Yesterday was the day on which candidate nominations declared and ballot paper draws conducted. The electorate pages in the Poll Bludger election guide now feature full lists of candidates in ballot paper order, though the job is still half finished for the Senate guide. House of Representatives nominations are up, with the average number per electorate being almost exactly seven, compared with 6.6 in 2016. However, there are fewer Senate nominations, presumably because a half-Senate election offers small players less prospect for success than a double dissolution.
To my eye, the two points worth noting about the ballot paper draws is that the Liberals and One Nation have both enjoyed good fortune in the Senate (I don’t think the fabled “donkey vote” in the House of Representatives worth dwelling on, as it really doesn’t amount to very much). The Liberals (taken to include the Liberal National Party in Queensland) has drawn a more leftward column than the Liberal Democrats in all six states, reducing their chances of voters confusing the two. One Nation have drawn second column in Queensland and the first column in Western Australia, although the advantage in the former case is diminished by the fact that the United Australia Party, who would seem to me to be fighting over the same turf, are right next to them in the third column.
Over the fold are presentations of House of Representatives candidate numbers for each party; the number of groups and candidates in the Senate; and how they have changed from 2016.
House of Representatives nominations
Senate nominations
BK
Did you tell them you were perplexed as to why they were taking copper from the lights when there is so much more copper in Turnbull’s NBN ? 😉
Frankly – this pref deal with Palmer is likely being massively overblown. This won’t increase the LNP 2PP by much. It’ll have an impact in Qld, but ONP is still a force in those marginals.
The UAP vote is still largely pissed off RW populists who are being drawn away from ONP but aren’t prepared to back the LNP. So the reality is, with ONP toxic, they had to do a deal with someone and it was hardly going to be the Grns or Lab was it?
Dave I just hope that someone can save all the embarrassing and incriminating material at NBNco.
Go BK!
Seconded.
Cud Chewer
In my view a solid analysis.
I want a 54 because just as a 51 would cause the panic merchants here stress; imagine what a 54 would do to the Liberals.
True, but its very convenient to Labor because it distracts the media and steals oxygen from Morrison.
BK @ #492 Thursday, April 25th, 2019 – 5:38 pm
It’s that Bill Shorten fellow. He’s got some serious questions to answer…
Good point poroti!
frednk yep a 54 would see some orbital unhingement in the Murdoch media 🙂
Firefox @ #417 Thursday, April 25th, 2019 – 3:27 pm
Rudd II had to clamber out of the smouldering wreckage left by Gillard.
He might have been personally popular, but the ALP was a wreck.
Yes Fred
The higher the better
I want this mob of ****s out
Citation needed.
I think Clive Palmer might have a chance of winning a Senate seat in Queensland at the expense of One Nation. However I can’t see the United Australia Party coming close to winning Senate seats in other states. Although the fragmentation of the right-wing populist vote, could ensure that either one of these parties won’t win a senate seat in any state.
EGW…
Let’s not restart the Gillard/Rudd wars – been done to death already!
My observation of recent elections is that there is a swing towards Labor in the last 1 or 2 weeks. This may be the work put in to the field campaign taking effect when voters start to focus as the polling day approaches. The obvious exception is the NSW election. This may be due to Daley’s alleged racist issue in the last week.
Lizzie
Many places give out wrist bands if there is a bar tab organised. The wrist band indicates you as part of the tab group. It could be nothing.
Tristo @ #473 Thursday, April 25th, 2019 – 5:06 pm
Vote 1 for Dutton and get another by-election. A sure vote winner! Hope the ALP pushes this line.
Fairly obvious line on UAP is:
“The Coalition have revealed their true colors at last.
They have done a grubby a deal with a man who has $50 million to buy an election, but not even a fraction of that pay his employees their entitlements.
What was Scott Morrison thinking? This is one if the most blatant instances of political cynicism – from boths sides of the equation – that Australians have ever seen.”
MM @ #432 Thursday, April 25th, 2019 – 4:04 pm
Misrepresentation. The salaried high-earner in question wasn’t questioning income tax policy in any meaningful way. He wasn’t asking about switching to a flat income tax. He wasn’t suggesting that the GST be increased and the proceeds used to cut income taxes. He didn’t contribute anything novel to the debate.
The question he put was “where’s my tax cut?”. That’s asking for a handout, not questioning tax policy. The only thing we can glean from that is even people with high incomes like getting tax cuts. Which was never really in doubt.
SKY journo says they were invited guest so it was ‘a friendly crowd’
the liberals don’t understand the deals with uap are like the deals with onp at state levels… they only possibly benefit the insane conservative parties. Mr Palmer is firmly of the opinion that any one can be bought esp the voters
jenauthor
I wonder how “ScoMo the friendly bloke” copes with an unfriendly crowd. Bring current PM he’s probably protected.
Re formality of votes, there is some latitude. See sections on House if Reps guidelines (p. 31) and Senate Guidelines (p. 39).
https://www.aec.gov.au/elections/candidates/files/scrutineers-handbook.pdf
So, Palmer gets to use the whole Liberal machine nationwide to hand out HTVs giving him preferences, while he does SFA. Sounds like a great deal for the fat guy from Queensland. The Libs must be totally desperate to fall for this one.
Lizzie,
Trust me, to get to within the proverbial bull’s roar of Ad Man from Mad Men you have to be a Party Member, invited and confirm your identity before entry.
Plus, if he is actually in a public space (so not a selected business premises), the minders around him (and media) are so thick you again do not get to within the proverbial.
Interesting was Shorten telling the media to get out of the way so he could talk to real people, who he was there to engage with.
a r says:
Thursday, April 25, 2019 at 5:57 pm
The question he put was “where’s my tax cut?”. That’s asking for a handout, not questioning tax policy. The only thing we can glean from that is even people with high incomes like getting tax cuts. Which was never really in doubt.
…
Fair enough.
P.S. is it possible to do decent quote commenting without a Chrome plugin?
Observer
I believe you. Well done Shorten. 🙂
EGW @ #509 Thursday, April 25th, 2019 – 5:47 pm
…because he wrecked it in the grandest of fashions.
Henderson has swallowed the Liberal line, hook line & sinker. She was such a good little noddy in the HoR.
lizzie @ #528 Thursday, April 25th, 2019 – 6:14 pm
I think it’s fair to say the AWU, CFMMEU and SDA control and dictate a lot of Labor policy.
We don’t have the direct comparison with PUP that we do in the Reps (as the Senate system changed in the following election), but whether minor/micro voters generally followed how to vote cards was looked at a fair amount in 2016, and from memory the general conclusion was that how to vote cards (and by implication preference deals) were effectively useless as a predictor (with one micro in Tasmania managing the distinction of *nobody* following their how to vote). UAP may get over the hurdle of nobody knowing what their how to vote is, but don’t expect it to be followed uniformly (there will be meaningful leakage elsewhere).
(NB we can expect UAP voters to favor the Libs over Labor (to the extent they don’t exhaust), but if you thought Palmer was thought of as progressive you may be reading too much News Corp)
I suspect UAP and the deal is most useful to the Libs against One Nation, due to them first splitting the right-wing malcontent vote (which lowers he proportion of a quota ON has), then having some of it go to the third Lib candidate over ON which increases the chance of them winning. Of course, there is no way to tell from polling, as national polls have tended not to include UAP and the media would prefer to pay for endless marginal seat polls of dubious value rather than solid state-level polling.
PS: I found this by Kevin Bonham (scroll to the bottom). PUP may have had a possibly mythical outlier in Victoria (noting their vote had collapsed so even less reason to expect it to scale), but generally expect 10% or less to follow their HTV. http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2016/08/senate-reform-performance-review-part-2.html
MM
Probably the simplest way of responding is to copy/paste the entire post you’re responding to, then add some sort of delimiter, like a handful of dashes, then your reply, which is what you’ve done. If you know HTML you can try a blockquote around the post you want to reply to.
Test if required HTML to explain HTML supported in blog
@lt; i @gt;
Copy quoted text here
@lt; /i @gt;
Test if required HTML to explain HTML supported in blog
@lt;i@gt;
Copy quoted text here
@lt;/i@gt;
“@SHendersonMP
If @billshortenmp is elected, meet his deputy. The union movement’s control of @billshortenmp is frightening. #auspol”
As Unions power continues to dimish so does wages… so I wouldn’t mind seeing Unions have more influence and hopefully we will start see wages move again.
Jackol
In South Australia, the lower house franchise was (and is) all adults 18 and over (presumably 21 it was at some point). The upper house franchise had in addition a property owning requirement. This was defended by Ren de Garis as right and proper in that whilst the lower house reflected the temporary will of the people, the upper house (in Ren’s conception) reflected the permanent will of the people. In any event the franchise is certainly different.
Your position in relation to the lack of an upper house to constrain Mr Newman’s activities is (of course) wholly legitimate but I would first point out that it is a (Burkeian) conservative position (a sort of argumentum ad hominem, of course). More importantly (and subjecting myself to my own cheap criticism) I support the review function at the Commonwealth level (i.e. the Senate) and oppose the abolition of the Senate more strongly than I advocate the abolition of the State upper houses. The main reason for this apparently paradoxical position is as follows:
– the Senate is constituted as a House of Review, and moreover since the introduction of Senate Estimates in the 1970s has fulfilled this function effectively;
– in contrast, the State upper houses descend (instead) from the House of Lords and as such intrinsically defend the interests of landed property holders (and in proportion to the size of their land holdings), and very likely continue to do so even after egregious corruption of franchise (e.g. that in South Australia) is removed.
In any event, bad behaviour by a unicameral State lower house is subject to review both by the people (as happened) and also by various branches of the Commonwealth (if more immediate relief is required).
Like what exactly? Either have a detailed and rational response or accept that you’re spouting shit.
Interesting was Shorten telling the media to get out of the way so he could talk to real people, who he was there to engage with.
And he was rewarded with the photo of the day as a result:
Nicko
https://twitter.com/i/status/1121002269774757893
MM
I’ve shown this as an image because if I did not it would actually cause the indent and you wouldn’t see the hidden codes.
Labor must be confident to agree to this dubious event…
BREAKING: Scott Morrison and Bill Shorten will take part in a Sky News/Courier Mail people’s forum next Friday May 3 in Brisbane.
The leaders will take questions from 100 undecided voters @SkyNewsAust @David_Speers
frednk @ #532 Thursday, April 25th, 2019 – 6:19 pm
I think you replace the “at” symbol with an ampersand.
A very nasty and unpleasant end to the Collingwood v Essendon ANZAC day match.
Crowd vibe is v ugly.
Not sure whether it is the weather or the close finish
BK @ #492 Thursday, April 25th, 2019 – 5:38 pm
Blame the Libs!
There is nothing they won’t sink to.
You know it makes sense! 😛
Some interesting multi bets available on Sportsbet..
Australia Federal Election – Bets on Tap
Labor to win the seats of Flynn (QLD), Forde (QLD) and Capricornia (QLD)
1.45
Both Tony Abbott and Peter Dutton fail to get elected at the Federal Election
2.50
Independent candidates to win the seats of Clark (TAS), Cowper (NSW), Indi (VIC) and Wentworth (NSW)
3.00
Coalition to win the Wentworth, Pearce, Dickson, Warringah and Scott Morrision to be sworn as PM
4.00
Green Party to win Wills(VIC) and Melbourne (VIC)
5.00
Solomon (NT) and Lingiari (NT) to both be won by the Coalition
6.00
Show Less
The absence of credible polling allows the Coalition and their media to publish that there is a move back to the Coalition – in an attempt to influence
They did the same in Victoria
Not more News Ltd ‘People’s Forums’ again. Didn’t they do their dash at the last election where it was pretty obvious the majority of those asking questions weren’t undecided in the slightest?
Fess, the worst one was the 2013 ‘Rorted Hill’ event run by Sky – where they had Liberal staffers masquerading as undecided voters, and they allowed Abbott to get off the stage and wander around the front row of the crowd.
I wonder what boerwar thought of the umpiring in the Collingwood/Essendon game.