| ALP | NAT | LIB | GRN | ONP | BROCK | COUNT | |
| PRIMARY | 5041 | 1267 | 7576 | 734 | 134 | 4557 | 19309 |
| % | 26.1% | 6.6% | 39.2% | 3.8% | 0.7% | 23.6% | 100.0% |
| Swing | -16.4% | -7.6% | 0.7% | ||||
| PORT PIRIE | 2157 | 181 | 1344 | 129 | 29 | 2480 | 6320 |
| % | 34.1% | 2.9% | 21.3% | 2.0% | 0.5% | 39.2% | 100.0% |
| Swing | -23.5% | -11.7% | -0.8% | ||||
| REMAINDER | 1368 | 735 | 4292 | 478 | 70 | 757 | 7700 |
| % | 17.8% | 9.5% | 55.7% | 6.2% | 0.9% | 9.8% | 100.0% |
| Swing | -8.6% | -6.2% | 1.9% | ||||
| DECLARATION | 1516 | 351 | 1940 | 127 | 35 | 1320 | 5289 |
| % | 29.2% | 6.5% | 35.7% | 2.3% | 0.7% | 25.5% | 100.0% |
| Swing | -9.2% | -13.9% | -1.9% | ||||
| 3CP | 5532 | 8215 | 5562 | 19309 | |||
| 28.6% | 42.5% | 28.8% | |||||
| 2CP (FINAL) | 9322 | 9987 | 19309 | ||||
| 48.3% | 51.7% |
Thursday, January 28
Malcolm Mackerras muses on this and other recent by-elections in the Canberra Times.
Wednesday, January 27
Electoral commissioner Kay Mousley has officially rejected the Liberals’ request for a recount, on the basis that specific concerns about the counting of votes had not been identified. The mere closeness of the result was deemed insufficient grounds for a recount. Below is the piece I wrote for yesterday’s edition of Crikey, previously available to subscribers only. Martin Hamilton-Smith’s office has been in touch to dispute the claim that the “super Saturday” concept referred to below was seriously considered, saying it came down to “one MP” who had been “canvassing the notion to media”.
For psephologists and related species of political tragic, by-elections can’t happen often enough. But for normal people, forced mid-term visits to the polling booth rank somewhere around brain surgery on lists of favourite things. No political operative should ever need reminding of this, but it appears the South Australian Liberal Party did – and now has been, in terms it won’t forget in a hurry.
Saturday’s preference count for the Frome by-election, held a week earlier upon the retirement of former Premier Rob Kerin, gave the Liberal Party the rudest of shocks three days after it had issued a press release claiming victory. Both Liberal and Labor scrutineers were convinced that Liberal candidate Terry Boylan had survived an early scare, thanks to Nationals voters who ignored the party’s recommendation to direct second preferences to independent candidate Geoff Brock. It was believed this would prevent Brock from getting ahead of Labor’s John Rohde, resulting in his exclusion at the second last count. That being so, the State Electoral Office’s indicative two-party count pointed to an unconvincing final Liberal margin over Labor of 1.7 per cent.
However, it seems scrutineers obsessing over the Nationals had neglected to consider the actions of Greens voters, who in the absence of guidance from the party’s how-to-vote card were thought to have followed their normal practice of putting Labor second. In fact, 42 per cent of Greens preferences flowed to Brock against 37 per cent to Labor – enough for Brock to emerge a bare 30 votes ahead of Rohde, before storming home on Labor preferences to defeat Boylan 9987 votes to 9322.
Before the evening was through, a Liberal Party that could previously be heard expressing nothing but warm goodwill about their good mate Kero suddenly found voice to complain about the “obscure” reasons given for his retirement, which had “fuelled resentment” among voters. However, this was clearly wisdom after the event.
Last June, The Advertiser’s Greg Kelton reported that “senior Liberals” were “hatching a plan which would force the Rann Government to face a ‘super Saturday’ of by-elections on the growing political row over changes to country health services”. This would involve the simultaneous retirement of Kerin (who was quoted saying the idea had been “mentioned a few times”) along with fellow Liberal veterans Graham Gunn and Liz Penfold, initiating by-elections in the country and outback seats of Frome, Stuart and Flinders. As bad as Frome has been for the Liberals, it appears that only the reluctance of Gunn and Penfold to bring forward their retirements has spared them a self-inflicted triple-barrelled disaster.
For all that, Labor shouldn’t get too cocky (and reports from The Advertiser that “gleeful Labor MPs have run off copies of Mr Hamilton-Smith’s ‘Liberal victory’ press release to hold up when State Parliament resumes next month to goad the Liberals” do not bode well in this regard). The two-party swing Labor would have picked up if Brock had run third had less to do with voters’ conscious preferences than with their adherence to how-to-vote cards, which in Brock’s case had Labor third and Liberal fourth. The 16.4 per cent of voters who deserted Labor might very easily find less benign ways to register their evident displeasure with the government when the next election is held in March 2010.
Labor MPs would do well to acquaint themselves with a forgotten episode of Western Australia’s recent political history known as the Peel by-election, which in February 2007 gave Labor a morale-boosting 1.0 per cent two-party swing from a strong performance on the primary vote – for all the good that did Alan Carpenter 18 months later.
Tuesday, January 27
Crikey subscribers can read my by-election post-mortem here.
Sunday, January 25
Electoral commissioner Kaye Mousley refuses a recount. Mousley argues that “the final difference between the two candidates is some 600 votes with the distribution of preferences”, although the point surely is that Brock survived the second last exclusion by 30. That would leave the Court of Disputed Returns as their only recourse. However, the Electoral Act empowers the court only to anoint a different winner or order a new election, and I’m not aware of any basis on which such an order could be made.
Saturday, January 24
7.15pm. The last trickle of 265 postal votes had little bearing on the result: 147 (55.5 per cent) went to the Liberals, 47 (17.7 per cent) to Labor, 37 (14.0 per cent) to Brock, 23 (8.7 per cent) to the Nationals, 10 (3.8 per cent) to the Greens and 1 (0.4 per cent) to One Nation. In other words, they added 10 votes to the hurdle faced by Brock to overtake Labor. Meanwhile, the Poll Bludger has maintained its dismal record in predicting by-election results with this clanger from January 9: “Despite a preference swap between independent Port Pirie mayor Geoff Brock and Nationals candidate Neville Watson, there seems little reason not to think Terry Boylan will easily retain the seat for the Liberals.” That said, there’s plenty of humble pie to go round.
6.55pm. The Advertiser now has a full report, which tells us “Liberal officials say they will be ‘seeking clarity’ on the count from the State Electoral Office”. Also:
Liberal MP for Morphett Duncan McFetridge partly blamed Mr Kerin for the loss, saying he had given obscure reasons for leaving politics which fuelled resentment by voters towards the by-election.
True enough, but I hadn’t heard anyone in the Liberal Party complain before. Indeed, it seems they were happy to bring on the by-election because they were expecting Labor to suffer a bloody nose over the country health plan. In June we were hearing this idiotic talk emanating from the Liberal camp (courtesy of Greg Kelton of The Advertiser):
SENIOR Liberals are hatching a plan which would force the Rann Government to face a “super Saturday” of by-elections on the growing political row over changes to country health services … The move would involve three Liberal MPs in rural seats – who are all due to retire at the next election – stepping down to force by-elections. The MPs, Rob Kerin in Frome, Liz Penfold (Flinders) and Graham Gunn (Stuart), have all been outspoken in their criticism of the Government’s planned changes to rural health services … Mr Kerin told The Advertiser the by-election idea had been “mentioned a few times’” but he had not spoken to anyone about stepping down in Frome which he holds with a 4.2 per cent margin. He said he would not rule out the idea … (Gunn) ruled out stepping down to force a by-election in his seat of Stuart which, with a 0.4 per cent margin, is the most marginal Liberal seat in the state. Ms Penfold, whose vast Eyre Peninsula seat of Flinders is the safest Liberal seat in the state, said normally she would not support any moves for a by-election. “But this is such an important issue I will reserve my judgment,” she said.
6.45pm. The surprise packet was the flow of Greens preferences to Brock – 41.7 per cent against 36.6 per cent for Labor and 13.4 per cent for the Liberals. The estimates I was using in my preference calculation were 30 per cent, 50 per cent and 20 per cent respectively. The reason Brock was being written off was the high number of Nationals voters who were defying the HTV card and preferencing Boylan. The Nationals preference distribution I eventually arrived at based on Antony’s reports of what scrutineers were saying was pretty much accurate: 48.0 per cent to Brock (I had 45 per cent), 37.8 per cent to Boylan (I had 40 per cent, which admittedly was the low end of what Antony was expecting) and 14.1 per cent to Rohde (I had 15 per cent). No doubt the page on the Liberal website on Wednesday claiming victory will be removed shortly, so I’ve preserved it for posterity here. That said, we may yet get a recount.
6.20pm. Wasn’t looking hard enough – SEO preference distribution here. The amazement lies in the second last exclusion: Boylan 8215, Brock 5562, Rohde 5532. With Rohde excluded, preferences give Brock his 1.7 per cent victory.
6pm. BROCK SHOCK! Nothing yet on the SEO or Antony Green’s site, but The Advertiser reports that the preference distribution has defied expectations by giving victory to Geoff Brock – according to Brenton in comments by 9987 votes (51.7 per cent) to Terry Boylan’s 9322 (48.3 per cent). Evidently those Nationals preferences were kinder to Brock than scrutineers believed.
Wednesday, January 21
11pm. Antony Green in comments: “The Labor scrutineers have been watching National preferences all week to work out where they are going. They’re flowing to the Liberals, which is why everyone’s given up on Brock closing the gap. Once the Liberals get half of the National preferences, there aren’t enough votes left to get Brock ahead of Labor.”
4pm. Based on Antony’s feedback, I have changed the minor party preference estimates as follows. Nats: Brock 45, Liberal 40, Labor 15. Greens: Labor 50, Brock 30, Liberal 20. One Nation: Liberal 50, Brock 30, Labor 20. That leaves Brock in third place, 1.2 per cent behind Labor.
3pm. With the addition of 3288 pre-poll votes, only a handful of postal votes remain to complete the primary vote count. These have made things interesting: coming mostly from Port Pirie, where the main pre-poll booth was located, they have split 1094 (33.9 per cent) to Brock, 1033 (32.0 per cent) to Labor, 868 (26.9 per cent) to Liberal, 179 (5.3 per cent) to the Nationals), 50 (1.5 per cent) to the Greens and 14 (0.4 per cent) to One Nation. Brock’s primary vote deficit against Labor has narrowed from 3.3 per cent to 2.5 per cent and, if my preference estimate is correct, he will just barely edge ahead of Labor on preferences and ultimately win the seat. BUT – please read this before commenting – these estimates are completely unscientific (see my 8.16pm entry from Saturday) and are evidently different from the calculations of Antony Green, who has spoken to scrutineers. He says: “Brock could yet pull ahead narrowly and win on Labor preferences, but it would require stronger flows of preferences to him from the National and Greens candidates than I think can be delivered. Not impossible but I would say it is unlikely.”
Tuesday, January 20
12.30pm. Antony Green has added 1795 postal votes which aren’t yet appearing on the SEO site, and they are very encouraging for the Liberals. Only 189 (10.5%) are for Brock, whose total vote has fallen from 23.1 per cent to 21.7 per cent, increasing his deficit against Labor from 2.0 per cent to 3.3 per cent. However, Antony notes that the 3000 pre-poll votes remaining to be counted mostly come from Port Pirie, which might at least staunch the flow. Terry Boylan has received 925 votes (51.5 per cent), increasing his vote from 40.2 per cent to 41.5 per cent and perhaps increasing his slim hope of winning even if Brock overtakes Labor. My table now includes a section for provisional votes, with a “votes counted” figure based on an educated guess that the final total will be 4500. Note that the preference projection now has Brock finishing in third place.
Monday, January 19
My general overview of the situation can be read at Crikey. Dovif in comments: “As for the scrutineers, the ALP will be trying to kick out as many ALP 1s as possible, while the Libs will be trying to increase the ALP vote. That would be fun to watch.”
Sunday, January 18
The Advertiser reports the Liberals are “confident” of retaining the seat, while conceding a “slight possibility” of defeat. The report says “almost 5000” postal and early votes were cast by Friday.
Saturday, January 17
9.00pm. I have evidently not been giving enough weight to the possibility that Brock will fail to get ahead of Labor. He trails by 2 per cent on the primary vote, which he would be able to close on preferences – but as Antony Green points out, independents traditionally do poorly on pre-poll and postal votes and the primary vote gap can be expected to widen. Antony deems it unlikely that the Liberals can win if Brock stays ahead.
8.16pm. That’s us done for the evening, with the result still up in the air. My preference estimate has Brock leading 7208 to 6837. I have distributed the minor players as follows: Nats: Brock 60, Liberal 30, Labor 10. Greens: Labor 55, Brock 35, Liberal 10. One Nation: Liberal 55, Brock 35, Labor 10. I have then taken the Labor vote, including those votes Labor received as preferences from the aforementioned, and given 80 per cent to Brock and 20 per cent to the Liberals. It was reported on Wednesday there had been 1700 early votes and 2200 postal applications, which can be expected to favour the Liberals quite solidly. Stay tuned over the next week or two.
8.11pm. Clare has indeed given Liberal candidate Terry Boylan the result he needed – 59.0 per cent (though down 7.9 per cent from 2006) against only 6.2 per cent for Brock.
7.49pm. Port Broughton and Tarlee now added – relatively good results for the Liberals, bringing my margin estimate below 5 per cent. If Clare can cut that further, the result will be truly up in the air.
7.47pm. Port Broughton has kind of reported, but the SEO is having more of those data entry issues (Brock on zero).
7.44pm. Just taking my first look at Antony Green’s site – his assessment is about the same as mine.
7.42pm. Still to come: Clare (2432 votes in 2006), Port Broughton (good Liberal booth, 849 votes in 2006) and Tarlee (259 votes). The Liberals will need very good results here, a good show on the many outstanding declaration votes and better preferences than I’m crediting them with.
7.40pm. Port Pirie booth of Solomontown gives Brock a slightly below par 35.4 per cent. The Liberals will be hoping for a big result in the very large country booth of Clare.
7.35pm. Three rural booths plus Port Pirie West now in – another plus 40 per cent result for Brock in the latter. My preference calculation now has him opening up his lead, so my summation from three entries ago may have been askew.
7.33pm. These are my preference estimates – would be interested if anyone disagrees. Nats: Brock 55, Liberal 35, Labor 10. Greens: Labor 55, Brock 35, Liberal 10. One Nation: Liberal 55, Brock 35, Labor 10. Labor: Brock 80, Liberal 20.
7.31pm. Unfortunately, the SEO is doing an irrelevant Liberal-versus-Labor preference count. Brock will clearly finish ahead of Labor.
7.30pm. Here’s roughly how I see it. Frome is evenly divided between Port Pirie and the rural remainder – the former is breaking 66-34 to Brock over the Liberals, and the latter’s doing the opposite. That suggests it should be very close, but this is based on my very rough preference guesses which if anything probably flatter for the Liberals. The locally knowledgeable Michael Gorey is calling it for Brock in comments.
7.28pm. Crystal Brook (rural) and Port Pirie South both in, another 40 per cent result for Brock in the latter.
7.21pm. Risdon Park South replicates Risdon Park East, with Brock’s primary vote around 40 per cent – my slapdash preference calculation now has him in front.
7.19pm. Three more booths in including a very exciting result for Brock in the Port Pirie booth of Risdon Park East – assuming it’s not a glitch, because the SEO has no percentage figures next to the raw results.
7.12pm. 2CP error corrected.
7.10pm. Five more booths in, including the first from Port Pirie – which Geoff Brock narrowly won ahead of Labor. That shuts out any notion of Brock failing to pass the Nationals, and could yet make things very interesting as more Port Pirie booths come in. Apologies for the 2CP error in the table – will get to work on it.
6.55pm. I’ve now removed Brinkworth’s alleged 14 Labor votes from my count.
6.53pm. Some explanations about the table. The “3CP” result assumes the last three standing will be Labor, Liberal and Brock, although Brock is well behind the Nationals on the basis of small rural booths. The “count” figure has been devised so it will add up to 100 per cent when all votes are in, whereas other media normally just show you the number of votes counted divided by number of enrolled voters.
6.50pm. Two more small rural booths, Brinkworth and Manoora, now in – although something’s obviously gone awry with Brinkworth, which has 14 votes for Labor and nothing in any other column, including the total.
6.39pm. As Judith Barnes notes in comments, the absentee vote could be over 20 per cent.
6.37pm. Two country booths reporting, Georgetown and Lochiel – excuse the mess in the Port Pirie entries in the table, it will correct when I have figures in. Only a small amount counted, but Geoff Brock might have hoped for more, remembering of course that Port Pirie is his stronghold. In noting the drop in the Liberal vote, it needs to be remembered there was no Nationals candidate last time.
6.15pm. Please excuse the messiness in the table above – I’m still sorting it out. The numbers there are test results rather than real figures.
6.00pm. Polls close. Official results here. First figures should start to come in around 6.30pm, by which time I should have my act together with my results table.
Is this the same Brock who has been pushing for a Magnesium smelter in Port Pirie, assuring Port Pirie residents that they will not be relocated to avoid lead poisoning, and has said he supports a zinc production plant in the electorate even though Nystar has been preparing since at least 2006 to move zinc production to Hobart?
I only ask because of Brock’s mercurial rise from unknown to Mayor in a relatively short space of time.
Bob post 50….. the electoral comm website picks this as a straight ALP/LIB
final contest….. is most likely it is BROCK(ind) and LIBS
if this ends up the case and it will be close…. then they indeed have lost the seat
Mick, possible, but I believe unlikely.
“9.00pm. I have evidently not been giving enough weight to the possibility that Brock will fail to get ahead of Labor. He trails by 2 per cent on the primary vote, which he would be able to close on preferences – but as Antony Green points out, independents traditionally do poorly on pre-poll and postal votes and the primary vote gap can be expected to widen.”
And Antony predicts the Libs to pick up another 0.3% on 2pp to finish on 53.4% against Labor. http://www.abc.net.au/elections/sa/2009/frome/
Actually, I think it follows the pattern of all by-elections since Kevin 07 won. I each one, there has been a very good showing by either an independent or a Green. I agree that Labor and the Libs can’t be too pleased about this result. And the Greens polled woefully as well. Brock was the only winner.
Antony says;
[If Brock can pull ahead of Labor, then he is likely to defeat the Liberal candidate on labor preferences. If the contest finishes as a two-party contest, then the Liberal party would defeat Labor.]
You really have to wonder about our preferential voting system when the best thing for the Libs is for Labor to pre-poll well so the Libs will beat them, and that Labor would be hoping they pre-poll badly so that Brock wins. It’s a bit counter-intuitive. 😉
Diogenes, what about Gippsland?
And this is state politics. What about the NSW by-elections?
Why can’t Labor be pleased with the result? For all the doom and gloom some projected for Rann, to not have lost any votes on a 2PP basis with the Libs since the 2006 election certainly is good news. Sure there was a Kerin personal vote, but the supposed anti-Labor sentiment “should” have more than taken care of that.
Diogenes
Can’t quite agree with this:
“And the Greens polled woefully as well. ”
They increased their vote, at this stage, by .7%.
May not be much to write home about but considering they did better outside Pirie, and however small the increase is at least its an improvement.
Much better than a slap in the face with a dead fish.
Not to mention the fact that the Greens are in part a protest party. Without Brock, dissolutioned Labor voters would clearly have increased the Green vote.
Bob
Gippsland didn’t have an Independent so it was hard to find a “protest” vote there, although the Greens upped their vote a little. I must admit I barely followed the NSW by-elections as I just assumed that Labor would get their backsides handed to them. I still think a good Independent or Green in a by-election has a great chance of getting a annoyed protest vote.
In Frome, there was also the “we’re pissed off at having to vote on our holidays because Kerin decided to swan off mid-term” anti-Lib vote. So I’m not reading too much into it.
Anyway, as you’ve said before, it’s the metropolitan seats that will decide the next election and that’s where the Liberals are absolutely stuffed. And I still contend that they are not really trying. The only Shadow Minister I can name is Chapman in Health and she is a liability.
And the cynic in me suggests that the Libs got the FFP to stay out of the contest, or stayed out on their own accord, to bring most of the 5% 2006 vote back in to the Liberal fold and avoid any leakage of preferences to Brock, furthering his chances at capturing the seat.
bob and fredex
Mea culpa, I admit I’m wrong on that. I hadn’t taken into consideration the leakage of protest votes to Brock instead of the Greens. That would account for their very modest improvement. I know they were hoping to get 6-8%.
If you look at the % counted on William’s table, it’s 83% overall. Port Pirie has 78% counted and the remainder has 90%. Doesn’t that mean that most of the votes to come will be from Pt Pirie, which favours Brock? If so, Brock will probably win won’t he ❓
Where does William get those figures from? SEO and ABC both state only 65.5% of the vote has been counted. And Antony Green remains of the opinion, that whilst currently the result is 53.1% LIB v ALP, that the final result will be 53.4% LIB v ALP.
I also note that where Brock did well, the Greens went backward. Port Pirie, -0.8%. Remainder, +1.8%.
South Australia has a unique provisoon in its electoral act (yes, yet another one) that says declaration votes cannot be counted until the electoral lists from polling day have been scanned. This catches a tiny tiny number of people who lodged both a polljng day and a declaration vote. The scans will be done tomorrow, along with a re-check of counting from tonight. There will be no new votes counted until Tuesday.
http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/
Damn!
fredex, as was pointed out theres been a small swing to labor and Brock who could well snaffle the seat is a labor leaning independant, i think the only reason labor fielded a candidate was becuase of the political mileage MHS would have made of it if they hadnt, all along they never had a snowflakes chance in hell of taking it and they knew it and Rann publically admitted it, they’d be more than happy if Brock romps in.
My votes counted percentages for “Port Pirie” and “Remainder” were in error – now corrected. The idea behind my figures is that they will add up to 100 per cent when all the votes have been counted, as they now do for Port Pirie and Remainder. This is done by assuming the same number of votes of various kinds will be cast as they were at the 2006 election, from which you can infer that 17 per cent of the votes in 2006 (i.e. the remainder to be counted) were declaration votes. Whereas the SEO/ABC 65.5% figure is the number of votes cast divided by the number of enrolled voters, and will total about 75 per cent when all the votes are counted.
OMG my Liberal-Advertiser comment actually got published!!!
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/comments/0,,24926699-5006301,00.html – ‘Fascinated of Adelaide’
I think you mean 82-85% turnout William.
As for who the rest of the votes to be counted will favour, the 2PP swing is currently 0.3% to Labor, but if the Dec vote runs exactly as in 2006, then the Liberal vote will increase by 0.3% producing a the current ABC prediction of no swing. It may not flow exactly as in 2006, in which case the final result will be different.
Both the Labor and Liberal Parties will have flooded the electorate with postal vote applications while Geoff Brock will not have done this. (I stand to be corrected on that, but it is unusual for an Independent to do what the major parties do, which is send a postal vote application to every voter.) On past evidence, the Independent vote will fall with the Dec vote.
Postal votes do not always favour the Liberal and National parties. Once postal votes were the preserve of rural voters, but the wash of applications sent out to urban voters has changed the mix of postal votes.
What is not known is how holding an election in a major holiday period will affect the trend in postal and pre-poll voting. With such a long lead time on the campaign, voters going on annual summer holidays will have had time to vote early. I’m not sure if anyone knows whether this will have changed the social mix of postal and pre-poll voters compared the the late March 2006 state election. All we can do is wait and see what unfolds.
MHS is counting his chooks before they’re hatched.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24926699-5006301,00.html
Judith, and my second post was put up there too! Incredible! They’re actually approving posts that aren’t just pro-Liberal for once!
someone has lauded Anthony to them as well lol.
what a bun fight they’re having, it’s hilarious.
I find it most hilarious that the pro-Liberal posters are crowing on about the 16% primary vote drop for Labor, as if that actually means anything. Brock is a Labor-leaning Independent, with 7% peeled off the Libs. There is a slight swing, so far, toward Labor, which is abysmal considering rural SA is where the anti-government polling swings are coming from.
But I spose when there’s little good news, all they can do is grab that one tiny piece of good and whip it to within an inch of it’s life, even if it is meaningless.
That, or they don’t actually understand the voting system.
Bob, they’re still at it over there tit for tat, one blogger congratulated your input–hey dont get a big head now!
They are? As far as I can see, they’ve stopped approving posts for now. My latest is the second to last (Fascinated of Adelaide 2:44pm today).
And each and every single one of them was approved! My posts never get approved! The Liberaltiser must have a different editor on today.
I stand corrected. New posts.
The most pro-Liberal newspapers in Australia (in order):
1. The West Australian
2. The Daily Telegraph
3. The Advertiser
4. The Australian
The most pro-Labor newspapers in Australia (in order):
1. The Age
2. The Canberra Times
re post 78……. all the Murdoch stable?
Anthony Green’s latest post…… wouldn’t the Nats poll best in the most Rural
part of the electorate….. and their preferences are going to Mr Brock
Is post 62 correct?
We are really guessing no one will know till more votes are counted
I’m willing to bet a lottery ticket that Mr Brock wins
mick i hope your right and i’ll even shout you a lottery ticket if Brock gets in.
[re post 78……. all the Murdoch stable?]
All but The West, which is owned in part by Kerry Stokes.
Mick Quinlivan @80 – No, the Nats would not poll best with the postal vote. They only got 6.5% of the vote in booths. If their vote is above 8% on the postal votes I would be stunned. Their best booths were in areas around Crystal Brook where their candidate came from and their vote approached 20%. They will get nothing like that with the postal vote, or with the pre-poll vote.
so Antony what do you think Brocks chances are?
On the current votes he would win. But how will he and Labor do with the Declaration vote yet to be counted? I suspect his vote will fall compared to Labor, widening the gap beyond 2%. The wider the gap, the harder it is for him to pull ahead of Labor on preferences. Given the much higher level of postal and pre-poll votes, I couldn’t give you an estimate of how Labor, Liberal and Brock will go with these votes. I expect the Liberal vote to improve by as much as 1%. However, this is irrelevant. The issue is the gap between Labor and Brock, so it is an issue of how they both go with the declaration vote, not how the Liberals go. We will have a better idea after the first declaration votes are counted on Tuesday.
thanks Antony, i can only hope for Brock then.
Commander Hamilton-Smith reporting on Frome. Intercepted message.
First I declare victory. There’s still a bit of mopping up to do but we are well ahead at present and that is Victory One.
Second I declare Frome a defeat for Mr Rann. Labor on current projection cannot win.
Third there will be an investigation into a lack of performance in some areas. It appears that some usual troopers have been on holidays. We will certainly have to do something about that.
Fourth there is the Nationals problem. Despite my various clear directions to regard the Nationals as part of the enemy forces there still seem to be some in our party who want to fratenise with them. I am ordering a review into why we give preferences to these people when they don’t reciprocate. Anyway we creamed the Nationals in the vote and that is Victory Two.
Fifth any criticism of party leadership at this delicate time will be treated as gross disloyalty and consequences will be severe.
Sixth, if our Victory One is to be soured by having to declare Victory Three despite our candidate having to accept victory without actually getting the seat in Parliament (at this stage) then former member Kero Kerin will be sacrificially burnt at the Victory Three ceremony that I am planning.
Lastly anyone wishing to discuss this needs to note that I am on holidays returning shortly.
The extreme Liberals and MHS are at it again. He really needs to understand that the Nationals perform and poll better and are more respected by the electorate when they are prepared to support either of the major parties, not just be a lapdog to the Liberal Party.
Libs fume over Nats ‘defection’ – http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24929764-5006787,00.html
LIBERAL leader Martin Hamilton-Smith has labelled the South Australian Nationals “disgraceful” after they preferenced an independent at the Frome by-election in a move that could ultimately cost his party its once-safe seat.
“It’s a huge concern and it’s frankly disgraceful that the Nationals did that,” Mr Hamilton-Smith told The Australian yesterday. “I think it says that a vote for the South Australian Nationals in this state is a vote for Labor. They willingly co-operated with others to block the Liberals in this campaign.”
This is so good, it’s got to be fattening.
http://www.seo.sa.gov.au/byelection2009/results.php
Frome, Libs, 3.4% margin in 2006. 3.1% on by-election night. It’s now 2.6%. Whatever happened to the apparent dissatisfaction with the Labor government???
Suck eggs MHS Libs!
It might be that in wresting the middle ground from both the ALP and the Liberals, Brock has driven perceptions of these two main parties apart for the first time in decades.
Support for the ALP and Liberal has been defined in this Frome by-election by diehard traditional voters, with moderates swinging toward Brock.
If Brock had not stood as an independent, it may be that moderates looking for a change would have placed their primary votes with the Nats or the Green party instead. Labour’s primary and Port Pirie vote would have probably shown a much smaller swing against, while the Liberal swing against would have probably been about the same and directed towards either National or Labour.
Brock has clearly picked up a slew of votes from Labour by spreading about the notion he is a pro-minerals guy, providing industrial jobs for a population used to being employed in smelters and factories. The dreadful truth is that jobs in Port Pirie provided by this type of industry are likely to be on the decrease, regardless of who wins the by-election.
If minerals industry jobs do decrease in this electorate by the time of the next Frome election, voters could swing back towards Labour with the Greens and National picking up the fall-out.
i would think Rann would be more than happy to have Brock there, he’s labor leaning anyway.
If Boylan is elected, I really do feel sorry for the people of Frome for electing someone with the IQ of a peanut.
Last night, an optimistic Mr Boylan said: “I think the voters of Frome have given (Labor) an absolute belting.” – http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24926699-2682,00.html
Yeah Boylan, such a belting that Labor picked up a 0.3% two-party swing on by-election night, which has now extended to a 0.8% swing, from the Liberals.
This ABC is predicting a 0.5% two-party preferred swing to the ALP this morning.
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/sa/2009/frome/
As opposed to this ABC, which was predicting Geoff Brock would become the new independent member for Frome.
http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2009/01/frome-by-electi.html
I believe that the fact that there is a significant new 3rd player means that the 2PP vote is worthless until a full distribution is made.
As for the Scrutineers, The ALP will be trying to kick out as many ALP 1s as possible, while the Libs will be trying to increase the ALP vote. That would be fun to watch
While the loss of 20% primary vote by the ALP won’t cost them the seat. It could have much bigger significance down the track
1. ALP voter will be tempted to vote independance in the future.
2. Could have effect in future on upper house vote
You don’t appear to understand the difference between two-party preferred and two-candidate preferred preferences freihans. The statements you repeat in post 93 and 94 are both correct even though they predict different results.
During the distribution of preferences after all primary votes are counted, first the One Nation candidate, then the Green, then the National candidates will be excluded and their votes distributed. At that point there will be three candidates, Liberal in the lead, along with Labor and Independent Brock.
Who wins will depend on whether Brock or the Labor candidate finishes third after the exclusion of the other three candidates. If Labor finishes third, Labor’s preferences will be highly likely to elect Brock, defeating the Liberal candidate. If Brock finishes third, then the Liberal candidate will win, and on current estimates there will be a 0.5% swing to Labor. Even if Brock wins, in 2-party terms there could still be a swing to Labor.
Bob1234 – the election night swing hasn’t actually changed. Alll that has happened is that about 200 excluded votes from Saturday night have been admitted to the count under the provision that allows votes with incomplete preferences to come into the count if a party has registered a ticket vote. Those votes were mostly in favour of Labor which is why the election night swing has changed. So the measured swing on Saturday night was an incomplete estimate because not all the election night votes were included. The figure published now is actually ann accurate election night swing.
This may sound like a meaningless argument about whether the sun rises or earth rotates, but the election swing doesn’t actually change. The votes have all been cast and the result is out there. Published swings on partial counts are merely estimates of the actual swing that will be revealed when the count is finalised. The estimates change depending on the way you measure them. I’ll let you in on a secrte. The swing to Labor will increase to 0.8% this afternoon when I change the basis for my calculations before the declaration votes are included. That swing will then fall until the final swing value is reached.
dovif, I don’t know what you’re on about, the 2pp so far is fairly accurate. Antony Green predicts 53% ALP to 47% LIB.
bob1234
“Predict” is the key term
Prediction is made from preference flow from the last election. We have no idea how much of the Brock’s vote will go to Labor or the Liberals
For example if the ALP was on the nose. how many voter would have voted Lib 1 instead of Brock 1, if they weren’t given the choice of a third candidate?
If a person was going to “send a message” to the ALP, they have given the ALP a protest vote, this is shown in ALP down 16%, how do we predict whether these people will preference Lib/ALP. Alternatively if Brock was not there would the protest vote had gone to the Lib instead
When the non ALP/Lib vote are so large, and so different from the last election, unless a poll is taken during the count, it is difficult to predict 2PP
No, we do know how Brock’s preferences will go. The 2PP totals publised are ACTUAL preference counts. If Brock finishes third, the Liberal candidate will win and we know this because an indicative preference count has been done. However, this was done between Labor and Liberal candidates. If Labor finishes third, we only have guestimates that Brock will win. I think Brock will win if he finishes third, but the doubt and uncertainty is over whether he will finish third.
My general overview of the situation can be read at Crikey.