The Advertiser has published a poll of 571 respondents from the South Australian state seat of Chaffey, held by the state’s sole Nationals MP Karlene Maywald. It finds an effective dead heat in two-party terms between Maywald and Liberal candidate Tim Whetstone, with the former on 50.5 per cent. Primary vote figures after distribution of the undecided are 40 per cent for Whetstone, 30 per cent for Maywald, 14 per cent for Labor, 11 per cent for Family First and 3 per cent for the Greens. The result at the election was 53.2 per cent for Maywald and 28.2 per cent for the Liberal candidate, resulting in a 17.2 per cent Nationals-versus-Liberals margin after preferences. The margin of error on the poll is around 4 per cent. The paper appears not to have repeated the mistake of its poll of the electorate in August 2008, when it merely asked respondents which party they would vote for without naming Maywald as an option. When asked who Maywald should support in the event of a minority government, 53 per cent said Liberal and 33 per cent Labor. Maywald has served as a minister in Mike Rann’s government since 2004, currently in the water security and River Murray portfolios. She has nonetheless maintained she would support a “conservative” government in office.
Please feel free to use this thread for general discussion of the South Australian election.
[I don’t see how the Libs can win if they can’t poll 40% and if the Greens get close to 10%.]
The SA Libs will need at least a 40% primary if they want to be in with a chance.
[The latest SA poll I’ve been able to find is the Newspoll of Oct 2009. It shows the Greens at 12% and FF at 1%. I’d be surpised if FF can get a seat on that primary vote, unless they have really sweet preference deals.
Does anyone know of any more recent polls?]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australian_state_election,_2010#Polling
Family first consistently got 2-3% around the 2006 election, but received 5.9% (in the lower house. 5.0% in the upper). But they are now consistently polling 1%. I think FF will get around 3%, especially as the Libs are more (not much, but more) competitive, so the religious right is less likely to park their vote with FF. Also, with the number of controversial AbortSA.com posters around the place, i’m sure some will vote for it who wouldn’t have ended up voting FF, but end up voting for FF anyway through AbortSA’s above the line preferencing.
FF is very much in play for a seat, but I wouldn’t be shocked if they didn’t end up with a quota (8.3%).
Seeing Greensborough Growler’s most recent post got me thinking about bukkake again.
I also thought, if it is a Japanese word , whether it’s correct spelling should be –
bu-ka-ke
rather than with a double “k” – buk-ka-ke.
Don’t suppose anyone into that type of thing would be too worried about how it is spelt – except perhaps GG.
Diogs,
Having people do HTVs is critical for small parties otherwise their vote evaporates. Upper House considerations are critical for the major Parties in ensuring the minority of people who vote Lib/Lab in losing electorates have their upper house votes shepherded to the Party of choice.
#404
Are voters too busy doing bukkake to remember which box to tick above the line in the Upper House ballot paper/
Pull the other one.
PY,
Quit while you’re behind.
You have no idea how election campaigns are run and won.
GG
What % of voters just put a 1 above the line? With the huge number of candidates running for the Upper House in states and Fed, that must be the overwhelming response.
PY
Wiki uses kk then k. You must be looking at less educational sites.
GG
[ Quit while you’re behind. ]
Is that the ‘withdrawal method’ used in bukkake?
DIO – #408
😆
Diogs,
Plenty do.
Many seats are decided by under 3%.
Many people do not make up their minds until they turn up at the poll and often vote differently to what they intended and what they say they do. Your questions belie an underlying misunderstanding of the process. Many people don’t give a rats. The fact you are there on the day, smile and you give them the only ticket will win you votes.
Diogs,
You are the Yoda of PB.
[Many seats are decided by under 3%.]
On a Labor v Liberal basis, only 4 of 47 seats in 2006 were won by a 2PP margin of less than 3%.
bob,
You’re only as stupid as you want to be.
#413
[ On a Labor v Liberal basis, only 4 of 47 seats in 2006 were won by a 2PP margin of less than 3%.]
Geez – Greensborough Growler is loose with the truth.
Claiming “many” is equivalent to 4/47 or 9%.
Must be all that bukkake causing his brain go to mush. He should give it up before he goes blind or insane.
Diogs,
You need to get your pets under control.
Family First get a good vote from Assemblies of God church members and some other similar churches. Thats worth a base vote of about 20,000 or 2%. They get more votes by using simplistic sloganeering and being well organised with troops on the ground and some fairly significant financial backers.
handing out HTV cards is always a good thing but less so for minor parties. Because we have candidates parties on ballot papers nearly everyone can it out without a HTV. Probably Labor and Libs satnd to lose about 3% of their vote ie a swing of 3% if they are absent and the other is there. But observation of Greens votes at last election suggests the effect is about the same order ie 3% – so at a booth with a Greens vote of 10% in 1500 voters thats a loss of 7 or 8 votes. In low vote places it might only be 1 or 2 votes. Certainly not worth paying someone $100 or more to cover.
Of course every now and again there is a really close elimination and then the HTV work is all worthwhile.
GG you need to know when to stop digging.
[Family First get a good vote from Assemblies of God church members and some other similar churches. Thats worth a base vote of about 20,000 or 2%.]
You shouldn’t assume anywhere near all AoG members vote FF. Some are still rusted Lib/Lab.
It’s like how not all old or rural people vote Liberal. It’s always a question of percentages.
419 – quite so. Thats where most of their base vote comes from. Hopefully it is falling apart – getting involved in politics can be very destructive for Church harmony – and the quicker the better.
My first week election prediction:
Labor to retain every held seat, with a possible loss in Norwood or Morialta.
Labor to pick up one seat – either Stuart (due to the loss of G.Gunn’s personal vote and a strong Labor candidate) or Finniss (due to the popularity of Mary-Lou Corcoran)
Liberal to pick up Mt Gambier.
Which, pretty much = pendulum stays the same (with possibly one Labor seat lost and, of course, the loss of a Labor-supporting independent in Mt Gambier).
I have no doubt that recent ‘internal polling’ leaked by both parties was absolute bull. Libs leaked to look like they were real contenders, and Labor agreed, because it is always a strategy that Labor uses to look like they are diminishing in internal polling. Labor will trump libs in the debate and in the campaign as a whole. Redmond will end up looking like the weak novice that she is.
But that’s just my first week prediction.
#421
[ But that’s just my first week prediction.]
No doubt an unbiased and objective view of the situation.
James@421 – I am hearing that the libs are a bit worried about that seat in the medium term. The demographics are certainly moving against them and it won’t be held by the margins we have seen in the past. Mary-Lou is pretty popular in those parts and might make Pengilly sweat. He seems a pretty ordinary member to be honest. The Libs should be able to do better than him.
SA has the worst mental health system in Australia and the front page of the Tiser highlights this.
[MORE than 40 people died soon after leaving South Australia’s mental health system last year, documents state.
The 2008-09 report, obtained by The Advertiser , shows most incidents were suicides, prompting criticisms that there is a tragic shortfall in acute-care beds and follow-up support services.]
It was bad under the Libs but it has gotten much worse under Labor. Suicides happen with monotonous regularity after patients get discharged too soon because Labor has cut so many beds, the coroner and doctors point out the problems and nothing changes because of callous indifference.
You’ll note that Sherbon doesn’t even pretend to care.
“That’s how the risk management process works.”
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/in-depth/people-the-state-left-to-die/story-fn2sdwup-1225834057797
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/rudd-insulates-the-batt-man-with-a-bail-out/story-e6freuy9-1225834072080
What is the difference between a drunken sailor and Kevin Rudd
When a drunken sailor run out of cash …. they stop spending
[Finniss (due to the popularity of Mary-Lou Corcoran)]
LOL!!!!!!
This will take my most hilarious prediction of the campaign I reckon 🙂
I assume you are laughing at Labor winning Finniss rather than the popularity of Mary- Lou 🙂
Wonder when William will upgrade his election guide?
[I assume you are laughing at Labor winning Finniss]
Correct.
“Liberals enter enemy territory”
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/in-depth/liberals-enter-enemy-territory/story-fn2sdwup-1225834057637
[THE Liberals will venture into what is regarded as Labor’s heartland – the seat of Norwood – to launch their formal election campaign.
Labor is also opening its campaign in Norwood on Sunday.]
Errr, a big song and dance over nothing? Both parties did the exact same thing at the last election…
[There was an old ghost gum tree at Barcaldine, in Queensland’s outback, more than a hundred years ago. ]
http://www.independentweekly.com.au/news/local/news/general/the-vulnerable-and-the-venerable/1755970.aspx
I always love reading pre-election articles when they start off like this 🙂
The ghost gum at Barcaldine and the great strikes of 1891 are part of the story and there were successful labour-backed candidates before then. But the first organised Labor Party in Australia in fact was formed in South Australia and it was the first such party to send official Labor candidates into parliament.
On January 7, 1891, the United Labor Party was formed at a meeting at the Selborne Hotel, Pirie Street, Adelaide. The first election committee consisted of the secretaries of the Maritime Labor Council, Building Trades Council, Iron Trades Council, Adelaide Democratic Club, the Allgemeiner Deutscher Verein, North Adelaide Patriots Association and Mr Ivor McGillivray and were appointed with power to act with the Trades and Labor Council Political Committee.
The first candidates selected by plebiscite in February 1891 – David Charleston, Andrew Kirkpatrick and Robert Guthrie – were all elected to the Legislative ouncil in May 1891.
Rules and platform for the Labor Electoral League In NSW were prepared by March 1891 and 36 endorsed candidates were elected to the Legislative Assembly in June and July that year.
Four Labor men backed by the Australian Labor Federation were elected to the Queensland parliament in 1892 before a formal party was instituted in August of that year.
*waits in anticipation for the SA Newspoll due out at any time…*
I agree bob – I also suspect the ’tiser will have a seat level opinion poll in tomorrow’s paper (hint, hint).
Shall we make predictions?
Newspoll SA history here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australian_state_election,_2010#Polling
I predict 52-48 to Labor, down 1.
(Still a consistent winning poll trend that Brown/Olsen/Kerin, or Howard, could only have dreamed of…)
Ooooh, how creative the ‘Tiser gets with their front pages…
That front page looks more like the front cover of a Dr Who DVD.
I’m predicting Labor 54-46.
[Wonder when William will upgrade his election guide?]
My bet would be shortly after the closure of nominations.
[*waits in anticipation for the SA Newspoll due out at any time…*]
Does this mean we have reason to expect a Newspoll release at any tick of the clock, or just that we feel they’re due for one?
[Does this mean we have reason to expect a Newspoll release at any tick of the clock, or just that we feel they’re due for one?]
I base it on previous patterns:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australian_state_election,_2010#Polling
We should have a Jan-Feb Newspoll anytime now, and then another one March 18ish.
Having thought about this as I was typing this post, I thought it would be a good idea to see when Jan-Feb for 2006 was released at http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/polling/display_poll_data.pl – it was released March 1. So perhaps we have to wait a whole week yet.
It will either be 54-46 or 51-49.
And bob – i would put this as a quote if i knew how:
“I am hearing that the libs are a bit worried about that seat in the medium term. The demographics are certainly moving against them and it won’t be held by the margins we have seen in the past. Mary-Lou is pretty popular in those parts and might make Pengilly sweat. He seems a pretty ordinary member to be honest. The Libs should be able to do better than him.”
That’s completely accurate. The only problem Mary-Lou has is on the Island.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_district_of_finniss
The seat is not moving to Labor any time soon. 6.5 percent would definitely be the high water mark, as a result of the massive swings seen in 2006, and it will take a LOT of demographic shifting for the Liberals to be challenged in this seat.
And as the above shows, Mary-Lou contested it in 2006. So her personal vote was there then too.
I did say “medium term” – if Mary-Lou was the liberal candidate she would sh*t it in 🙂
[I did say “medium term” – if Mary-Lou was the liberal candidate she would sh*t it in]
As all Lib candidates in Finniss do 🙂
Pengilly is a dud – the margin reflects that. I was quite surprised it was as low as 4.3%.
correction: 4.9%
What’s 4.9%…?
The Finniss margin.
[The Finniss margin.]
No, the Libs won over Labor in Finniss on 56.5% to 43.5%. You’re giving the post-redistribution figure.
Fair call – I’d missed that. Still, not an overwhelming win for Pengilly – he’s lucky that Mary-Lou polled so well last time or there might have been a Nationals member for Finniss.
[Fair call – I’d missed that. Still, not an overwhelming win for Pengilly – he’s lucky that Mary-Lou polled so well last time or there might have been a Nationals member for Finniss.]
I doubt it…