0.2 per cent at this point of the count, is coming off a disastrous campaign from an accident-prone candidate in 2004. Other seats in Perth swung slightly to Labor. The 3.1 per cent swing that won them Hasluck was at the upper end of the range.
• Interestingly weak swings to Labor in McMillan and Gippsland, which were also areas of weakeness for Labor at last November’s state election.
• A little further to the west, swings were in the exact 5 per cent to 6 per cent range Labor was shooting at. Deakin has been won for only the second time in its history, while McEwen and La Trobe are still in doubt.
• Not hard to spot the odd seat out in South Australia: with swings elsewhere of between 4.3 per cent and 11.0 per cent, Nicole Cornes could manage only 2.0 per cent in Boothby. Makin and Wakefield swung heavily enough that they’re outside the Labor marginal zone, but not so Kingston, which produced the state’s second smallest swing at 4.3 per cent.
• The Liberal vote proved curiously resilient in the Australian Capital Territory: they were down only 3.7 per cent in the Senate, enough that Gary Humphries retains his seat, with swings of below 2 per cent in the two lower house seats.
• This election produced even less support for the “doctors’ wives” thesis than 2004. There was very little movement in inner Sydney and Melbourne, either in safe Labor or safe Liberal seats. The most notable beneficiary was Joe Hockey in North Sydney, where a harmless 4.3 per cent swing was nonetheless a relatively poor result by inner urban standards. Sophomore surges for Julie Owens in Parramatta (7.7 per cent) and Chris Bowen in Prospect (7.3 per cent).
• Outer Sydney swung as heavily this time as it famously did in 1996: Chifley (8.3 per cent), Greenway (8.4 per cent), Lindsay (9.8 per cent), Macarthur (11.0 per cent), Mitchell (9.6 per cent) and Werriwa (7.9 per cent).
• A diverse range of Queensland seats produced double digit swings: Dawson and Leichhardt in the north, Longman in northern Brisbane and the neighbouring Brisbane hinterland seats of Groom, Blair and Forde. Groom was the only survivor. Retiring sitting members were a factor in Forde and especially Leichhardt. Ryan failed to live up to the hype, with a 6.8 per cent swing that was very modest by Brisbane standards. I’d be interested to know why Longman swung so heavily.
• Labor’s two party share of the remote mobile votes from Lingiari was up from 78.7 per cent to 88.4 per cent.
• While enough to bag two seats, swings in Tasmania were relatively mild. Franklin was one of the four seats to swing to the Liberals, a testament to Harry Quick’s personal vote.
• A noteworthy outcome in Melbourne, where Greens candidate Adam Bandt will likely overcome the Liberal candidate to take second place, a first for the party at a general election. Lindsay Tanner made it academic by winning more than 50 per cent of the primary vote, but the seat will be marginal after preferences.
• Links for the “photo finishes” series of posts have been added to the sidebar. The most notable development of the past few days has been very strong performances for the Liberals on postal votes in the neighbouring seats of La Trobe and McEwen.
Its Eric Abetz, by the way. He is/was a Costello backer, and I don’t think he is any more annoying, if for no other reason that he was already scoring 11/10 on the annoying scale while in Government.
James over on the McEwan post says they have found 3000 votes from working class areas that were accidently sent ot Scullin
Go Rob Mitchell.
[Its Eric Abetz, by the way. ]
Everyone knows his nickname is Erica.
paul k if you are here
the libs may be in opposition for a while yet
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/27/2102325.htm
Minchin warns Labor on Senate mandate
Liberal Senator Nick Minchin says the new Labor Government should not expect blanket upper-house support for its new legislative program.
Labor’s incoming leaders Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard say the party has won a mandate to scale back the WorkChoices legislation, and is not prepared to negotiate any changes in the Senate.
But Senator Minchin says that when it was in power, the Howard Government also claimed a mandate for taxation changes, the sale of Telstra, and changes to unfair dismissal laws.
In regard to the Bennelong count:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/pms-people-didnt-think-we-had-it-in-us/2007/11/26/1196036812278.html
“A spokeswoman for the commission said new counting was unlikely until later this week”
Why is that ?
It’s funny it’s taking a while to get used to this. The headline on SMH is ‘Praise for battler Banton’ and then underneath that the words ‘Prime Minister’ and my inner monologue is already ranting ‘oh that scumbag would have choked him to death himself if he thought it would get a good headline’ and then i read ‘Kevin Rudd’ and, woops, that’s right, the PM now has a halo instead of a yawning black soul, remember
I’ll presume soon the reflex gag at the words ‘prime minister’ will be gone… but i wonder how long it will take to come back again….
Hugh Mackay’s follow up to his great piece of a couple of months ago about awaking from a slumber:
“We are awake, now. We have changed. We are feistier, less acquiescent, more engaged. We are hungry for inspiration.
The big picture is coming back into focus. We are still struggling against feelings of powerlessness, but there’s renewed optimism that we might be able to do something to improve the state of the world – in the local neighbourhood and on the planet at large.”
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/sleepers-awoke-from-slumber-of-indifference/2007/11/26/1196036809914.html
We are really having ourselves on when we talk about landslides in Australia, last weekends TPP was 53.5/46.5. In other words if 4 people in every hundred had voted a different way the result would have been the other way, so lets stop all this talk about crushing victories and smell the roses in a Labor governed ( 70% trade union approved) Aus.
What Rudd has to do is bring in laws that will facilitate the underlying support for trade unions being translated in union OK cards. For all the Hawke governments pro union sentiment union membership significantly decline under that government.
If Rudd is serious about strengthening the organizational capacity of the Labor Party into an the election winning machine it once was then he must facilitate the modernisation of its industrial wing.
Australia was less than 3.6% away from witnessing the annihilation of its trade union movement, no wonder they fought as fiecly as they did.
Speaking of coalition bloodletting, its one thing to talk about leadership and portfolios, but what about the “unrepresentative swill”? A number one or two Senate position for Labor or Liberal is basically giving someone a job for six years. Will there be any pressure on these sitting Liberal senators to resign and put in better performers? In the era of Howard control post 2004, the Senate has been a rubber stamp providing no input, and watching a fax machine is more enjoyable.
Again, the Liberal Senate ranks are not exactly brimming with intellect and charisma. Minchin is at least diplomatic, but after that Barnaby Joyce is their next best. How does someone like Bill Heffernan survive the “barren years” without a benefactor? Some of the losers must be looking jealously at these seat holders now.
The question is whether the Libs and Nats act as a coalition. Barnaby Joyce has already signalled he is prepared to consider Labor legislation on it’s merits. A DD will not work out too well for the Nats and would probably increase the number of Green Senators.
I reckon Labor will get their legislation through without the Libs. Minchin is about to learn about relevance deprivation syndrome.
GG
I agree – Fielding too would have to be suicidal to want a DD. I was more interested in the general question of how the Libs rebuild themselves. So far peopel have only talked about the leadership and candidates. But I think their senate list also needs a hard look too.
105. The way counts usually work is that on the night there is a big staff who do a 2pp count. In close seats the votes are all recounted the following week, by a much smaller staff. This happens before pre-polls and postals are even looked at.
This method means that we usually get a result on election night, but it also keeps the cost down and ensures accuracy in close seats. During the second count it’s not unusual to have more scrutineers in the room than AEC counters, so if there are no Libs watching the Bennelong count everything else is a formality.
I was just looking at the latest data on Andrew Landeryou’s Election Map and there are 13 seats within 1%. Ok I know that as the election progresses it is hard to peg back the results If within 0.5% it is worth a recount. BUT 1% at this stage is like skating on thin ice.
a href=”http://ocdevelopment.googlepages.com/OCMap.html”>Andrew Landeryou’s Election Map has a filter pan option. You click on the media stop button and if you change the margin setting or select the pendulum sort option then hit play it loads up a selection of electorates which you can then use the left and right media buttons to pan through the electorates. It takes a while to load the data but once leaded the results are easy to view.
Andrew Landeryou’s Election Map has a filter pan option. You click on the media stop button and if you change the margin setting or select the pendulum sort option then hit play it loads up a selection of electorates which you can then use the left and right media buttons to pan through the electorates. It takes a while to load the data but once leaded the results are easy to view.
107
Pancho
Yeah, Mackay was on the money with his ‘waking up’ call a while back. I knew he was right then, you could feel the sap rising and a sense of renewal in the air. Howard was done for, and the Labor campaign as tight as a drum, marched him off the political stage with military precision.
It was truly historic stuff, with lots of political deaths and hari-kiri and some tragically poignant passings, like Banton and Price.
We won’t be forgetting Kevin 07 for a very, very, very long time.
I don’t like how NSW-centric the leadership contenders for the Liberal Party is.
I think we need a leader or at least deputy from States other than Victoria and NSW.
Francis says:
“I’ll presume soon the reflex gag at the words ‘prime minister’ will be gone… but i wonder how long it will take to come back again….”
In my own case I’m expecting
1st term – happy camper
2nd term – mildy distrubed about the rise of spin over substance – but that’s politics – so ok
3rd term – hey fella you’re spinning the wheels now
4th term – I don’t want to go there – its a dark place
This is pretty much the path Steve Bracks was on – but he wisely went out on top – as did Beattie.
Glen 117,
I agree and think the shift to a Qld focus has done Labor good. Looking at both Liberals and Labor, it seems to me that the most toxic, combative, ideologically entrenched branches of both parties are in Sydney, and they would do well to look outside. To be non-partisan about it, I similarly think that the NSW State Labor government is one of Australia’s weakest, surviving only because of even weaker opponents. Surely both sides have better in other states, as Labor proved.
In this respect I suppose Julie Bishop would be a good move, tying into the one palce where the Libs have some genuine strength. Not so sure about Robb though.
Glen, is that your pro Julie Bishop call redirected through an equity rather than attraction channel?
Labor leaders seem to have been remarkably adept at reading the writing on the wall.
Let’s hope it remains so. I’m sure Kev would be astute enough to recognise in another the sympotms of longevity.
As for himself, that’s a question we won’t need to ask for at least 7 or 8 years.
Bishop aside, I still agree with the general point though Glen. Half the former inner cabinet came from north shore electorates within walking distance of each other.
Was Howard’s victory in ’96 a landslide? If that was then this surely is.
As Melbcity points out, there are 13 seats within 1%. This means that determination of whether 2007 is a landslide cannot be dependent on the final number of seats. It matters zilch whether Team Rudd wins a half-dozen less knife-edge marginal seats than the 95 which Team Howard won in 1996. Just changing demographics alone could cause all 13 to fall the other way by 2010.
Therefore, I reckon that the relevant benchmark for a landslide is the 2 Party Preferred percentage:
In 1996, Team Howard got 53.63%, and that was widely accepted as a landslide by all sides of politics.
As of two minutes ago, the AEC virtual tally room has Labor on 53.24%.
Assuming Labor’s final % is lower because of postal votes going against them, I’m still calling it a landslide if Team Rudd’s final tally is above 53%.
[ 104
Kevin Andrews for Liberal Leader Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 11:47 am
paul k if you are here
the libs may be in opposition for a while yet ]
.
.
Long Live the Rudder of the Nation. May his reign be a long one.
It’s stupid to have 3 leadership contenders from NSW when we’ve got just 12 MPs there i mean seriously wake up. Labor have had since Keating, a sandgroper, a victorian, another NSWman and a QLDer. Since we need $$ and WA is our last bastion it would be crazy for us not to have Julie Bishop in the leadership team, i think Julie will run for the leadership if she can win if not she’ll go for deputy i thinks that’s whats taking her so long. She’d have a good shot with possibly 11 MPs plus WA Senators = 30% of Liberal Parliamentary members but we’ll see.
On Rudd and stepping aside before overstaying his welcome, I think he has a much better chance of doing it than Howard. Reason: Rudd had, and could have again, a life outside of politics. Howard didn’t and couldn’t. Moving on after 10 years for Howard was terrifying, for Rudd it might be a relief.
There’s a message in this for both parties, don’t go too far left or right otherwise the voters will ‘have you’.
[ it would be crazy for us not to have Julie Bishop in the leadership team ]
Glen,
You have the hots for Bishop real bad.
Gary
The real danger lately in Australia and the US, is that some leaders seemed to beleive that they could do that and take the people with them. Manipulative buggers.
So you think the only thing Julie would bring is her good looks Paul, women are more than their looks you know 😉
[ Paul, women are more than their looks you know ]
Glen,
I’m not the one who is obsessed with her. There isn’t a day when you don’t go on about her. I couldn’t care less what she looks like.
If you call that an obsession than many of you lot would be obsessed with KR lol.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22829277-661,00.html
Libs leadership: just $9.49
All those saying this wasn’t a landslide, get your heads out of your as*es. 6% swing, nearly 30 seats. It was a LANDSLIDE.
yep Glen…if they choose two from NSW its suicide…how deep can that hole get. Given the first term doenst matter and the previous Costello issues the leader will want a non-aspirational deputy. The choices are only WA, QLD or SA. The LIBS aslo need to do a me-too on the ‘female’ thing, to counter Julia and to shake the Abbott Vs ALL women factor. So your logic makes sense. Having said that to be serious about winning they need to be from QLD or VIC.
[Libs leadership: just $9.49]
What a f’ing rip off!
Pancho @ 107
Thanks for the heads-up on MacKay’s article.
Mackay nailed the 2004 result on Skynews the day election was called because his social research groups had picked up no evidence of a mood for change.
A month ago on Skynews, MacKay said that his research showed a significant increase in people wanting a change in the nation’s priorities away from solely economic management. (Newspoll’s chief finally admitted this was true on Skynews this week, after denying it throughout the campaign.) Much of the shift to was due to Baby-boomers reviving their Sixties’ values.
Other than the fact that he’s always held a grudge against baby-boomers (nasty younger siblings I’d imagine), the bloke is a legend.
Our talent from QLD and VIC has been depleted not that we had much to begin with from there so i doubt we can do this unless Andrew zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Robb is deputy.
It needs to be Nelson and Bishop or Turnbull and Bishop IMHO.
Yes, but Glen, you forget about factions and such like.
Julie Bishop has scary eyes, and that has nothing to do with her gender. Michael Brissenden’s on ABC’s “7:30 Report” are just as scary. I reckon that even when sleeping, neither of them can close their eyes.
That Ebay add for Libeal leadership has got cheek! They want somene to pay them, and be the leader of the Liberal Party too! The price should be -$1,000,000.
This illustrates the fundamental philosophical problem the Liberals have with market solutions for everything, instead of a focus on badly needed skills. Rather than try to sell the leadership, they should be trying to advertise for a leader, since they clearly don’t have one 🙂
Our factions need to ask themselves do they wanna win again or f around like the 80s and get nowhere…they’ll come around…
I dunno Glen@142, the Alex Hawkes of the party don’t strike me as particularly open to such rational argumentation. I have a feeling its gonna get worse for your lot before it gets better.
Who cares who the Liberal leader is? Look at history, both state and federal. The Libs will lose the next election and dump whomever they choose now.
History would have said Rudd couldn’t win in 2007 and he did CC, id hold your tounge just for the time being…
While the LIBS are still getting news access at the moment, this will shortly dry out. The female face needs to be Bishop not Coonan. (senators in my opinion are nothing more than a single issue distraction in the overall scheme of things. As soon as they elect a leader they will know their place). Considering I know very little about Nelson hard for me to comment. Will he be able to get his face on the news? Turnball will have no probs with this aspect.
Glen,
But I said he would win in February – and I never wavered. You can laugh at me in one, two or three years if I am proved wrong.
I wouldn’t agree with Glen on many things, but this whole “Glen must have the hots for JB” malarkey really doesn’t wash, even as a joke, it’s just not funny. She may be okay as deputy, but the job of party leader is difficult enough without the additional burden of an increased number of transcontinental flights – remember Kimbo had the same problem. No, the leader will be from the east coast, and, as already noted, this time from NSW.
Glen, for once I agree with you totally. The Liberal factions will “come around” because the thirst for power is the greatest motivator.
Thus, Kroger on Skynews yesterday was saying you could immediately reform the Liberal Party by adopting some of the ALP model with the leadership group having more power to intervene in branch selections etc.
In NSW, I see O’ Farrell talking up the Lindsay culprits getting criminal charges this week, and Debnam’s Kyoto speech was very telling in last week.
Whether the factions will come around in time for next Fed. election is uncertain, but it’s clear that there won’t be wall-to-wall state and territory Labor governments in a few years.
Neither Brendan Nelson nor Tony Abbott would do anything to lift Liberal support. It has to be Malcolm Turnbull of those three. The profile of the deputy is less important because there is a behind-the-scenes role to do too, so some charismaless operator might be a good choice.