Same-sex marriage survey: 61.6 yes, 38.4 no

And the winner is …

So there you have it. Below is a tool for exploring the results at divisional level according to a range of electoral and demographic criteria. Take your pick from the drop down menu, and you will get divisional “yes” votes recorded on the vertical axis, and their results for the relevant indicator on the vertical axis. Most of these are self-explanatory, with the exception of “One Nation support index”. This equals the division’s 2016 Senate vote for One Nation divided by the party’s overall Senate vote in that state, multiplied by 100. So an electorate will score 100 if its One Nation vote is exactly equal to the state average; it will score 200 if it’s double; 50 if it’s half; and so forth. This is to prevent the party’s across-the-board high results in Queensland from spoiling the effect. “Finished school” is measured as a percent of the 15-plus population.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,326 comments on “Same-sex marriage survey: 61.6 yes, 38.4 no”

  1. **Bernardi probably trying to get an inquiry into the hack in the faint hope that it reveals Pyne is lying that there was a hack. Pretty smart move if he suspects that is actually the case.**
    Those two need to settle it Pushkin style.

  2. I can see that the legal reasoning behind the Hollie Hughes decision seems a bit brutal, especially if applied to other situations.

    However, it’s worth mentioning that her case is actually a very good example of the “mischief” that the section is designed to combat.

    She agreed to be on a Senate ticket in an unwinnable position for the party that eventually won the election. She then was gifted a plum job which is directly in the gift of the Attorney General, no doubt at least partly because of her candidature. Now she seeks to be elected to the Senate on a count back. She is totally compromised in relation to any government measure before the Senate.

  3. IOM,

    Regardless, there clearly are important considerations that should not just be ignored or wished away by indifference and complacency.

  4. lizzie

    Small minds at the Tele.

    Of course now the actor is playing the father of a gay person in Modern Family.

    Thats from opening credits of comedy show Married with Family

  5. lizzie

    Margaret Court says she is inclined to end her 50-year association with the Liberals over same-sex marriage

    Maybe they’ll get back to her to let her know that they don’t give an FF if she disassociates herself.

  6. Lizzie

    Ted Bundy from Married With Children. A person in a dysfunctional “traditional” marriage…….


    The Smith bill is not perfect. However it should pass without amendment to prevent more crap in it. Plus it came out of the senate committee. Lab + Grn to amend after next election.

  7. lizzie @ #951 Thursday, November 16th, 2017 – 11:44 am


    Margaret Court says she is inclined to end her 50-year association with the Liberals over same-sex marriage, believing the major parties are presiding over the nation’s moral decline.

    The shame of it all. 🙏🙏🙏

    I feel sad for this wonderful lady. I have witnessed first hand the decent into religiosity (what my wife used to say), with an emphasis on sex – fornication is out (not in and out Brown Bear), sex is for procreation only and must not be enjoyed.

    From my time holding down (gently) various patients while I worked at the local hospital I witnessed various ordinary people behaving in the most outlandish fashion when recovering from anesthetic drugs. The same applies to various steet drugs.

    I revel in the memory of a sweet old lady telling me that I was the whore master and the lovely young nurses were prostitutes working for me. This lady recovered (AFAIK) to return to her normal self.


  8. lizzie @ #385 Thursday, November 16th, 2017 – 9:39 am

    Only 8 Coalition Senators turned up to hear Dean Smith.

    Mark Kenny‏Verified account @markgkenny · 44m44 minutes ago

    The symbolism of that is truly woeful. After more than 12 million people vote for change they can’t front up for the opening defining speech?

    Isn’t that like 7 more Coalition Senators than Dean Smith actually needs to pass his bill?

  9. citizen says:
    Thursday, November 16, 2017 at 9:16 am
    The sleuths should be called in to verify how Pyne’s Facebook page was (allegedly) hacked.

    I have a different view of this matter. Much as I don’t have very much time for Christopher Pine porn is legal in this country (unless it is under age porn) and what people do in their sex lives is no-one else’s business (which was a major part of the argument for same sex marriage).

    So whether it was Pyne or a hacker who accessed the site is irrelevant IMO, except in terms of the illegality of hacking another person’s private information. If the offence did occur the person should be found and punished.

  10. Stephen Koukoulas‏Verified account @TheKouk · 23h23 hours ago

    For an anonymous, voluntary postal survey, the ABS sure knows a lot about who voted Yes and No, their age and where they live

    I was wondering about that, too. Thought I must be the ignorant one.

  11. RichardDiNatale: With the marriage equality postal survey coming in $20m under budget, the government should give this money to the mental health and counselling services that have been so stretched and done so much to support LGBTIQ Australians in recent months.

    #MarriageEqality #auspol

  12. John Goss says:
    Thursday, November 16, 2017 at 10:20 am
    Penny Wong just gave one of the great Australian speeches in speaking as co-sponsor of the Same-sex Marriage Bill. I didn’t hear Dean Smith’s contribution, but apparently that was a ripper as well.

    She certainly did. This is such an uplifting moment for us all. Smith, Wong, Rice….they speak very movingly…not a dry eye in my family…. 🙂

  13. Darn,

    The pulishing of the porn is not the issue here.

    Pyne is a senior Government Minister and he claims that his site was hacked.

    The Australian Public need to be assured that no confidential or sensitive information has been extracted from his site. I agree with Bernardi’s Motion. This needs to be investigated.

  14. GG

    Glad to see we are on the same page.

    Its certainly no Pyne’s private sex life that is the issue. Its about the security of devices.

    Of course if Pyne has two phones and one of those has no work related issues this is of zero public interest

  15. Ides
    “Ted Bundy from Married With Children.”
    Ted Bundy was a famous serial killer, who coincidentally was a friend of Ann Rule who is a famous author of books about serial killers.
    That one’s Al.

  16. I believe there is a small chance of Jacqui Lambie’s entire ticket getting disqualified (Lambie a scot, Martin as Mayor of Devenport, Waterman as head of rural health tasmania). which would the presumably elect the One Nation Candidate Kate McCulloch into Lambie’s 6 year position. I haven’t heard anything about her eligibility but fingers crossed.

  17. GG

    Yep. Thats why I agree an official investigation is warranted.

    We need that public interest test to be proven one way or the other.

    As I said I think we are on the same page on this.

  18. Also I presume Lambie will run (and win) again at the next senate election, letting JLN have 2 seats off her personal poppularity when they could only manage one at the Double Dissolution. Presuming her party still hasnt been wiped out by HC

  19. I have read everyone’s responses to my arguments. I’m very sympathetic to arguments that run along the lines of “most religions preach antiquated nonsense and should have no place in our governmental or legislative environments.” But I don’t think that view is tenable in the increasingly multicultural society in which we live.

    I think that some of you, and many of the SSM proponents, are struggling to free themselves of a false mental model of the element of our population with deeply-held religious convictions. They are envisaging some sort of white male unreconstructed dinosaur Christian: a sort of Fred Nile on steroids.

    Take for example this comment from Janet Rice: “To people who voted no, I urge you to get to know us… open your hearts and minds”

    But how meaningful is the concept of “opening your mind and heart” to a member of the devout communities of Western Sydney who voted No? I don’t know if, like me, Senator Rice has ever had close friends who are devout Muslims. If she had, I would have thought she’d know that, in mainstream Islam (both Sunni and Shia), there is virtually no scope for adherents to have an “open mind” on a very wide range of issues, including human sexual behaviour. There is simply a powerfully-enforced obligation to obey the rules, which Muslims can at best disobey in a clandestine manner (which can create significant risks).

    Now, I’d be quite interested to have a debate about the extent to which devout Islamic practice fits in with broader Australian values, but I reckon it’s a pretty fraught topic.

    And it isn’t just about Islam. For example, there seems to be growing community support (which I share) that Indigenous Australians should be allowed/encouraged to apply their religious practices not only to themselves but to all of us: eg, that we should obey their edicts that we should not set foot on their sacred sites such as Uluru. I struggle to see the difference between respecting an Indigenous person’s religious sentiments about where I should walk and respecting a Muslim or Christian person’s sentiments that they should not be made to involve themselves directly or indirectly in a same sex wedding.

    I have always endeavoured to respect other people’s religious beliefs where I don’t see them impinging on the basic rights of my own or others. I don’t think that the ability to demand that a particular person to bake me a cake when they don’t wish to, and when there are plenty of other cake-makers who are happy to serve me, is a basic right. Indeed, I think what is happening to the Colorado cake shop is a form of institutionalised bullying. As would be someone attempting to use the courts to overturn the wishes of the people of Mutijulu that they not walk on Uluru.

    As I have posted earlier: “live and let live.” IMO, it’s all about respect for people who are different to you.

  20. One has to admire Senator Dean Smith. But it doesn’t seem most of his senate colleagues don’t because only 7 of them turned up to see him introduce his SSM bill. What a bunch!

  21. Apologies already posted , from the Guardian as opposed to the ratbag Murdoch press..

    Pratt says the spurious arguments from the no camp were hurtful to the LGBTIQ community. She said they had been subjected to “lies and misinformation about their families”.

    While they did that, the result is a resounding rejection of those arguments. And the result is a victory for all in the LGTBI community. Those arguments hurt our community, they hurt young people, trans people, children and families, who weren’t really at the centre of the substantive debate about what a mutual commitment is between two people who want to marry each other. The results of the survey show they did not win the arguments about marriage, they did not win the arguments about schools, they did not win the arguments about children. Any forthcoming amendments along those grounds must be rejected.

  22. MB

    In using the Colarado Cake shop example you have outed yourself as supporting the white nationalists and evangelicals who think their religious belief should override secular society and other people’s religious belief.

    Uluru as a sacred site is the church or temple. Its not the commercial baking shop down the street.

  23. mb

    But you are advocating for respect to be a one way street – it’s OK for the Christian baker to disrespect the gay couple, but not OK for the gay couple to then show disrespect for the Christian baker.

  24. If the JLN group runs out of candidates, there is an argument (that is not necessarily conclusive) that it is situation like a single candidate dying in the single member electorate and thus there should be a new Senate election. The whole Tasmanian Senate recount process is also at risk of getting messy as it was such a close result and taking a previously elected candidate out risks unelecting McKim and replacing him with One Nation and that may not be possible and a new election might be needed.

  25. Put it this way… I support the rights of churches to decide who they do and do not marry. Religions have held that right, essentially as a membership organisation.

    A private business, enters into business and registers to be compliant with the law. That includes anti-discrimination laws. So I have NO sympathy for businesses refusing service because they find the idea of ssm uncomfortable. If it’s illegal to refuse service to someone because of their sexuality, then there is no room to move here.

  26. In disturbing news there is an eerie corelation between No voting electorates in Western Sydney and their proximity to KFC outlets!


  27. lizzie @ #966 Thursday, November 16th, 2017 – 8:00 am

    Stephen Koukoulas‏Verified account @TheKouk · 23h23 hours ago

    For an anonymous, voluntary postal survey, the ABS sure knows a lot about who voted Yes and No, their age and where they live

    I was wondering about that, too. Thought I must be the ignorant one.

    They do appear to have got a bit exited and provided more than they were asked to.

    They were only asked to break the result down to electorate level so the age and gender breakdowns exceed what it was asked to do.

    Obviously they needed addresses to allow the electorate figures to be calculated and identity to ensure the integrity of the process, one person, one survey.

    I don’t see it as an issue and I think a lot would find the breakdowns interesting. 🙂

  28. meher baba @ #854 Thursday, November 16th, 2017 – 7:58 am

    The champions of identity politics of the 2010s like to throw the phrase “civil rights” around a lot and invoke the memory of Rosa Parks. But there is a clear and major distinction between the cases of Rosa Parks and Masterpiece Cake Shop: that is, there was at least one other (and, I assume, dozens of other) cake shops in Denver that were happy to supply a cake on this occasion, while Rosa Parks certainly did not have the option of choosing another bus service provider in Montgomery who would have been happy to have her sit in the front seats.

    That’s a rather nonsensical distinction. It says that a business’s “right” to discriminate depends upon the density and disposition of competing service providers. And also apparently that had Montgomery only bothered to set up a separate “blacks only” bus service then Rosa Parks would have been completely mistaken to protest the discriminatory, unequal, and racist treatment she received.

    What happens if someone lives in a rural area that’s only serviced by a single cake shop? Based upon your distinction, that shop would not be allowed to discriminate.

    What if there’s a major resurgence of fundamentalist Christianity and even though there are 20 cake shops in Detroit none of them are willing to sell to gay people? Do they all get to discriminate because there’s still lots of them around, or do none of them, or does one of them get forced into being the token “gay cake shop” so that the rest can discriminate freely?

    What if there’s a competing, gay-friendly cake shop but their cakes suck and everybody knows it? And the only halfway decent cake shop in town refuses to serve gay people because they’ve technically got a gay-friendly competitor nearby? Do gay people have to live with being relegated to having only the most sucky cakes available?

    Far simpler to say that businesses have no more of a legal right to discriminate against gay people than they do against black people. Those that really want to may still find a way. But that’s not a reason for handing them a way to do so legally.

Comments are closed.