Federal election preference flows

New figures from the AEC confirm the Coalition’s share of Hanson and Palmer preferences was approaching two-thirds, a dramatic increase on past form.

We now have as much in the way of results out of the federal election as we’re ever going to, with the Australian Electoral Commission finally publishing preference flow by party data. The table below offers a summary and how it compares with the last two election. They confirm that YouGov Galaxy/Newspoll was actually too conservative in giving the Coalition 60% of preferences from One Nation and the United Australia Party, with the actual flow for both parties being nearly identical at just over 65%.

The United Australia Party preference flow to the Coalition was very substantially stronger than the 53.7% recorded by the Palmer United Party in 2013, despite its how-to-vote cards directing preferences to the Coalition on both occasions. A result is also listed for Palmer United in 2016, but it is important to read these numbers in conjunction with the column recording the relevant party’s vote share at the election, which in this case was next to zero (it only contested one lower house seat, and barely registered there). Greens preferences did nothing out of the ordinary, being slightly stronger to Labor than in 2016 and slightly weaker than in 2013.

The combined “others” flow to the Coalition rose from 50.8% to 53.6%, largely reflecting the much smaller footprint of the Nick Xenophon Team/Centre Alliance, whose preferences in 2016 split 60-40 to Labor. This also contributes to the smaller share for “others”, with both figures being closer to where they were in 2013. “Inter-Coalition” refers to where there were both Liberal and Nationals candidates in a seat, some of whose preferences will have flowed to Labor rather than each other. The “share” result in this case records the combined Coalition vote in such seats as a share of the national formal vote.

While we’re here, note the blog’s other two recent posts: Adrian Beaumont’s account of Brecon & Radnorshire by-election, and my own in-depth review of the legal challenges against the election of Josh Frydenberg in Kooyong and Gladys Liu in Chisholm.

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.

1,440 comments on “Federal election preference flows”

Comments Page 3 of 29
1 2 3 4 … 29

  1. zoomster, the point I take from your example of Barnaby Joyce and his “tame” scientist(s) is that the politician was doing the work, not the scientist that he used to give himself cred.

  2. LR

    So it’s a pity that politicians and scientists from the other side of the argument didn’t get out there and do the same thing.

    The electorate is still woefully ignorant about what’s going on and what needs to be done.

  3. Bushfire Bill:
    I’m fucked if I know why the management permits it to go on and on and on, day after day, week by week, always the same fucking mind-numbing shit show.

    Probably for the same reason he puts up with your, how great is my missus, how fantastic are my dogs, how your opinion on the law and theology is gospel, how great was my trip to Bunnings, and a million other irrelevancies that are all about YOU.

    And, fyi, I have had nath blocked because I know he is simply a miscreant troublemaker and so have not engaged in any back and forth since before the election. However, yesterday I was alerted to the fact he was spreading, yet another, mistruth involving me and so I set out to prove it. And did. I am now going back to ignoring him. And 99% of the time I ignore LvT as well.

    If you don’t like that, then stiff cheese. Especially after the abuse I have received from you in the past. ‘Gosford Godzilla’ ring any bells?

  4. z, yes it is. And Joyce is obviously very good at his job. For mine it’s the politicians who need to be changing minds, using scientists as backup, as you described Joyce doing. This as a political problem. And on the flip side, scientists might line up their support behind a competent politician who makes it their theme.

  7. mundo

    Yes – so it’s the responsibility of both politicians and scientists to educate them, not simply prescribe actions.

  9. z, Sorry, but I disagree.

    Science is built around doubt. It’s purpose is to remove it. This is the core of every successful scientist. Politics is built around power. It’s purpose is to gain it. This is the heart of a successful politician. Politicians use scientists, not the other way round. Responding to global warming is a political problem.

    Also, “scientist” covers so many diverse fields. When we’re discussing global warming only a very small number of scientists would count as expert in a mind boggling complex field. There just aren’t enough of them. And again, this is because we don’t value them, which is a political decision. One of the first things Abbott did was cut funding to climate research.

  10. frednk
    Thanks for the bit about the Russki who saved the world. I sort of knew about this, but more as a social mythy thing. Well, yes, we have to hope there are people like this still around.

  11. Elizabeth Farrelly hits the nail on the head about the so-called ‘better economic managers’:

    We don’t see it. On the contrary, governments need only be sufficiently mean-spirited for us to take their very nastiness as a sign of good financial management. If they cut enough welfare, flog enough public assets, chop enough trees and destroy enough public space we assume they’re ruthlessly efficient. Practical and unswerving. Tough.

    https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/sydney-stuck-with-the-bad-decisions-of-those-blinded-by-big-piles-of-dosh-20190801-p52d03.html

  12. LR

    Not sure which bit you’re disagreeing with… and I thought, in the context of the discussion, that I had made it clear that there are scientists and scientists.

    When I was trying to formulate climate change policy, I didn’t know enough about the science to work out what the solutions might be (that’s thirty years ago, there’s been a lot more work done since then). I would ask the climate change scientists I was working with basic questions – would burning wood be a better solution than burning coal? is one I remember – and, because it was outside their field (identifying that there was a problem) they couldn’t answer.

    Your average politician has even less scientific knowledge than I have. And the average voter has even less than that.

    Politicians don’t have the expertise to work out the answer to problems like climate change (particularly in the intitial stages). They needed to be presented with possible courses of action.

    I’m not trying to push any particular barrows here, just going over some of the problems I encountered dealing in this field (at a very very minor level, I stress, although the scientists I had the privilege to work with are undoubted experts).

    Gettting scientists to even talk to politicians was a major exercise – I cunningly invited a climate scientist and an enviro Minister to the same forum, and put them on the program so that each could hear the other speak. Unfortunately, one left immediately after their speech and then the other arrived! … so I had to arrange for both of them to meet and talk at another event….

    All those years on, and it’s clear that the general populace still doesn’t understand what’s happening and what needs to be done.

  13. Newsweek:

    IS THIS A REPUBLICAN TEXODUS?
    Former El Paso Congressman and 2020 presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke warned from the primary debate stage this week that Texas, once a ruby-red state, was on the verge of turning purple. “There is a new battleground state: Texas, and it has 38 Electoral College votes,” he said.

    He may be onto something. A number of old guard Texas Republicans are hanging up their cowboy hats at the end of this session in what is now being called “the Texodus.”

    Will Hurd, the only black Republican in the House, became the third GOP representative from Texas to announce his retirement from Congress in the past two weeks. Representatives Pete Olson and Mike Conaway also announced they won’t seek reelection.

    The Texas Tribune wrote Thursday evening that this string of retirements has operatives worried. The paper reported that “several state and national Republican operatives reached out to The Texas Tribune to react to the news. Nearly all of the commentary involved highly explicit language.”

    Now all eyes are on three Texan Republicans: John Carter, who won his districts in a very close races during the last go-around, and Kenny Marchant and Mike McCaul, whose winning campaigns have dropped considerable percentage points in recent elections.

    There’s still no telling whether this will lead to a blue ripple across Texas in 2020, but the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is investing vast sums of money into the state and targeting the seats of these three Republicans, as well as that of Representative Chip Roy.

    Ever the optimist, O’Rourke also seems to think there’s a possibility that the state votes for a Democratic president.

    “Those 38 Electoral College votes in Texas are now in play, and I can win them,” he said during this week’s debate. “That is how we defeat Donald Trump in November 2020, and how we bring this divided country together again in January of 2021.”

  14. z, sorry. It’s just that I can’t blame the scientists. 30 years ago the idea of global warming was remote and the science still emerging. Scientists specially would have been worried about the uncertainty in their assumptions and predictions. Scientists are trained to focus on what they don’t know. They would have been keen to discuss their ignorance. They would not have been emotionally ready for a robust public debate. But today climate records being broken is almost normal and 30 years of science backs it up. (I went through a similar exercise in designing nuclear waste storage facilities for Hanford waste 25 years ago. The uncertainties were used by the politicians to kill the work.)

    I like your example of Joyce and his “tame” scientist. How did he conscript him and how did he wield him? That’s the political path to follow.

  15. C@t:

    From the Washington Post:

    “The president’s reelection campaign needs to take Texas seriously,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said in an interview. He added that while he remains optimistic about the GOP’s chances, it is “by no means a given” that Trump will carry Texas — and its 38 electoral votes — next year or that Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) will be reelected.

    For a state that once elevated the Bush family and was forged into a Republican stronghold by Karl Rove, it is an increasingly uncertain time. Changing demographics and a wave of liberal activism have given new hope to Democrats, who have not won a statewide elective office since 1994 or Texas’s presidential vote since Jimmy Carter in 1976.

    Recent Republican congressional retirements have stoked party concerns, particularly the surprising Thursday announcement by a rising star, Rep. Will Hurd, that he would not seek reelection in his highly competitive district, which stretches east from El Paso along the Mexican border.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/take-texas-seriously-gop-anxiety-spikes-after-retirements-democratic-gains/2019/08/02/d9e9942c-b4b8-11e9-8949-5f36ff92706e_story.html?utm_term=.8a81c70b4ea1

  17. I really wasn’t blaming the scientists, full stop. There’s plenty of blame to go around. But I do think it’s a flaw in the way the profession thinks.

    It’s (to my mind, at least) a dereliction of duty to say wtte of ‘this is going to happen, it’s going to be disastrous, action needs to be taken now’ and then sit back and wait for other people to take the action.

    As I said earlier, it allowed ‘other’ scientists – those who weren’t afraid to be seen as populist – to run the argument in public.

    I realise that that’s not technically the job of scientists – after all, that’s what the scientists said to me – but leaving it up to amateurs who have no knowledge of the field to be responsible for the call for action has meant that it’s been easy for the ‘other side’ to pick holes in their arguments.

  18. Late Riser @ #1717 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 3:58 pm

    z, sorry. It’s just that I can’t blame the scientists. 30 years ago the idea of global warming was remote and the science still emerging. Scientists specially would have been worried about the uncertainty in their assumptions and predictions. Scientists are trained to focus on what they don’t know. They would have been keen to discuss their ignorance. They would not have been emotionally ready for a robust public debate. But today climate records being broken is almost normal and 30 years of science backs it up. (I went through a similar exercise in designing nuclear waste storage facilities for Hanford waste 25 years ago. The uncertainties were used by the politicians to kill the work.)

    I like your example of Joyce and his “tame” scientist. How did he conscript him and how did he wield him? That’s the political path to follow.

    LR & z.
    The politicians have very little role in either the conscription or wielding of tame “scientists” in the climate debacle: the pollies are clients of the Merchants of Doubt who tell them which ex-(nuclear) physicist, geologist, engineer or ex-tobacco industry PR flak will be presenting the FUD today. It is propaganda not politics. There is no science in denial, and scientists don’t do it.

  19. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-03/crown-casino-corruption-silence-major-parties/11379226

    The Coalition’s main focus for the sitting fortnight remained trying to wedge Labor. The Opposition’s main focus was on trying to pin corruption allegations on a government minister which, while important to pursue on accountability grounds, didn’t quite rate on the same scale as the imputation of systemic corruption involved in the Crown allegations.

    The Government played down the controversy. The Opposition didn’t even think they warranted any questions.

    The questions instead eventually came from the crossbench, led by the Greens.

    Greens MP Adam Bandt asked the Prime Minister whether ministers had lobbied the Department of Home Affairs to ensure “high rollers” could jet into Australia and gamble at Crown with as few checks as possible.

    Scott Morrison told the House on Monday that “in relation to the specific matters that were raised by the member, there has been nothing presented to me that would indicate there are any matters there for me to address”…

    The cartel arrangement between the LibNats and Labor on this matter must greatly embarrass their partisan supporters.

  21. rhwombat, agreed on that. What you’re suggesting is a model where Joyce and his ex-scientist would have been tamed and teamed by “the merchants”. But politicians do also have power. They have a platform.

  22. Lovey says:
    Saturday, August 3, 2019 at 1:57 pm
    The solution to the problem is reducing emissions. Blindingly obvious and universally recognised.

    It is not the job of climate scientists to say how this should be done. This falls on politicians (and us).

    Political dysfunction means the ruling party will be able to avoid the issue. Unless and until dysfunction is repaired there will be no effective national action. Nothing much can or will be done in Lib-kin Garden. Dysfunction arises because it serves the Lib-Libs and the Lib-kin. This is perfectly obvious. It is always denied.

  23. briefly @ #122 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 4:38 pm

    Lovey says:
    Saturday, August 3, 2019 at 1:57 pm
    The solution to the problem is reducing emissions. Blindingly obvious and universally recognised.

    It is not the job of climate scientists to say how this should be done. This falls on politicians (and us).

    Political dysfunction means the ruling party will be able to avoid the issue. Unless and until dysfunction is repaired there will be no effective national action. Nothing much can or will be done in Lib-kin Garden. Dysfunction arises because it serves the Lib-Libs and the Lib-kin. This is perfectly obvious. It is always denied.

    The political dysfunction is headlined by the LibNat and Labor cartel arrangement in propping up the thermal coal industry.

    The LN-L cartel is a cancer on Australia.

  24. Physicists have known for more than a century that GHG emissions would cause global heating. Scientists were ignored in the 19th century. They were ignored in the 20th century. They are being ignored now.

    This is not the fault of the scientists. It is the fault of those who will not listen and will not act. We exhibit nothing so much as a lack of willpower and imagination; nothing so much as perpetual attempts at free-riding.

    We are just useless. We do not deserve the environment we have inherited. We are wrecking it and it will soon be changed irrevocably. We may well be the authors of our own extinction. This would be fitting. We have been responsible for the exploitation and extinction of so much already. We do not respect life. We will be obliged to relinquish it.

  25. briefly @ #124 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 4:47 pm

    Physicists have known for more than a century that GHG emissions would cause global heating. Scientists were ignored in the 19th century. They were ignored in the 20th century. They are being ignored now.

    This is not the fault of the scientists. It is the fault of those who will not listen and will not act. We exhibit nothing so much as a lack of willpower and imagination; nothing so much as perpetual attempts at free-riding.

    We are just useless. We do not deserve the environment we have inherited. We are wrecking it and it will soon be changed irrevocably. We may well be the authors of our own extinction. This would be fitting. We have been responsible for the exploitation and extinction of so much already. We do not respect life. We will be obliged to relinquish it.

    One wonders why partisan voters keep opting at each election for the LN-L cartel arrangement that is destroying our planet.

  26. John SimpsonVerified account@JohnSimpsonNews
    23h23 hours ago
    God knows, in a country that contains The Sun, the Mail & Piers Morgan we’re no strangers to spiteful journalism, but Andrew Bolt’s attack on the climate campaigner @GretaThunberg in Melbourne’s @theheraldsun is the nastiest thing I’ve seen in ages. I felt dirty just reading it.

    Bolt thrives on notoriety and would be lapping up the outrage. Even better that it’s international.

  27. In Rexology the powerless are to blame for the failures of the powerful. This is an axiom. It exonerates the powerful from failure. It rewards failure. It commends inertia. Rexology. How good it is!

  31. briefly @ #129 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 4:59 pm

    Self-reflection is not rare in Rexology. It is entirely absent.

    The last time I voted 1 for Labor I watched as it self-destructed due to personal ambition.

    I reflected on that – and the path we were heading down in regards to the environment we are leaving to future generations.

    I concluded it was no longer viable to keep supporting the LN-L cartel arrangement that controls our parliament.

    It was a very easy conclusion to come to.

  32. Pegasus @ #130 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 5:08 pm

    As rhwombat commended:

    https://player.fm/series/big-ideas-full-program-podcast/certainty-vs-insecurity-why-scott-morrison-defeated-bill-shorten

    Scott Morrison is possessed of certainty. Bill Shorten is insecure. This helps explain why the Coalition was re-elected, and why Labor lost. So says writer, Erik Jensen.

    This program is certainly worth listening to.

    The life of a centrist is consumed by uncertainty. Genuine leaders they are not.

  33. In Rexology there will never be any point to anything. There is only a dog chasing its tail. There are several chapters in the Rexology Handbook. They are all the same. They are titled Futility – How to get good at it.

    The image on the cover of the book is a pic of Lib-kin Garden.

  34. I am appalled. The SMH has undertaken a review of the Australian economy by 20 experts and Bill Mitchell is not one of them
    Luke 4:24

  35. briefly @ #133 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 5:22 pm

    In Rexology there will never be any point to anything. There is only a dog chasing its tail. There are several chapters in the Rexology Handbook. They are all the same. They are titled Futility – How to get good at it.

    The image on the cover of the book is a pic of Lib-kin Garden.

    The point is.. that continuing to vote for the LN-L cartel arrangement is futile – like chasing ones tail – while the planet heats to a level of total destruction.

    I urge voters to change the trajectory at the next election to give ourselves a chance.. at least.

  38. The SMH has undertaken a review of the Australian economy by 20 experts and Bill Mitchell is not one of them

    It is a stupid omission – you are right.

    It’s akin to gathering 20 naturopaths to review the latest developments in cardiology.

    It would be very unwise to rely on the Sydney Morning Herald for insight into macroeconomic policy.

  39. Bloody hell, this is frightful – and adds weight to suggestions that the Department of Home Affairs is being corrupted into a visa-issuing protection racket for criminal spivs.

    Shooting wombats? FFS!

    “High-rolling tourists are being invited to hunt and kill wombats at a luxury hunting lodge on an 809-hectare (2000 acre) property backing on to Murrindindi Scenic Reserve, in the state’s north-east which is run by a Chinese businessman who is a Crown casino partner with alleged crime links.”

    https://www.change.org/p/daniel-andrews-stop-the-slaughter-of-wombats-in-victoria

  42. Nicholas @ #138 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 5:56 pm

    The SMH has undertaken a review of the Australian economy by 20 experts and Bill Mitchell is not one of them

    It is a stupid omission – you are right.

    It’s akin to gathering 20 naturopaths to review the latest developments in cardiology.

    No, it is more akin to asking 20 economists for an opinion on economic policy. You would get 20 different answers. And a different 20 if you asked the same question again the next day.

    At least Bill Mitchell would have the advantage that no-one will ever be able to prove him wrong, because his theories have no hope of ever being adopted.

  43. Gary Fallon @GaryFallon2
    ·
    44m
    #auspol The private healthcare sector is a major Liberal Party donor. They want the nursing union killed so that they can cease paying penalty rates so profits and donations are increased. Morrison will oblige them…..

  44. lefty e @ #139 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 6:04 pm

    Bloody hell, this is frightful – and adds weight to suggestions that the Department of Home Affairs is being corrupted into a visa-issuing protection racket for criminal spivs.

    Shooting wombats? FFS!

    “High-rolling tourists are being invited to hunt and kill wombats at a luxury hunting lodge on an 809-hectare (2000 acre) property backing on to Murrindindi Scenic Reserve, in the state’s north-east which is run by a Chinese businessman who is a Crown casino partner with alleged crime links.”

    https://www.change.org/p/daniel-andrews-stop-the-slaughter-of-wombats-in-victoria

    Yes, disgusting, isn’t it. Where is the “sport” in shooting an animal that can barely run faster than a mouse, and which freezes as soon as you shine a torch on it?

    They should hunt each other instead. And may the best man win.

  46. P1

    At least Bill Mitchell would have the advantage that no-one will ever be able to prove him wrong, because his theories have no hope of ever being adopted.

    Just as the theory of evolution doesn’t need to “be adopted” to be tested, Mitchell’s theories could also be tested. (I asked Nicholas of this some many many months back.) Putting them into practice is a whole ‘nother game though.

  49. They can come and shoot some of our wombats. They are wrecking fences, digging holes in the paddocks, killing tree plantings and causing serious riverbank erosion.

  50. P1

    Setting up meetings between climate scientists and enviro Ministers. Organising policy forums. Introducing climate friendly practices at our local Shire and hospitals. Writing policy for Vic Labor. Acting as a local liaison for a climate change study of our area, and suggesting areas for further investigation.

Comments Page 3 of 29
1 2 3 4 … 29

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *