| HIGGINS | ||||
| # | % | SWING | 2PP | |
| O’Dwyer (LIB) | 34764 | 54.4% | 0.2% | 59.6% |
| Hamilton (GRN) | 20778 | 32.5% | 22.2% | 40.4% |
| Australian Sex Party | 2084 | 3.3% | ||
| Liberal Democrats | 311 | 0.5% | ||
| Australian Democrats | 1455 | 2.3% | 1.1% | |
| One Nation | 199 | 0.3% | ||
| Democratic Labor Party | 2452 | 3.8% | ||
| Independents | 1828 | 2.9% | ||
| TOTAL | 63871 | |||
| COUNTED: | 72.5% | |||
| BOOTHS (OF 38): | 38 | |||
| BRADFIELD | ||||
| # | % | SWING | 2PP | |
| Fletcher (LIB) | 39159 | 56.3% | -3.2% | 63.8% |
| Gemmell (GRN) | 17608 | 25.3% | 14.4% | 36.2% |
| Democratic Labor Party | 1477 | 2.1% | ||
| Australian Sex Party | 2222 | 3.2% | ||
| One Nation | 450 | 0.6% | ||
| Liberal Democrats | 561 | 0.8% | ||
| CCC | 702 | 1.0% | ||
| ENE | 719 | 1.0% | ||
| Independents/CDP | 6646 | 9.6% | ||
| TOTAL | 69544 | |||
| COUNTED: | 73.1% | |||
| BOOTHS (OF 40): | 40 | |||
Tuesday. 3726 postals from Bradfield, massively favouring the Liberals (75.4-24.6 on 2PP).
Sunday (9pm). Turnout on ordinary votes was 88.8% of the 2007 election in Higgins and 95.9% in Bradfield, compared with 89.3% at the Mayo by-election, 93.2% in Lyne and 89.4% in Gippsland. So it was actually quite high in Bradfield and only slightly below par in Higgins. Part of the reason in Higgins might be that it’s not a growth area. We could equally get a high number of pre-polls and postals bringing the number closer to average. I suspect we’ve seen half the pre-polls counted so far (the rest should come in quite quickly) and a third of the postals (which should dribble in over the next week).
Sunday (7.30pm). 2938 postals from Higgins added. Error in my Bradfield table corrected.
Sunday (4.30pm). 5841 pre-polls from Higgins and 3765 from Bradfield added. These have been particularly strong for Kelly O’Dwyer, increasing her two-party margin from 8.3 per cent to 9.1 per cent. Special hospital team (about 500 votes) also added from Bradfield; not yet available from Higgins.
Sunday (early). The AEC has seen fit to publish booth results, so too late to be any use, I hereby reinstate the table. Also, here’s a revised version of my regional Higgins breakdown. I’ve abolished the distinction between the “pink-green” area of Prahran-Windsor and “red” Carnegie – notwithstanding that there’s some distance between the two, the figures were near identical. The other distinction is between “deep blue” Toorak-Kooyong and the “light blue” bulk of the electorate.
| LIB | CHANGE | GRN | LIB 2PP | SWING | |
| Light Blue | 52.76% | -1.2% | 24.4% | 58.5% | 1.1% |
| Deep Blue | 61.13% | -2.9% | 19.8% | 65.3% | -0.7% |
| Marginal | 41.03% | 2.1% | 27.9% | 48.6% | 6.8% |
And here’s the Bradfield breakdown, the “marginal” area being what I described previously as “pockets on the edges of the electorate in the north-west at Asquith and Hornsby and in the south at Chatswood and Willoughby”.
| LIB | CHANGE | GRN | LIB 2PP | SWING | |
| Deep Blue | 58.0% | -5.6% | 25.2% | 66.0% | -1.7% |
| Marginal | 48.4% | 0.2% | 28.9% | 57.1% | 4.1% |
The general impression is that while the Greens absorbed most of the missing Labor vote across the board, some of it leaked either to the Liberals or to other minor parties (the DLP in particular polled 6.6 per cent in the marginal areas of Higgins, and scored double the vote in the marginal areas of Bradfield compared with the rest of the electorate) and thence to the Liberals as preferences. This counterbalanced a fall in the Liberal primary vote in the deep blue areas of both electorates, which proved nowhere near the magnitude required to put them in danger. It’s interesting to note that this fall was lower in Higgins than in Bradfield, which it’s tempting to put down to resistance to Clive Hamilton among those at the highest end of the income scale.
9.20pm. I’ve performed a similar exercise in Bradfield. There are marginal pockets on the edges of the electorate in the north-west at Asquith and Hornsby and in the south at Chatswood and Willoughby. These areas swung to the Liberals 4.7 per cent in two-party terms. However, the wealthy Liberal heart of the electorate, from Killara north through St Ives, swung 5.1 per cent to the Greens.
8.40pm. Psephos in comments notes the trend detectable from Higgins in the table below (which I’m continuing to update as the last few booths come in) is reflected in Bradfield: “Hornsby Central, Labor’s best booth in the seat: Liberal primary vote up 5.9%.”
8.20pm. I’ll keep that coming in tabular form. “Light blue” zone is the bulk of the electorate; “deep blue” the riverfront from South Yarra through Toorak to Kooyong; “pink-green” Prahran/Windsor; “red” the Carnegie area.
| LIB 2PP SWING | BOOTHS REPORTING | |
| Light blue zone | 0.9% | 20 out of 21 |
| Deep blue zone | -0.8% | 6 out of 6 |
| Pink-green zone | 6.3% | 6 out of 6 |
| Red zone | 7.1% | 3 out of 3 |
8.02pm. While I’ve been quiet, I’ve been calculating the Higgins booth results provided by Antony into four zones. While this has been happening the Liberal-Greens margin has blown out to 9 per cent. All four zones have swung to the Liberals: the normally Labor-voting area in the south-east around Carnegie by 9.3 per cent; posh Toorak/Kooyong has swung 1.7 per cent; pink-green Prahran/Windsor 4.3 per cent; and the middle-Liberal balance, from Armadale to Glen Iris and Camberwell to Malvern, by 1.1 per cent. That’s assuming my calculations are correct, which I can’t state with total confidence.
7.38pm. Twelve booths now in from Higgins, swing steady at 5.4 per cent, Kelly home and hosed. Props though to the 400 or so voters of Toorak West for the short-lived entertainment they provided.
7.32pm. Another booth pushes Liberal two-party lead in Higgins to 5.4 per cent. Antony has abandoned commentary, but if he hadn’t I’m guessing he would be calling it now.
7.30pm. No alarms for the Liberals in Bradfield: projected margin 12 per cent.
7.28pm. Antony nonetheless says Higgins “can’t be called yet”.
7.27pm. Antony Green has eight booths in from Higgins and 9.2 per cent counted – O’Dwyer with an almost certainly sufficient 4.8 per cent two-party lead.
7.22pm. Possum, who took about 10 seconds to call the US election for Obama, says on Twitter: “Shorter Higgins – Greens went well with wealthy Lib voters but not so good with middle income Libs. Failed with ALP voters. game over”.
7.19pm. I’ve abandoned the table – it is not possible to keep up with the furious number crunching I needed to do to keep track as each new booth reported. Head to the ABC for elucidation on what’s happening.
7.15pm. That Toorak West result looking quirkier after Gardiner booth reports, but it’s still close. Having trouble keeping up due to AEC failure to report individual booths, so double check anything you see above.
7.13pm. Better result for Liberals in Higgins from Kooyong Park.
7.05pm. Both the booths have 2PP votes in, so my 2PP figures are now less speculative.
7.02pm. First Higgins booth is super wealthy, super Liberal Toorak West, and it shows a very interesting plunge in the Liberal vote.
6.49pm. Unless I’m mistaken – please let it be so – the AEC are not providing individual polling booth figures, which means I might as well pack up and go home.
6.46pm. Lady Davidson Hospital booth in from Bradfield – only 293 votes, but no evidence of a remarkable result.
6.36pm. Still nothing. These are urban electorates so there are no small booths that report quickly; the large number of candidates, particularly in Bradfield, might also be slowing things down.
6.20pm. Until I get notional 2PP counts, my 2PP will be based on the following preference estimates:
HIGGINS: ASP 80-20 to Greens; LDP 80-20 to Liberal; Dems 70-30 to Greens; ONP and DLP 80-20 to Liberal; all others 55-45 to Liberal.
BRADFIELD: DLP 80-20 to Liberal; ASP 80-20 to Greens; ONP and LDP 80-20 to Liberal; CCC and ENE 50-50; all others 75-25 to Liberal.
# and % primary vote figures are raw; primary vote swing and 2PP figures are based on booth matching.
6pm. Welcome to the Poll Bludger’s live coverage of the Higgins and Bradfield by-elections. First figures should be in in about 20 minutes.
BK, but methinks the Tiger Fish has more mistresses than the other Tiger (5 so far)
[Greens don’t deserve a place because they prefer 100% of nothing rather than 80% of something.]
So they don’t deserve a place at the debating table because a) Labor wouldn’t negotiate with them and more importantly b) their view differs to yours?
Yet more Labor hackery hypocrisy.
What is this mythical debating table we’re discussing?
BK, watching the program and then double check with Google Map Africa is incredible.
[What is this mythical debating table we’re discussing?]
See 1143. ruawake thinks it’s outrageous that Bob Brown wants to be included in Rudd Abbott CC debates.
How is it hypocrisy when you say you don’t give a damn about the Greens views and then back it up by acting to prove what you are saying.
[So they don’t deserve a place at the debating table because a) Labor wouldn’t negotiate with them and more importantly b) their view differs to yours?
Yet more Labor hackery hypocrisy.]
How many negotiations do you enter into where you insist on 100% or you walk?
The Greens dealt themselves out of the initial round and will continue to do so. 100% of nothing is better than 80% of something. Very helpeful position you got there Bob.
Now I shall resume ignoring you.
Finns,
Thanks for that. No wonder it’s called “the river that swallows all rivers”!
[Bob Brown wants to be included in Rudd Abbott CC debates.]
What climate change debates? Am I missing something or is Bob Brown making something up and then asking why he can’t be involved in the made-up debate?
[See 1143. ruawake thinks it’s outrageous that Bob Brown wants to be included in Rudd Abbott CC debates.]
Where did I say it was outrageous? I think it is hilarious.
ltep
Abbott challenged Rudd to a debate on CC. Rudd refused and suggested Abbott might like to work out a policy first. If there was a debate, I think a Green should be there but there won’t be.
It’s just bluster from Abbott.
2938 postal votes break 2247-691 to O’Dwyer (sorry if this is old news, or if nobody cares).
Diogs,
What ever happened to Parliament as a debating forum?
What debates? 😉
[Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has dismissed a challenge for a series of public debates over climate change, saying the Federal Opposition needs to have a policy first.
Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott says he wants to have the debates over the proposed emissions trading scheme before the Government reintroduces the legislation in February.
But Mr Rudd says Mr Abbott should instead focus his efforts on developing a Coalition policy.
“Mr Howard had a policy on climate change, Mr Turnbull had a policy on climate change – it was called an emissions trading scheme,” he said.
“Mr Abbott – the current leader of the Liberal Party – does not have any policy on climate change.
“I’d suggest the Leader of the Opposition calms down, puts in the hard yards and actually develops a policy.”]
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/06/2763256.htm
Finns
[Diog, are you watching on Nat Geo Wild about the expedition on Lower Congo River Fish Species.]
I don’t get cable.
The Congo is the second biggest river in the world by volume.
William
[2938 postal votes break 2247-691 to O’Dwyer]
Are we now in a position to determine the turnout?
[It’s just bluster from Abbott.]
Rudd is treating Abbott like Brown!
Irrelevant! 😉
[Are we now in a position to determine the turnout?]
They need to count all the postal and pre-poll votes first.
scorps
[Rudd is treating Abbott like Brown!
Irrelevant! 😉 ]
They weren’t irrelevant when it came to passing the CPRS. 😯
Surely some hard heads in the Libs must be a tad concerned at the ~3% loss of primary vote in Bradfield? It can be spun a dozen ways to explain it – but…
[“Mr Howard had a policy on climate change, Mr Turnbull had a policy on climate change – it was called an emissions trading scheme,” he said.]
Rudd could’ve added Dr Nelson, because the coalition hadn’t jettisoned an ETS when he was leader.
[They weren’t irrelevant when it came to passing the CPRS.]
My gut feeling is that if the Greens had indicated they would vote with the Govt. the two Libs would not have crossed the floor.
Much is made of the Libs “freedom” to cross the floor. But rarely does this action result in the party position being changed.
[Surely some hard heads in the Libs must be a tad concerned at the ~3% loss of primary vote in Bradfield? It can be spun a dozen ways to explain it – but…]
Channel 10 are talking up the By-election result as a boost for Abbott and a rebuff of Rudd’s ETS.
Finns
[Wang Wang (pronounced Wong Wong), in Chinese, means “woof woof”. He was so named because he barked constantly.]
[How would you pronounce Wang when in an English speaking country?
It’s my own last name and I don’t know whether to correct people or not. In Chinese, it’s pronounced Wong like ‘long’ but English grammar rules pronounce it Wang like ‘bang’.]
[Name: Wang
Phonetic Pronunciation: wong ]
http://inogolo.com/pronunciation/Wang
The evidence for the prosecution is building.
Looks like you were WANG !!!
You dont always get what you wish for and get to eat your own vomit:
[But he was also partly serious. Minchin had not expected Abbott to win. Nobody had expected Abbott to win. Not even Abbott. Contrary to widespread impressions in the media, Minchin did not even want Abbott to win. Although the pair are both stalwarts of the conservative group in the party, Minchin knew very well what everyone else in the room knew – that of the three leadership candidates, Abbott was the most unpopular. The parliamentary members of the Liberal Party had just chosen to elect a leader that most of them considered to be unelectable.]
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/the-accidental-leader-how-abbott-won-20091205-kbc8.html
Itep @ 1111 and ruawake @ 1114 are little examples pointing to the move of the Libs and the ALP towards the centre; seeking essentially the same voting demographic. Both characterise the Greens as extreme and ruawake believes the Libs as more vote-worthy. This also helps to explain the vitriol aimed at the Greens by the ALP internals on PB (responded to in kind by some Greens supporters – one in particular 🙂 ) .
But the best post of the last 2 days on the by-elections was that of Sam Bauers last night quoted by Diogenes today, which is worth quoting again, in an attempt to get some reality into the debate:
[Second guessing voter motivation after an election is junk-science, there isn’t any data to support any proposition on the connection the result has with the passage of the ETS or the personality of Tony Abbott or anything else. Speculation is fine, but most of the comments here aren’t put as modest speculation, most of it just reads as so much ass-hatery.]
The by-elections ended up as essentially meaningless unless you like to read tea leaves. The real interest is in the set up for the re-introduction of the CPRS bill next sitting; in what the Libs do about policy; whether the government will negotiate with the Greens (they HAVE NOT yet) ; and the extent to which Copenhagen demands changes to the defeated bill.
[Channel 10 are talking up the By-election result as a boost for Abbott and a rebuff of Rudd’s ETS.]
Could Ch10 explain how a supporter of the Govts ETS should have voted? These were by-elections to replace a failed leader and a failed leader who would not lead.
Looks like the Costello non swing at the last election was a myth, the good folk of Higgins would vote for the blue wiggle if he had Lib beside his name on the ballot.
[ and ruawake believes the Libs as more vote-worthy.]
Bollocks. 😛
jaundiced view what are you talking about? I am a Greens supporter. I just don’t see it as a good thing that a mainstream political party (of which I count the Greens) has promoted someone who has stated democracy may need to be suspended for the climate change action to be taken. Nor do I support the Greens promoting someone who supports the Government’s insane web filtering plan.
Just because I support a particular political party does not mean I cannot question its actions. Much as I suppose some ALP supporters question some of the preselections that get made in their own party.
ruawake @ 1177
Channel 10 – like the rest of the media – is doing what we were doing last night; indulging in junk-science. 🙂
Diog, the Chinese have a saying: “Playing the piano to the cow”.
There are 20 Chinese characters that bear the pronunciation of WANG. The general consensus was that he was named after the Net, and a woof woof to you because two Wongs dont make a Wangker. 😛
Just to show I’m fair, there is a solar thermal power station in Spain which stores energy as molten salt and so can deliver 90% capacity and provide baseload which can compete with nuclear and coal stations.
It only provides 20MW and cost about $500M, which equates to about $25B for a 1 GW station, but it competes with nuclear/coal on other specs. The question is how to scale it up.
http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/12/06/tcase7/
Itep & ruawake – Gee – got a rise there didn’t I? I appear to have misinterpreted your comments in my scan, so respectfully withdraw my impertinant connection of you to the general point.
I also cannot abide Hamilton’s censorship position.
But in general the Greens can’t be expected to be going for the ‘mainstream’. They aren’t in existence to be a ‘mainstream’ party. The are in existence to have strong policy on the environment based on science. As long as the ‘mainstream’ is out of sync with the science on climate change, then I guess they will be seen by many as ‘extreme’. But they aren’t really. Science is about facts, not extremism.
[Channel 10 – like the rest of the media – is doing what we were doing last night; indulging in junk-science. ]
Except I said the result was irrelevant – which to my mind it is. 🙂
As much as I enjoy this blog and am a irregular poster I have to say I am going a bit spare at having to ignore so many repetitive postings from Bob1234. Bob its your perogative to keep posting but mate I’ve stopped reading them.
[1108…..mexicanbeemer
……the only reason it is ALP v Green is there are no Liberal Party people around here.]
Though I’m starting to suspect that bob1234 is a Lib in green drag. He is certainly as hostile to Labor as any Lib I’ve seen.
[Except I said the result was irrelevant – which to my mind it is.]
Yes, the media just giving attention to the new ‘colourful political identity’ on the scene.
jaundiced view, I disagree. I think if the Greens want to be able to implement the greater raft of policy change and to move Australia in the direction they want they need to become more mainstream, at least in the way they sell their message.
The first step towards implementing broader social change is to achieve a balance of power in the House of Representatives. They will never do this unless they appeal to mainstream Australia in some way. Personally I think the Greens have some dangerous days ahead as they transition to a Milne leadership.
Politics really is the art of the possible, pragmatism is a much needed quality in a representative democracy. The lack of pragmatism will dash the Abbott Liberals and the Greens hopes of electoral gain in 2010.
Itep
[I disagree.]
Then I may be forced to withdraw my withdrawal 🙂
I agree with what you say about selling the message. The more change you represent the more conservatively you need to be garbed. Suits and ties, voices of tempered reason. Milne is not going to be a step forward in that regard, to say the least. Is it definite she’s going to be leader just on seniority? If so, it’s a pity. Isn’t there another ‘Brown’ lurking in the Greens (male or female)?
[ Personally I think the Greens have some dangerous days ahead as they transition to a Milne leadership. ]
If Milne gets the leadership, the greens go the way of the Dems.
If I were in the Greens I’d be seeking candidates from among politically savvy climate scientists. Surely there must be some who aren’t nerds.
jaundiced view. I think the battle will be on in the Greens between Milne and Rhiannon if she wins a Senate seat in New South Wales. I’m not sure either have the sort of appeal that Bob Brown has. The only other options so far are Ludlam and Hanson-Young (who are green in more than one sense of the word) and Siewert (who is my preferred option). The Greens will need to start preselecting a broader range of people as parliamentarians in my opinion.
Rudd has god on his side.
The Greens are atheists.
Tony Abbott has god and the Pope on his side.
Long live the god.
Turnout on ordinary votes was 88.8% of the 2007 election in Higgins and 95.9% in Bradfield, compared with 89.3% at the Mayo by-election, 93.2% in Lyne and 89.4% in Gippsland. So it was actually quite high in Bradfield and only slightly below par in Higgins. Part of the reason in Higgins might be that it’s not a growth area. We could equally get a high number of pre-polls and postals bringing the number closer to average. I suspect we’ve seen half the pre-polls counted so far (the rest should come in quite quickly) and a third of the postals (which should dribble in over the next week).
[If Milne gets the leadership, the greens go the way of the Dems.]
Bob Brown has about 3 years left, a DD may see him in the Senate for another 6 years. He has been an advocate for the things he believes in but has achieved nothing.
Itep
Rhiannon is not the answer. I’ve been hearing her in NSW for years, and … no, she’s not from the ‘broader range of people’ I’m afraid. Very much the old style activist sloganeering campaign warrior type… er, not that there’s ANYTHING wrong with that. 🙂
But, not what they need these days really.
1186
[Though I’m starting to suspect that bob1234 is a Lib in green drag.]
Some of us have thought that for several months now.
[ I think the battle will be on in the Greens between Milne and Rhiannon if she wins a Senate seat in New South Wales. ]
I just hope rhiannon never gets into the senate. The Greens have enough problems already.
Any Milne/ Rhiannon combination/ variation and its the end of the greens. That would be a real pity.
Finns@1175:
[You dont always get what you wish for and get to eat your own vomit:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/the-accidental-leader-how-abbott-won-20091205-kbc8.html%5D
Thanks for the link Finns, that is very important information.