| # | % | Swing | 2PP | Proj. | |
| Varga (IND) | 574 | 3.3% | |||
| Totten (CEC) | 44 | 0.3% | |||
| Ter Horst (IND) | 145 | 0.8% | |||
| Zagami (IND) | 927 | 5.3% | |||
| Boni (IND) | 302 | 1.7% | |||
| Du Plessis (FFP) | 158 | 0.9% | -0.8% | ||
| Tagliaferri (ALP) | 6,748 | 38.5% | -0.4% | 46.7% | 47.1% |
| Hollett (CDP) | 300 | 1.7% | -0.2% | ||
| Lorrimar (IND) | 136 | 0.8% | |||
| Carles (GRN) | 7,802 | 44.5% | 17.5% | 53.3% | 52.9% |
| Wainwright | 400 | 2.3% | |||
| TOTAL | 17,536 |
Monday
Here’s me on the by-election in Crikey.
Sunday
I’ve knocked up a map showing the primary vote swing to the Greens at the different booths. No visible pattern can be discerned, but I’ve done it so here it is. I’ve also tried to find correlations between votes, swings and demographics, and found only one worth mentioning: the Greens swing had a correlation with the Italian-speaking population of -0.47 and an R-squared value of 0.22. No doubt statisticians will tell me a sample of 10 booths doesn’t mean very much, but the scatterplot looks persuasive to my unpractised eye and it makes all kinds of sense intuitively. Equally interesting was the lack of a significant correlation between the Greens swing and the Liberal vote from the state election. That would seem to argue against the notion that a static Labor vote was swamped by Liberals moving to the Greens. Note that the lowest swing was recorded at a Catholic primary school, Christ the King in Beaconsfield. For what it’s worth, Alan Carpenter was handing out how-to-vote cards there.
Saturday
9.20pm. Antony Green: “There is a very important bit of history in this reslt. This is the first time at a state or federal election that the Greens have outpolled the Labor Party on primary votes. All previous cases where the Greens have won or come close to victory have seen Labor ahead on the primary vote and the Greens chasing Labor down on Liberal and Independent preferences.”
9.10pm. All together now …
Mea culpa to Greens pianist Geoffrey, who was told by me that his candidate would fall short by about 52-48, despite his enthusiastic protestations to the contrary.
8.42pm. So, the new maths for our already very exciting Legislative Assembly: Labor 27, Liberal 24, Nationals 4, Independent 3, Greens 1.
8.39pm. Carles now leads on the WAEC’s two-party count 8745 to 7370.
8.32pm. Now the WAEC has the Greens lead at a definitively insurmountable 7421 to 6395. I would like to thank them though for that little moment of excitement, while reminding them that that isn’t their brief.
8.30pm. Now the WAEC says Carles leads 6056 to 5535, which sounds still more like it. Too much to rein in on postals.
8.27pm. Beaconsfield PS and 1306 postal votes added. Despite what the 2PP says, I don’t see how Labor could win from those primaries.
8.24pm. WAEC count now has Carles leading 4900 to 4660, which sounds more like it. However, it does suggest that Labor are doing slightly better on preferences than I or Antony had projected. It might not even be over yet. But again, who knows.
8.22pm. So, to summarise. Thanks to the WAEC, I have absolutely no idea what’s going on. If anyone from the WAEC is reading this, please send a fact-finding mission to the Tasmanian Electoral Commission to find out how to conduct a count properly.
8.19pm. Antony Green also doesn’t appear to have any real world preference figures he can use. If the WAEC has decided that we only need to be given a lump sum two-party count, I can only say that they’ve bungled once again.
8.15pm. Hmm. The WAEC has a big, uninformative “notional distribution of preferences” which has Tagliaferri leading 4071-3824. This is extremely exasperating. Where are these votes from? Why haven’t they been recording them booth by booth like everybody else does?
8.04pm. Big win for Carles at Fremantle Primary School. I’m calling it for her.
8.01pm. Carles also has a big win at East Fremantle Primary School, making it very tempting to call it for her …
7.59pm. Carles wins the upmarket Bicton booth.
7.53pm. Carles wins Richmond Primary School, up near Bicton way, which gives Zagami his first big result. Nonetheless, that has Carles’ lead narrowing a little further on my estimate. I might also note that the Greens didn’t do a postal vote mailout.
7.52pm. ABC has Christ the King bringing Carles down only a little, to 53.2 per cent (exactly where I have it). Tagliaferri still needs some more big results.
7.46pm. Very good result for Tagliaferri at Christ the King School makes things interesting again. Interesting to note that Alan Carpenter was handing out how to vote cards there …
7.43pm. VERY surprised no other candidate is over 5 per cent.
7.41pm. Re the previous comment – White Gum Valley, the most Italian booth of all, was also a big win for Carles. No particular reason to expect the nearby Beaconsfield booths to behave differently.
7.23pm. Beaconsfield and Christ the King are two strongly Italian booths that are yet to report – but so was Palmyra, and Carles won that.
7.22pm. Another good result for Carles in White Gum Valley – 46 per cent to 39.5 per cent. Minor party vote lower than I might have thought.
7.21pm. Antony now has the Greens 2.5 per cent in front after preference projection.
7.20pm. Tagliaferri finally wins a booth, the solidly working class Phoenix.
7.18pm. Carles wins Anglican Church Hall as well, which is in a similar area.
7.16pm. Greens win the Palmyra booth as well, which isn’t their heartland. I suggest my projection flatters Labor a bit.
7.14pm. Antony’s projection has the Greens 3.4 per cent ahead.
7.13pm. St Patrick’s in – Carles wins the primary vote, but check out that projection …
7.08pm. Few teething problems with the table as usual – working through them.
7.06pm. 622 pre-polls added (along with Rottnest Island) – there’s reason to believe these might behave unusually, but at they’re at least a little bit exciting for the Greens.
6.37pm. Come on, you’d think at least Rottnest might have reported by now … Anyway, I’ve been doing a bit of work so I do get a projected two-party result, based on the booth figures calculated by Antony Green. I wouldn’t stake my wages on its accuracy though.
6.14pm. First trickle of daylight saving votes coming in. Big no majority, but it doesn’t mean anything yet.
6.05pm. Some explanations of what you will see above. Booth matching will be employed for the primary vote swings, but not the two-party preferred vote as no figures are available in Labor versus Greens terms from the state election. The figures will at first be estimates, but will be replaced with real world numbers as booths report their notional two-party counts.
6pm. Polls have closed, so welcome to the Poll Bludger’s live coverage of the Fremantle by-election count. I don’t think I’ll have much to say about the daylight saving referendum, which you will in any case find covered more than adequately at ABC Elections.
you’re dreamin
A mild suggestion for ALP and Liberal supporters here… You should try and understand what you are feeling right now, it’s something you are going to feel a few more times over coming elections.
Cunningham was a lucky break. This is the real deal.
One point I will also make about the Liberal voters in bicton and the other strong liberal areas look at safe liberal seats there are high green votes in all of them so that would suggest affleunt types are willing to vote green no suprise to me this result
The Liberals got 30% in Freo at the state election. Zagami the surrogate Liberal has 5%. So 25% of the electorate are Liberals who have tactically voted Green. Carles got 45%, so 55% of her voters are in fact Liberals. At the next election most of them will go back to the Libs, and she will lose.
[perhaps the dawning of a new era]
I wish, but I don’t think so. Baby steps.
I really don’t think this seat is like Cunningham. Fremantle was already the strongest Greens seat in the state, it was the most likely to fall at a general election. Cunningham wasn’t.
The Greens polled in the low 20s in Cunningham. In contrast, this is the first electorate ever in Australia where we have cracked 40% and come first on primary votes.
unless the liberals run a dead campain which would still mean they can hold on to the upper house and allow the greens to win. the liberals not running in freo will not happen
I too will be very surprised if Carles doesn’t hold the seat at the next election. So, the new maths for our already very exciting Legislative Assembly: Labor 27, Liberal 24, Nationals 4, Independent 3, Greens 1.
and also with carles being an incumbent some of the 30% liberal voters may not go back as they no the liberals will never win it and prefer a green than labor
The Greens were assured of victory because the Libs didnt run.
I tend to agree with Adam on this one.
This is as much a victory made possible by Colin Barnett than by Carles IMHO.
If the Libs stand a candidate in the next election unless Carles has done a really really good job as a local member she’ll lose.
Seems likely if you believe what Pollytics has said recently 🙂
I think Labor is now tasteing what the Liberals have for a while in safe seats you can not take advantage of them and put dudds up it bites you in the bumb. Freo has been neclected for years because it was a safe seat jim would have done no work in a seat clearly with inderpendant tentancies
Sam Bauers must be taking something. Cunningham and Fremantle are very alike
Furthermore the ALP primary vote of 38% is the same as at the state election, so the only reason Labor has lost is that the Libs didn’t run and handed their vote to the Greens. Viewed that way, it’s actually not a bad result for Labor. At the Cunningham by-election our vote dropped 6%.
Adam would the Greens win the seat if the Libs didnt run next time?
[The Liberals got 30% in Freo at the state election. Zagami the surrogate Liberal has 5%. So 25% of the electorate are Liberals who have tactically voted Green. Carles got 45%, so 55% of her voters are in fact Liberals. At the next election most of them will go back to the Libs, and she will lose.]
This is wrong for a number of reasons, not least because there was a swing against Labor in most booths and that the other candidates who sucked up some Liberal votes are closer to 10%.
But hey, taking Fremantle for granted got you to this stage so I can understand why you’d want to do it again.
I doubt that glen she was really close to winning it in 08 on the libs primary results in 05 she would have won it I know for a fact that the libs ran a good campain in the seat above average for safe labor seats and they got a swing which would have also been due to the state wide swing
agreed Psephos. Bad result for Labor but an aberration
Bear in mind that the Greens almost overtook the Liberals on primary votes at the 2008 election in Fremantle. It’s quite likely we would’ve still come in the top two if the Liberals had run. If you assume that Carles, with the benefit of incumbency, can overcome the Liberals on primary vote, then any argument about the absence of Liberals has no bearing on her chances of reelection in 2012.
Of course, a lot can happen in the next three years, but I would give her a good chance of holding on to it.
[Viewed that way, it’s actually not a bad result for Labor.]
What marvellous spin.
First time Labor’s not held the seat since 1924 and it’s “not a bad result”.
It is true that Labor needed a swing to hold the seat – of 4.3 per cent, by Antony’s reckoning. However, contra Adam, I think incumbency will be enough to get Carles over the Liberals in a three-cornered contest. I also think she would have cleared them if they had run at this by-election – the Liberals would have copped a flogging over the lead exports issue. Not sure if that will still be playing in 2012.
Carles is likely to be able to squeeze the ALP vote further, it is the type of seat where once the Greens get ahead they will consolidate further and mop up the left vote as Labor did in the old Deakinite protectionist seats long ago. But Labor’s candidates in the other Green-risk seats are much better.
I doubt the Libs would win the seat of Fremantle anytime soon, what demographic in the area would get them over the line?
Peter tags may have been why the primary labor vote did not decrese but yes the liberal vote won it for the greens but they may stay green it will only take a couple of hundred liberal voters to swith permant and the greens will overtake the libs and contunie to win the seat the greens vote in freo has increased every election it has run in freo since 2001 with an incumbent it will happen aswell
[Carles is likely to be able to squeeze the ALP vote further, it is the type of seat where once the Greens get ahead they will consolidate further and mop up the left vote as Labor did in the old Deakinite protectionist seats long ago.]
Yes, another reason why the comparison to Cunningham is inappropriate – the demographics.
Turnbull will be spinning this result tomorrow saying it is a rejection of the Federal budget.
Ah, no.
The swing to the Greens was about 17.5%. You are forgetting about Varga and Wainwright and a huge number of other factors.
The seat stays Green, sorry.
I think it all depends on what kind of job she does in Parliament. If she is a good local member she should be able to retain the seat but it will be hard if the Libs run IMHO.
Steve, it’s not that the Liberals could win – they couldn’t – it’s whether Carles would get ahead of the Liberals, and then win the seat on their preferences. She didn’t quite manage it last year; I happen to think she would if have if they had run at the by-election, though I think Adam might disagree; and I also think she’ll do it at the next election.
Malcolm can spin all he wants. The people of Freo wouldn’t even know who he is
Yer and as a liberal I clearly say this result has nothing to do with the budget and malcom would be wrong if he did say it
As someone who knows absolutely nothing about WA State politics, this has been a very very interesting night.
Thanks Billbowe.
Congrats Greens.
Glen: Don’t forget that your lot almost lost Downer’s old seat to the Greens in that by-election last year, I wouldn’t be getting too cocky about predicting a Liberal revival based on Labor losing one seat to the Greens.
Completely different numbers from Cunningham, which Michael Organ won off a 23% primary vote, far below Labor’s 38%, thanks to the direct prefs of anti-ALP Labor candidates polling above 10%. Adele just pulled off a 40%+ primary vote! There will be some very nervous people in Labor federally as we move into emissions trading negotiations…
Does this tell us something about the federal election? Are the Greens a legitimate threat in seats like Melbourne and Sydney?
If Carles works on her profile and gets results for the electorate then she may keep the seat next time. She will have to work hard though. In a general election i think she will struggle as a lot of people will be focusing on a result between Alp and Libs and give their primary vote to one of those. I think her large primary vote this time is because of the specific circumstances of this election and she cant rely on it repeating. It would be a great result for the Greens if it did though.
As far as this result translating to Brand?? Don’t think so. Parkes seems to have been working on her profile and getting exposure, being seen locally.
Thanks William, I’m off to lick my wounds
[What marvellous spin.
First time Labor’s not held the seat since 1924 and it’s “not a bad result”.]
I’ve seen bad results for Labor and this isn’t one. A seriously bad result would surely have seen a drop in our primary vote. Labor has the same level of support in Freo we had at the state election. That’s notr spin, it’s a fact.
Obviously Labor will lose any seat where we don’t get 50% of the primary vote if everyone else ignores their political differences and swaps preferences against us. You can do that at a by-election, but not at a general election. There won’t (I assume) be a statewide Libs-Greens preference deal at the next WA state election. The Libs can’t “run dead” at a state election. They will have to contest Freo because they will be trying to save their South Metro LegCo seat.
[Glen: Don’t forget that your lot almost lost Downer’s old seat to the Greens in that by-election last year, ]
And nearly lost Mayo to a popular Democrat in 1998.
Ah but that vote was a protest vote fair and square evan14 and all based on local issues which the Libs do badly on. Thus when it comes to federal election time and with the ALP running we’ll win back Independent/Green votes and hold the seat by a long way.
[Are the Greens a legitimate threat in seats like Melbourne and Sydney?]
I’d say definitely Melbourne, but Tanner’s had a massive boost in profile over the last year or so and that’ll help him. I don’t think Sydney at the next election, maybe the one after that.
William what are your thoughts on the federal rammifcations this could have on the Federal seat of fremantle could the greens pick it up of labor like they have done here.
[Obviously Labor will lose any seat where we don’t get 50% of the primary vote if everyone else ignores their political differences and swaps preferences against us.]
Which is not what happened. Carles had two candidates preferencing her and Tagliaferri had 7.
By-elections frequently produce odd results. They usually mean squat in terms of the next election.
Nah, federal Fremantle is a different kettle of fish. Once you leave the bounds of the state electorate and out to Willagee, Jandakot and Coogee, the Greens vote gets a lot more modest. However, there might be this federal ramification: Alannah MacTiernan becomes state leader and drops her plans for Canning, making that a less likely Labor gain at the next election.
Another factor to consider: Jim Mcginty would have had a large personal vote, the loss of that hurt the ALP.
[I’d say definitely Melbourne, but Tanner’s had a massive boost in profile over the last year or so and that’ll help him. ]
I wonder if the government is thinking about this.
Even if the CPRS passes in its current form, I’m sure it would like ANOTHER major green policy to appeal to inner urban voters.
If all she has to do if finish above the Libs she should be able to do it as the sitting member. But it will be hard if the Libs stand.
Colin Barnett just cost the ALP another seat in the LA and it cost him nothing LOL!
ShowsOn: Tanner is too valuable an asset, if they were really scared about the Greens winning Melbourne, perhaps they’d move Lindsay into another seat, or the Senate?
Adam, I should point out that quite a few of the minors were directing preferences to Labor – CDP, Family First, DLP, Nik Varga and Steve Boni.