Victorian upper house tickets: Libs put Greens last

224 comments on “Victorian upper house tickets: Libs put Greens last”

1. Well at least you admit your strategy GG. Personally I don’t think its a great one.
   The Libs have said that this is over for 2010, they will try and get some renewal.
   Ted will retire, surely someone in the parliament will step up.
   So the next state election is 2014, this current one is all over. Back to your lives citizens.

2. Barking,

   The Greens were relying on Lib preferences to be elected.

   It’s breathtaking you can come on PB and start throwing around words like principle.

   You played and you lost. Deal with it comrade.

3. Sometimes you have to laugh – just went to Andrew Bolt’s blog.

   [Victorian Liberals spurn Greens]
   Only a few sentences, followed by big Google Ad for, you guessed it, the Greens!

4. GG regardless the Greens will still win several upper house seats and may still take Melbourne and Richmond.

5. Just what principle are you worried about, ‘
   Not preferencing the coalition anywhere before the ALP,
   Not anywhere.
   What the Fibs do with their preferences is their business.
   Oh I see, you think its was the work of the geniuses in head office.
   Try pressure for somewhere a bit more Melbourne Clubish.

6. Sorry, 55 was for GG again,

7. mb,

   I can’t see them winning either.

   Libs will surely get 20% in Melbourne?

   In Richmond the high profile Socialist Alliance candidate Jolly is preferencing Labor in front of the Greens as well.

   No tofu for the Greens I’m afraid.

8. The Greens need tougher bargainers. The Liberals put in Adam Bandt to show the Greens their power, but what the Liberals give the Liberals can also take away.

   Politics is a dog eat dog world – to misquote Von Klausewitz “war by other means”. It’s like what I was saying yesterday about anti-abortion groups here and in the USA, they need lessons in negotiating if they really want to push their cause.

9. I am surprised that Jolly is placing the ALP ahead of the Greens.

10. RR,

    There’s nothing like a committed ideologue whose first decision on election was to make his girlfriend his electoral assistant to scare the big political players.

11. This is just extraordinary.

    The Green tide has gone out.

    But not necessarily good news for Labor. Libs think they have a chance.

12. I find it mildly amusing that such a furore was made over Nixon’s dinner that night, yet a country’s PM can send them to Iraq and pay money to Saddam via AWB, and we get no royal commission

13. Andrew

    There was a RC into the AWB, the Cole Commission.

14. Antony Green on the Libs stiffing the Greens

    [
    It’s late at night and I’ve been working all day on the Legislative Council, but let me say something briefly about the Liberal decision to put Labor second last, ahead of the Greens, on all its lower house how-to-vote material.

    There are two things to say here. First, don’t assume just because the Liberals have done this that 80-90% of preferences will flow to Labor. I would be surprised if the number got above 60%, which means the Greens can still win Melbourne and Richmond where the Greens had the higher first preference vote based on Federal election results.

    Second, and the reason why preference flows will be weak, is that if the Liberal Party has any sense, it will ensure that not one Liberal how-to-vote is distributed in Brunswick, Melbourne, Northcote and Richmond. What is the point of the Liberals bothering to campaign unless they wanted to do the reverse of what their how-to-vote suggests, which is to defeat the Labor member and elect a Green. The Liberals are highly unlikely to actively campaign and distribute how-to-vote material preferencing Labor. If it hurst the Liberal vote in Northern Metropolitan Region, that doesn’t matter as the best hope for the Liberals there is to poll badly and help elect a minor party at Labor’s expense.

    How to vote cards only matter if you put one in the hand of every voter. With its decision today the Liberal Party has taken an official position that it would rather see a Labor member elected ahead of the Greens in inner city seats. That doesn’t mean it will lift a finger to make this happen, just that it has taken a principled decision.
    ]

    http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/

15. Well, it will certainly be fascinating to see what happens in Melbourne and Richmond now. On William’s figures they become two of the closest contests in the election rather than fairly certain Greens wins.

    The Libs probably actually gain either way with this when I think about it. The Greens were never going to do a deal with them, or give them preferences, anyway.

    Labor and the Greens will now be so focused on beating each other to death in Melbourne and Richmond that a lot of bad blood will arise (following the GG model of how to play politics on both sides I suspect), reducing the Greens prefs flow to Labor in other seats, and maybe even making the difference in a few of them.

    Perhaps the Libs polling suggests the Greens will win Melbourne and Richmond anyway, especially if their own prefs leak a bit, so why sacrifice the advantages in not preferencing the Greens gives them elsewhere for no real gain? Probably even cause some flow on damage in the Federal sphere relationship.

    At the same time the Coalition will be able to campaign in rural seats on the “we are the real enemies of the Greens” instead of facing flack from the hunters, shooters, mountain cattle and bush bashers for having preferenced them in front of Labor, while Labor will be seen as “soft on Greens” by comparison in the same electorates. Might help them knock off Ingram too, and hang on to Mildura in the face of the Indi candidates there..

    With the silly deal done by Labor in the upper house with the former Shooters Party there is also a good chance that the Upper House will become more problematic for Labor.

    So all in all, it probably really is in the Libs overall interests in THIS election, and has the potential to cause some real harm to BOTH Labor and the Greens.

16. Landeryou says the Libs will be handing out HTV cards in Melbourne

    [
    Senior Liberal sources confirm to VEXNEWS they certainly will be handing out HTVs in the normal way in Melbourne #vicvotes
    ]

    http://twitter.com/vexnews

17. [It’s late at night and I’ve been working all day on the Legislative Council . . . ]

    I think Antony is a bit over-tired – confusing Federal with sate elections.

18. The Libs must think the bush is turning big time towards them.

    I cant understand though what is the difference between a Labor MP (who has to be a real lefty to win Brunswick/Richmond/Melb ect) and a Greeny?

    Why oh Why isnt Peter Ryan the Coalition leader 🙁 !!

19. [Landeryou says the Libs will be handing out HTV cards in Melbourne]

    Of course they will. Why bother making the decision to cut the Greens out and not follow through?

20. Glen,

    Agree, Ryan should be LOO. Libs wouldn’t let it happen though.

21. 64 madcyril

    So Antony’s saying that I’ve got more chance of finding a plague locust in the City of Maroondah (done!) than a Liberal HTV card in those electorates!

    68 Glen

    Goes to my theory that the Libs and Nats should actually unite – they never did for fear of a new “New Country Party” springing up overnight, but the reality is that with the LNP in Qld, it’s only Victoria and NSW where the Nats matter at all now and they would probably help themselves by uniting.

22. Glen two things.

    I agree Ryan might make a better leader except how would he travel in Melbourne?

    Maybe the Liberals are picking up a big swing in rural Victoria except the bush tends to make a fair bit of noise and the only noise I am hearing and again I refer back to the federal result but I just don’t see any great level of anger.

    I think in the pre-Black Saturday world there was a great level of anger but it appears to have swifted away.

    At best I think the Liberals could win and this is best case

    Bendigo West, Bendigo East, Ballarat West, Ballarat East, Seymour, Ripon, Macedon, South Barwon & Ballarine.

    Glen I just cannot see the Liberals winning many of that list.

23. [What is the rebellion rate of Libs voting Green when HTV says Labor, and what is it vice versa?]

    You can see the results of the ballot paper study on page 97 of this. It found that in 2006, with the Liberals preferencing the Greens ahead of Labor as normal, the rate of obedience to the card among Liberal voters ranged from 30 per cent in Richmond to 45 per cent in Brunswick. Liberal voters who didn’t follow the card nonetheless favoured the Greens over Labor 60-40. As to how different things would be with the Liberals preferencing the Greens last, nobody knows. If the 30-45 per cent of card followers from 2006 continue to follow the card, the Greens’ share of Liberal preferences will fall from approaching 80 per cent to about 40 per cent. But I suspect it will be more like 50-50.

24. Newspoll

    Issues important to Victorians and who can best handle them:

    http://bit.ly/9bdokY

25. [I am surprised that Jolly is placing the ALP ahead of the Greens.]

    Jolly is running a split ticket according to one account I’ve heard. Trying to get confirmation.

26. Rod Hagen
    Posted Sunday, November 14, 2010 at 10:58 pm | Permalink

    “Labor and the Greens will now be so focused on beating each other to death in Melbourne and Richmond that a lot of bad blood will arise (following the GG model of how to play politics on both sides I suspect),”

    said by a typical Green ,
    plus th feline anti GG narative thrown in….that wont wash

    Reality is Greens were ALREADY focused on beating Labor in those 2 safe Labor seats , and Greens aleady pedalling BS spin against th Labor Party to grassroots Voters ,
    so cut out th phony blogs that Greens been inocents today in those Seats

27. vik
    Posted Sunday, November 14, 2010 at 9:39 pm | Permalink
    I’m stunned the Liberals are doing this. Why the sudden outbreak of principals?

    I think they’re conceding the election. They feel they can’t win, so will sail into the sunset as the “principled party”.

    They’re not that principled that preferenced the Sex party in Northern Metropolitan.

    As for your statement on the two for one refugges policy.
    The actual DLP policy on asylum seekers is significantly further to the right than the Liberals, so I find it quite surprising that Dlpguy is spruiking the DLP as the “party of refugees”.

    This policy was presented after consulation with people who had visited Sri-Lanka and see the industry of people smugglers and how it is working.

    Private companies “that are supposed to be stopping boats” are actually feeding the industry and threatening lives. They then arrive here to be housed in our detention centres (run by another private contractor) and Australia gets bogged down in costs and procesing fees.

    Our responsibility is to the refugees already being held who have done the right thing and are rotting in these camps. Some for over two generations. There are plenty of camps already in our region and the only reason they are risking it on boats is because we have people like yourself promoting this trade.

    Have heart Vik…. Dont continue to feed this industry.

28. 75

    Last time Jolly`s preferences ran in the Greens favour 1284 to 496 with 167 coming from the other independent, People Power and FF.

    http://www.vec.vic.gov.au/Results/state2006distributionRichmondDistrict.html

29. Thanks GhostWhoVotes for all the info – you’re not Rupert are you?

30. There is really no need for the Nats to be separate in Victoria.

    We’re a small State and the Libs and Nats are close bed fellows down here.

    I dont understand why they dont merge and then have Ryan as leader and somone from the Libs as Deputy.

    Rocket its too good to be true but thats why it wont happen 🙁

31. William Bowe
    Posted Sunday, November 14, 2010 at 11:08 pm | Permalink

    “”If the 30-45 per cent of card followers from 2006 continue to follow the card, the Greens’ share of Liberal preferences will fall from approaching 80 per cent to about 40 per cent. But I suspect it will be more like 50-50.”

    However what is diff is Howard & Helen Kroger publicly adovated voting Labor over Greens , and there has been numerous MSN storys on subject since , so Lib voters likely more aware than 2006 when Lib Votrs almost left to own devices w/o public directon For voters to drop to 50/50 a surprise , I’d thought 65% , bet diff

32. When have I ever said anything about the Greens , or anyone else for that matter, being “innocents” Ron?

    As for GG, he seems to be determined to prove my point. As I’ve said to you before, I’m sure the Libs love nothing better than watching Labor and the Greens doing their best to kick each other’s heads in, but despite this he seems to do nothing else these days.

33. Not the sort of headlines the Libs were hoping for.

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/ted-baillieu-launches-election-campaign-promising-funding-at-60m-a-minute/story-e6frf7l6-1225953487036

34. This means ALP will retain government. I suspect it will lose 5 to 9 seats. Who cares if Greens are preferencing ALP in only 13 seats if it’s the 13 that matter. The rest they can issue splitters. ALP to lose Mt. Waverley, Gembrook, Forest Hill, Mitcham, +- Frankston, Prahran, Burwood, Mordialloc and Sth Barwon- although I think the racist factor might not get Katos over the line. And there you have it.

35. Rod,

    Cry me a river.

    Your Greens are cooked, comrade. Your whingeing is music to my ears.

    As I said earlier, the Greens are most welcome to help re elect the progressive Labor Government.

36. Tom

    Jolly has said he expects exec to ok a split ticket

37. Tom

    Jolly has said he expects exec to ok a split ticket for this electon

38. Glen 80

    No, I’m not so sure. For many years I followed the situation in Queensland (including living through one election up there) – I could see that post 1989 the Libs and Nats were stuck on the horns of a dilemma. The Libs were slowly overtaking the Nats statewide vote but getting very few seats in return because their votes were in Labor areas generally. So the Nats were increasingly the “senior” opposition party on seats but not votes. Thus a National was always headed for Premier at election, which seemed bizarre because an election that Labor lost was probably going to deliver more votes to the Libs.

    Eventually they merged into the LNP, and yes, it was a difficult merger, but in the end it probably had to happen. The many people (from Vic and NSW mainly) who were moving to Qld were probably unlikely to vote for the Qld Nats. And so I think the merger there was much more problematic than in Vic or NSW (let’s face it, the Nats in SA and WA are fairly insignificant) where the Nats are never going to hold many seats, and in fact are slowly being “eroded” out of their seats by demographic change (NSW North Coast), Independents, and Liberals winning three-cornered contests when Nats retire (that Nats rarely win back).

    So I actually do feel this will happen, maybe on a state-by-state basis before becoming de-facto Federal.

    Peter Ryan can only hope it happens sooner rather than later!

39. [This means ALP will retain government.]

    That was my own initial reaction, centaur, and it is probably true that Labor will hold, but don’t forget the positive benefits for the Libs this decision will have in some of the regional seats. There is a real logic behind this decision by the Libs, and it certainly doesn’t involve being nice to Labor!

40. RR,

    Ryan is 60 now so another four years wait is probably not on his agenda.

41. Rod Hagen
    Posted Sunday, November 14, 2010 at 10:58 pm | Permalink

    “Labor and the Greens will now be so focused on beating each other to death in Melbourne and Richmond that a lot of bad blood will arise (following the GG model of how to play politics on both sides I suspect),”

    you implied Greens hav not ALREADY been trying to take Labors Seat (peddaling BS against Labor) and ONLY NOW quote “Labor and the Greens will NOW be so focused on beating each other to death ” …

    yu lot already been doing it to voters direct , long before Libs pref deel anoounced , so do not pretend with pretty words that Greens not being so before today (as if youse Greens is ‘friends’)

42. Rod,

    Didn’t show much niceness to your Greens did it?

43. “Labor and the Greens doing their best to kick each other’s heads in, but despite this he seems to do nothing else these days.”

    no , all GG does is moderately point out Greens hypocracy , and econamic iliterness

44. [Cry me a river.

    Your Greens are cooked, comrade. Your whingeing is music to my ears.
    ]
    What “whingeing” would that be, GG? My only worry is that you interminably carry on in a fashion that in reality does Labor far more harm than good.

45. I haven’t “implied” anything, Ron. All I’ve said is that this decision by the Libs will harm both Labor and the Greens. It is, I think, much cleverer than it might look at first blush.

46. Rod,

    “What “whingeing” would that be”

    Oh, only the thousands of lines of unabashed puffery you think is political analysis.

47. What does Labor more harm is a Lawer Green like you trying all day to make reasonable -ness what ar impracticol Greens polisys on a Site to make Greens look like “friends of Labor , whilst at same time as you know Brown & Greens candidates is attacking Labor……

    sheeps in wolfs clothing

48. Ron,

    After today, the Greens and Rod are more sheep in sheep’s clothing.

49. There was meant to be a ‘Make Brumby history rally” on parliament house steps today at 2pm. Anyone hear how many turned up?

50. GG Ron

    in the words of a famous someone

    [there could be trouble]

    the truce boys the truce

Comments are closed.