Call of the board: Melbourne

More gory detail on the result of the May 18 federal election, this time focusing on Melbourne, where an anticipated election-winning swing to Labor crucially failed to materialise.

Time for part four in the series that reviews the result of the May 18 election seat by seat, one chunk at a time. As will be the routine in posts covering the capital cities, we start with a colour-coded map showing the two-party preferred swing at polling booth level, with each booth allocated a geographic catchment area by means explained in the first post in this series. Click for an enlarged image.

Now to compare actual election results to those predicted by a demographic linear regression model, to help identify where candidate or local factors might be needed to explain the result. I now offer a new-and-improved form of the model that includes interaction effects to account for the differences in demographic effects between the cities and the regions. The utility of the change, if any, will become more apparent when I apply it to regional seats, which confounded the original version of the model. The coefficients and what-have-you can be viewed here – the table below shows the modelled predictions and actual results for Labor two-party preferred, ranked in order of difference between the result and the prediction of the model.

The main eyebrow-raisers are that the model anticipates a stronger performance by Labor in nearly every Liberal-held seats, to the extent that blue-ribbon Higgins and Goldstein are both rated as naturally highly marginal. While this could prove a portent of things to come in these seats, it might equally reflect a model leaning too heavily on the “secular/no religion” variable to cancel out the association between income and Liberal support in the inner cities.

As in Sydney, the numbers provide strong indications of incumbency advantages, with both Labor and Liberal members tending to outperform the model and thus appear at opposite ends of the table. I suspect this reflects both the obvious explanation, namely personal votes for sitting members, and a lack of effort by the parties into each other’s safe seats. A tendency for parties to perform more modestly when a seat is being vacated is not so overwhelming as to prevent strong results relative to the model for Labor in Jagajaga and Liberal in Higgins.

With that out of the way:

Aston (Liberal 10.1%; 2.7% swing to Liberal): Aston attracted a lot of discussion after the 2004 election when the Liberals recorded a higher two-party vote than they did in their jewel-in-the-crown seat of Kooyong. Now, for the first time since then, it’s happened again, and by a fairly substantial margin (the Liberal-versus-Labor margin in Kooyong having been 6.7%). As illustrated in the above table, the swing places Alan Tudge’s margin well beyond what the seat’s demographic indicators would lead you to expect.

Bruce (Labor 14.2%; 0.1% swing to Labor): Located at the point of the outer suburbs where the Labor swing dries up, cancelling out any half-sophomore effect that may have been coming Julian Hill’s way after he came to the seat in 2016.

Calwell (Labor 18.8%; 0.9% swing to Liberal): Among the modest number of Melbourne seats to swing to the Liberals, reflecting its multiculturalism and location at the city’s edge. Maria Vamvakinou nonetheless retains the fifth biggest Labor margin in the country.

Chisholm (Liberal 0.6%; 2.3% swing to Labor): Labor’s failure to win Chisholm after it was vacated by Julia Banks was among their most disappointing results of the election, but the result was entirely within the normal range both for Melbourne’s middle suburbs and a seat of its particular demographic profile. The swing to Labor was concentrated at the northern end of the electorate, which may or may not have something to do with this being the slightly less Chinese end of the electorate.

Cooper (Labor 14.6% versus Greens; 13.4% swing to Labor): With David Feeney gone and Ged Kearney entrenched, the door seems to have slammed shut on the Greens in the seat formerly known as Batman. After recording high thirties primary votes at both the 2016 election and 2018 by-election, the Greens crashed to 21.1%, while Kearney was up from 43.1% at the by-election to 46.8%, despite the fact the Liberals were in the field this time and polling 19.5%. In Labor-versus-Liberal terms, a 4.2% swing to Labor boosted the margin to 25.9%, the highest in the country.

Deakin (Liberal 4.8%; 1.7% swing to Labor): While Melburnian backers of the coup against Malcolm Turnbull did not suffer the retribution anticipated after the state election, it may at least be noted that Michael Sukkar’s seat swung the other way from its demographically similar neighbour, Aston. That said, Sukkar’s 4.8% margin strongly outperforms the prediction of the demographic model, which picks the seat for marginal Labor.

Dunkley (LABOR NOTIONAL GAIN 2.7%; 1.7% swing to Labor): Together with Corangamite, Dunkley was one of only two Victorian seats gained by Labor on any reckoning, and even they can be excluded if post-redistribution margins are counted as the starting point. With quite a few other outer urban seats going the other way, and a part-sophomore effect to be anticipated after he succeeded Bruce Billson in 2016, it might be thought an under-achievement on Chris Crewther’s part that he failed to hold out the tide, notwithstanding the near universal expectation he would lose. However, his performance was well beyond that predicted by the demographic model, which estimates the Labor margin at 6.6%.

Fraser (Labor 14.2%; 6.1% swing to Liberal): Newly created seat in safe Labor territory in western Melbourne, it seemed Labor felt the loss here of its sitting members: Bill Shorten in Maribyrnong, which provided 34% of the voters; Maria Vamvakinou in Calwell, providing 29%; Tim Watts in Gellibrand, providing 20%; and Brendan O’Connor in Gorton, providing 16%. The newly elected member, Daniel Mulino, copped the biggest swing against Labor in Victoria, reducing the seat from first to eleventh on the national list of safest Labor seats.

Gellibrand (Labor 14.8%; 0.3% swing to Liberal): The city end of Gellibrand followed the inner urban pattern in swinging to Labor, but the suburbia at the Point Cook end of the electorate tended to lean the other way, producing a stable result for third-term Labor member Tim Watts.

Goldstein (Liberal 7.8%; 4.9% swing to Labor): Tim Wilson met the full force of the inner urban swing against the Liberals, more than accounting for any sophomore effect he might have enjoyed in the seat where he succeeded Andrew Robb in 2016. Nonetheless, he maintained a primary vote majority in a seat which, since its creation in 1984, has only failed to do when David Kemp muscled Ian Macphee aside in 1990.

Gorton (Labor 15.4%; 3.0% swing to Liberal): The swing against Brendan O’Connor was fairly typical of the outer suburbs. An independent, Jarrod Bingham, managed 8.8%, with 59.2% of his preferences going to Labor.

Higgins (Liberal 3.9%; 6.1% swing to Labor): One of many blue-ribbon seats that swung hard against the Liberals without putting them in serious danger. Nonetheless, it is notable that the 3.9% debut margin for Katie Allen, who succeeds Kelly O’Dwyer, is the lowest the Liberals have recorded since the seat’s creation in 1949, surpassing Peter Costello’s 7.0% with the defeat of the Howard government in 2007. Labor returned to second place after falling to third in 2016, their primary up from 14.9% to 25.4%, while the Greens were down from 25.3% to 22.5%. This reflected a pattern through much of inner Melbourne, excepting Melbourne and Kooyong.

Holt (Labor 8.7%; 1.2% swing to Liberal): The populous, northern end of Holt formed part of a band of south-eastern suburbia that defied the Melbourne trend in swinging to Liberal, causing a manageable cut to Anthony Byrne’s margin.

Hotham (Labor 5.9%; 1.7% swing to Labor): The swing to third-term Labor member Clare O’Neil was concentrated at the northern end of the electorate, with the lower-income Vietnamese area around Springvale in the south went the other way.

Isaacs (Labor 12.7%; 3.4% swing to Labor): What I have frequently referred to as an inner urban effect actually extended all along the bayside, contributing to a healthy swing to Mark Dreyfus. The Liberal primary vote was down 7.4%, partly reflecting more minor party competition than in 2016. This was an interesting case where the map shows a clear change in temperature coinciding with the boundaries, with swings to Labor in Isaacs promptly giving way to Liberal swings across much of Hotham, Bruce and Holt.

Jagajaga (Labor 6.6%; 1.0% swing to Labor): Jenny Macklin’s retirement didn’t have any discernible impact on the result in Jagajaga, which recorded a modest swing to her Labor successor, Kate Thwaites.

Kooyong (Liberal 5.7% versus Greens): Julian Burnside defied a general Melburnian trend in adding 2.6% to the Greens primary vote, and did so in the face of competition for the environmental vote from independent Oliver Yates, whose high profile campaign yielded only 9.0%. Labor was down 3.7% to 16.8%, adrift of Burnside’s 21.2%. But with Josh Frydenberg still commanding 49.4% of the primary vote even after an 8.3% swing, the result was never in doubt. The Liberal-versus-Labor two-party margin was 6.7%, a 6.2% swing to Labor.

Lalor (Labor 12.4%; 1.8% swing to Liberal): The area around Werribee marks a Liberal swing hot spot in Melbourne’s west, showing up as a slight swing in Lalor against Labor’s Joanne Ryan.

Macnamara (Labor 6.2%; 5.0% swing to Labor): Talked up before the event as a three-horse race, this proved an easy win for Labor, who outpolled the Greens 31.8% to 24.2%, compared with 27.0% to 23.8% last time, then landed 6.2% clear after preferences of the Liberals, who were off 4.6% to 37.4%. The retirement of Michael Danby presumably explains the relatively weak 5.0% primary vote swing to Labor in the seven booths around Caulfield and Elsternwick at the southern end of the electorate, the focal point of its Jewish community. The result for the remainder of the election day booths was 9.7%.

Maribyrnong (Labor 11.2%; 0.8% swing to Liberal): Nothing out of the ordinary happened in the seat of Bill Shorten, who probably owes most of his 5.0% primary vote swing to the fact that there were fewer candidates this time. Typifying the overall result, the Liberals gained swings around Keilor at the electorate’s outer reaches, while Labor was up closer to the city.

Melbourne (Greens 21.8% versus Liberal; 2.8% swing to Greens): The Greens primary vote in Melbourne increased for the seventh successive election, having gone from 6.1% in 1998 to 22.8% when Adam Bandt first ran unsuccessfully in 2007, and now up from 43.7% to 49.3%. I await to be corrected, but I believed this brought Bandt to within an ace of becoming the first Green ever to win a primary vote majority. For the second election in a row, Bandt’s dominance of the left-of-centre vote reduced Labor to third place. On the Labor-versus-Liberal count, Labor gained a negligible 0.1% swing, unusually for a central city seat.

Menzies (Liberal 7.2%; 0.3% swing to Labor): Very little to report from Kevin Andrews’ seat, where the main parties were up slightly on the primary vote against a smaller field, and next to no swing on two-party preferred, with slight Liberal swings around Templestowe in the west of the electorate giving way to slight Labor ones around Warrandyte in the east.

Scullin (Labor 21.7%; 2.1% swing to Labor): Third-term Labor member Andrew Giles managed a swing that was rather against the outer urban trend in his northern Melbourne seat.

Wills (Labor 8.2% versus Greens; 3.2% swing to Labor): The Greens likely missed their opportunity in Wills when Kelvin Thomson retired in 2016, when Labor’s margin was reduced to 4.9%. Peter Khalil having established himself as member, he picked up 6.2% on the primary vote this time while the Greens fell 4.3%. Khalil also picked up a 4.2% swing on the Labor-versus-Liberal count, strong even by inner urban standards, leaving him with the biggest margin on that measure after Ged Kearney in Cooper.

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.

1,431 comments on “Call of the board: Melbourne”

  1. Mundo
    Morrison is PM because the MSM campaigned to have the LNP and Morrison in charge of a government for the exclusive use of vested business interests.
    The Morrison has any number of crooks able to promote their own and others business interests.
    Morrison has no control over the Cabinet.
    Australian voters are not possessed of any deeper thought than their next poker machine jackpot and continued to be happy with the crooks extending the time frame of the next budget surplus and a thousand bucks in the pocket.
    Australia will continue to have third world LNP shonks while dumb-arse commentators are
    saying that Labor are bad, unions are bad and climate change doesn’t exist.
    It is possible to suggest that Labor campaigned extremely well considering the prevailing circumstances.
    The most telling story during the election, true or not, is the lady claiming to have voted LNP because she, not having any shares with franking credits to claim, and not knowing what franking credits are, didn’t want Labor to take them away.
    Three months since the election and all anyone knows is Morrison is riding his luck. It won’t last. Morrison has a history of being the first to jump ship.
    I believe a variety of vested interests are still fighting over over-allocated water allocations and public moneys associated with the the Murray Darling Basin, the river basin now consisting of dry river beds.
    The never ending property boom has ended, the credit cards are maxed, and the four wheel drives are littering the corners and sidewalks of Australian suburbs and towns.
    Morrison and his shonks will be exposed before Christmas.
    I’m still here and reality will land between the eyes of more than a few poker machine players of financial fortunes.

  2. lizzie
    Maremmas
    Having owned a few and used them to protect stock I swear by them.
    They are the smartest dog I have every dealt with. They are different to a normal dogs.
    The bitches are the best.

  3. The food name wars are kicking off with the EU.

    Isn’t this denying many of the Australian producers their cultural heritage?

    They emigrated from these regions and brought these foods with them.

    That is very different from someone with no cultural links deciding to manufacture a product and use the geographic name.

    Branding cheese as feta and gruyere may be banned in Australia under EU deal

    The trade minister, Simon Birmingham, has released a list of food products the EU wants protected as ‘geographical indicators’

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/aug/13/branding-cheese-as-feta-and-gruyere-may-be-banned-in-australia-under-eu-deal

  4. frednk

    The article compares the Maremma with the Anatolian, which seems to be more aggressive. OTOH I once tried to adopt a Maremma and had to give it back because it became aggressive to me, yet it went to another home and apparently was fine.

    It’s a puzzle.

  5. If we needed any proof …

    Joshua Badge
    @joshuabadge
    2m
    This month the @australian has published 13 negative articles about trans people—that’s an anti-trans article every day. This hostile campaign not only contributes to suicide and self harm rates among trans youth but also provides far-right groups an opportunity to mobilise

  6. mundo says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 9:17 am

    You make the mistake of supposing that the voters who choose the Liberals actually give a shit about these things. They don’t. If Labor campaigns on these themes they are effectively campaigning against themselves to the voters they need to win back.

    The economy is very sluggish. This is felt very acutely in some parts of the labour force. These parts swung to the Liberals. Household incomes and jobs shift votes. Other stuff…sometimes shifts some votes. Money talks loudest to people who really need it.

    The second constant in politics is that voters cannot stand it. They detest it. They hate campaigns. They resent the intrusions and the spin and the fighting. They are repelled by it. Oftentimes, the harder politicians try the worse it gets.

    The third constant in Australian politics is the default preference for Lib federal governments. Despite the colossal achievements of Labor when they have been in office, voters tend to prefer the Tories. This is an historical reality.

  7. There is a myth that Australian society is egalitarian. It’s not. This community is divided by age, geography, income, skin-colour, religion, language, education and wealth. Stratification, division and adherence to conservative authority are present just about everywhere. Donald Horne was correct about Australia.

  8. Alpha Zero says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 10:12 am

    That schools funding article is sickening!

    It shows where the wealth in society has gone…

    It certainly seems to highlight that “need” is not a prerequisite.

  9. briefly says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 10:16 am

    There is a myth that Australian society is egalitarian. It’s not. This community is divided by age, geography, income, skin-colour, religion, language, education and wealth. Stratification, division and adherence to conservative authority are present just about everywhere. Donald Horne was correct about Australia.

    That maybe true, but there were times when our Government was.

  10. A Chinese company’s plans to take over healthcare giant Healius is raising concerns in Canberra because the deal could compromise Australian Defence Force medical records, including those of elite special forces.

    The Morrison government has vowed that any move to acquire the $2 billion pathology and radiology company would trigger a Foreign Investment Review Board inquiry, where the national interest would come “first and foremost”.

    The ADF’s prized Garrison Health Services contract was last year won by British-based international healthcare group Bupa after previously being held by Medibank Private. As part of the new deal Healius was engaged as a sub-contractor to provide imaging services for the entire Australian Defence Force.

    The change meant Healius was handed years of historical data on military personnel including names, dates of birth, addresses, referral notes, pathology results, images and radiology reports.

    The Beijing-based Jangho Group, which already has a 15.9 per cent stake in Healius, launched a $2 billion takeover bid in January. Healius rejected the offer as too low but Jangho then issued a statement to the Hong Kong Stock exchange saying it “intends to acquire Healius in the future”.

    The sheer size of the transaction would automatically trigger the foreign investment review process but the links between Healius and the ADF have raised serious concerns in Canberra ahead of any new takeover offer.

    https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/chinese-firm-s-takeover-plan-raises-concern-in-canberra-over-access-to-adf-medical-records-20190812-p52gd5.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1565605164

  11. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/weekend-australian-magazine/elizabeth-blackburns-latest-quest-to-save-scientific-research/news-story/24836e0e4f001eda362cb2e52ad3b9f8

    It was a book gathering dust on a shelf in her home in Launceston, Tasmania, that caught her eye. Elizabeth Blackburn was young, barely a teenager, when she studied the cover and opened it up. It was the story of Marie Curie, the Polish-born physicist who discovered radium and won Nobel prizes in 1903 and 1911. “That book had such an impact on me,” she recalls about a tale laced with triumph and tragedy. Curie was a brilliant and trailblazing scientist who faced opposition from her male counterparts, was never rewarded financially for her work and died from leukaemia caused by her research. “She was so down to earth but she made science sound like such a noble quest,” says Blackburn. “And she was a woman.”

    She followed Sedat to Yale, where she made the first of three major discoveries that have reshaped the science of ageing. For her postdoctoral work she studied what is commonly known as “pond scum” – a single-cell organism called tetra­hymena. She describes the organism as if it were her pet, saying it is “almost adorable” with its “plump little body and hairlike projections that make it look like a fuzzy cartoon creature”.

    Blackburn says every young woman should have the chance to delve into pond scum like she did and try to unlock the secrets of science. “Not to boast, but if I had not gone into science maybe some things wouldn’t have happened. We haven’t figured it all out. We have only figured out enough to know how much we don’t know.”

    This is a wonderful article. I knew so little about the subject. I didn’t even know what is a Fitbit and initially I thought, as one would, that here was a diatribe concerning the urgers, pushers, skimmers, self rewarding narcissists and the like who gravitate to public life (pond scum).

    But no – well worth a read – the lady at the centre of the article was asked to serve –

    George W. Bush to serve on the President’s Council on Bioethics, whose role was “to monitor stem-cell research”

    Quite rightly G.W. and Co were not having any a that science and that stuff –

    Later she published her concerns, saying the reports wrongly implied that “designer babies” – the notion of selecting embryos for ­specific intelligence, or traits of temperament – would happen and was imminent. She also slammed the council for implying research into curing age-related disease would lead people to have “a lifelong obsession with immortality”.

    In February 2004, she received a call from “a polite person who said, ‘I am calling from the White House’. I presumed he was calling to renew [my position] but instead he said, ‘Thank you for your service’. He was discontinuing me.”

    Over and out from me as I wend my weary way to the roadside verge where bindii have attempted to take over my carefully cultivated weeds.

    One question remains – what was this article doing in “The Australian” ❓

    ☮ ☕

  12. So, if everyone drove fully autonomous automatic (electric) cars, none of them would run into each other. They’d all stop before impact. Simples

    Real men dont drive AVs. Real men drive big utes and need the feel of the wheel in their hands. I mean, how else is one meant to express ones manliness?

  13. The most telling story during the election, true or notis the lady claiming to have voted LNP because she, not having any shares with franking credits to claim, and not knowing what franking credits are, didn’t want Labor to take them away.

    Excellent analysis, you admit that the most telling story is probably a myth. I guess it keeps the delusion going a little longer

    An alternate analysis may be that Labor went to the election with a leader not trusted by the electorate and with policies grabbed from focus groups which had a superficial appeal until it became apparent that for every winner there was also a loser – usually the aspiring middle class

  14. The loser was not the aspiring middle class, but those who lie and call themselves the aspiring middle class and they managed to fool the aspiring middle class that they would be affected.

  15. Simon Katich @ #1113 Tuesday, August 13th, 2019 – 10:28 am

    So, if everyone drove fully autonomous automatic (electric) cars, none of them would run into each other. They’d all stop before impact. Simples

    Real men dont drive AVs. Real men drive big utes and need the feel of the wheel in their hands. I mean, how else is one meant to express ones manliness?

    Attempting to read this correctly I think your real men world view would result in many, many thousands of deaths on the road.

    Everybody knows that the Real Orstrayan Dude drives with the window down, (rain or shine) the right elbow out testing the breeze and now, expressing his manliness – nary a hand for the wheel. 🚘🖕😇

  16. Simon Katich says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 10:29 am

    I saw that weakling Tim Jarvis driving a Nissan Leaf. What a whimp.

    Agree, I chose the Yamaha Mio over the Honda Beat.

    The Beat is a real pussy at 100 cc, while the Mio is a much more manly 125. 😆

  17. lizzie

    They are not a house dog. Most of ours were used to protect stock. Some would let my wife in the paddocks and not me. So I know what it is like.

    I think they are an amazing dog; the increase in lambing percentage shows how well they work.

  18. Privatizing medibank private was such a good idea. The Liberals stuff up all they touch.

    lizzie says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 10:23 am

    A Chinese company’s plans to take over healthcare giant Healius is raising concerns in Canberra because the deal could compromise Australian Defence Force medical records, including those of elite special forces.

  19. frednk

    The first Maremma I met was a house and guard dog, who must have been differently socialised as she was tolerant of visitors during the day. She was friendly enough to be patted indoors when we visited. I’m glad you’ve found them successful. It would have been a marvellous solution when I still had free ranging chooks.

  20. Some examples:
    Limiting negative gearing but only on investment housing, the preferred investment of the AMC
    Limiting franking credits but effectively only on SMSFs in pension phase – the preferred retirement income for the AMC

  21. Oakeshott Country says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 10:30 am

    An alternate analysis may be that Labor went to the election with a leader not trusted by the electorate and with policies grabbed from focus groups which had a superficial appeal until it became apparent that for every winner there was also a loser – usually the aspiring middle class

    This is just wrong. The very thorough qualitative research shows the voters who swung from Labor to the Class Enemy and delivered the result for Morrison were overwhelmingly (75% of the time) motivated by jobs, household incomes and security of incomes. (These voters were not wealthy. They comprise parts of the labour force that is repressed.)

    Other factors were present, including leadership, leadership stability, taxes and tax cuts, health, education, climate change. But these were not decisive. They often tended to result in movement towards Labor.

    The single biggest issue among voters who decided the election – voters who swung to the Class Enemy – was and remains jobs and its corollary, the cost of living.

    The researchers who delivered this analysis tracked households in marginals for several months. They absolutely nailed the shift in votes and the respective PVs for the parties. Absolutely totally fucking nailed it.

    No-one paid any attention to them before the election. They are still being ignored.

  22. briefly
    says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 10:16 am
    There is a myth that Australian society is egalitarian. It’s not. This community is divided by age, geography, income, skin-colour, religion, language, education and wealth
    ___________________________
    How profound. Could you point to a society that has ever existed in which this has not been the case?

  23. Goll @ 9.59am and briefly @ 10.07am,
    Well said. But do you think mundo will listen? Nope. Nope. Nope. He thinks a Labor victory at the next election is as easy as Labor saying the right things. He still hasn’t reckoned with the Cone of Silence that the media has put over them. Maybe one day.

  24. “The most telling story during the election, true or notis the lady claiming to have voted LNP because she, not having any shares with franking credits to claim, and not knowing what franking credits are, didn’t want Labor to take them away.”

    Apocryphal or not, the well to do who benefit do have a way of making their problems seem like those of every day Australians battling with mortgages, raising kids and job insecurity. So that lady didn’t have shares and didn’t know what franking credits were but Labor’s plans sounded very bad.

    Likewise, novated leases supposedly benefit nurses and aged care workers. We are told most who benefit from negative gearing earn less than $80k (assuming that this was even true, no doubt after claiming negative gearing). And when all else fails, the economy is totally dependent on these rorts and will collapse (and you lose your job) if rich people suffer a dollar’s reduction in their after tax income.

  25. briefly,
    Oakeshott Country is just another alleged Labor person content to spread the Liberal myths about Bill Shorten’s popularity with the electorate, while denying the constant drip, drip, drip of bad press against him which soured the electorate towards him. Not to mention the fact that OC refuses to acknowledge the issues you state were central to vote deciding at the election. But then OC wants to see Labor in his home state of NSW destroyed by 2030. Doesn’t sound as if he much likes Victorian Labor either.

  26. Alpha Zero says:
    The loser was not the aspiring middle class, but those who lie and call themselves the aspiring middle class and they managed to fool the aspiring middle class that they would be affected.
    —————————–

    1) Regardless how the ALP tries to spin it, the franking credit policy cost them support among electorates with large retiree policies notably Roberston and Longman, not just the policy but the arrogant attitude that smacked of “I know best”

    2) ALP supporters keep sulking about so called lies but so what, the Liberals were always going to spin it, just as the ALP spin Liberal policies. It is called an election campaign

    The ALP needs to reassess what is wealthy or what is just being financially successful or prudent.

  27. briefly @ #1106 Tuesday, August 13th, 2019 – 10:07 am

    mundo says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 9:17 am

    You make the mistake of supposing that the voters who choose the Liberals actually give a shit about these things. They don’t. If Labor campaigns on these themes they are effectively campaigning against themselves to the voters they need to win back.

    The economy is very sluggish. This is felt very acutely in some parts of the labour force. These parts swung to the Liberals. Household incomes and jobs shift votes. Other stuff…sometimes shifts some votes. Money talks loudest to people who really need it.

    The second constant in politics is that voters cannot stand it. They detest it. They hate campaigns. They resent the intrusions and the spin and the fighting. They are repelled by it. Oftentimes, the harder politicians try the worse it gets.

    The third constant in Australian politics is the default preference for Lib federal governments. Despite the colossal achievements of Labor when they have been in office, voters tend to prefer the Tories. This is an historical reality.

    Re the last paragraph.
    Call me naive but I’m convinced a well designed education/ad campaign with the right tone highlighting these colossal achievements would win many voters over who either don’t know, have forgotten or never thought about it.
    The ‘historical reality’ is based on perception and ignorance. Tackle both in one go.
    I’m always talking to people who really have no idea who gave them what.
    Most people who have any idea about franking credits when asked which party introduced them will say the Liberal party. Tell them it was Labor and stand back.
    Exploding heads can be messy.

  28. It’s been said before. We will all swelter in Lib-kin Garden. As long as dysfunction persists on the centre-left, the Lib-Libs will win. Labor will be kept from office by the Greens for all time.

  29. Everybody knows that the Real Orstrayan Dude drives with the window down, (rain or shine) the right elbow out testing the breeze and now, expressing his manliness – nary a hand for the wheel.

    Left hand KJ? Where is the left hand?

    Eating a Steak Steve?

  30. Holden Hillbilly @ #1083 Tuesday, August 13th, 2019 – 9:08 am

    This morning scores of military vehicles began rolling toward Hong Kong from Shenzen City.

    The inevitable outcome.

    officials in Beijing responded to the weekend’s violent clashes by saying they saw signs of terrorism emerging in the protests.

    They’ve learned that you can get away with pretty much anything if you say you’re doing it to “fight terrorism”.

    gasoline bombs

    Molotov cocktails are incendiary devices, not “bombs”. Not that gasoline bombs don’t exist. They do. Though you won’t catch any ragtag band of street-protesting rabble using one. They’re reserved for the true pros.

    Mr Yang said such violence must be severely punished, “without leniency, without mercy.”

    Yep. Pretty much anything. Because “terrorism”.

  31. Briefly “The Labor campaign was also just about the worst in memory.”

    And there you have it.

    The Coalition compaigned in exactly the way expected, including the lies and smears. So did the Murdochracy. Clive Palmer was a bit of a surprise but that wasn’t a decisive factor. The rest of the media behaved as expected. All predictable, right up to the resurfacing of ancient allegations, all needing a counter-plan. I was hoping / expecting Labor and Bill Shorten to pull a rabbit out of the hat but as the campaugn ground on and reached its conclusion – no rabbits.

  32. C@tmomma
    says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 11:03 am
    briefly,
    Oakeshott Country is just another alleged Labor person content to spread the Liberal myths
    _______________________________
    Careful OC. Commissar C@t might have you taken out the back and shot.

  33. Steve777 says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 11:14 am

    I was hoping / expecting Labor and Bill Shorten to pull a rabbit out of the hat but as the campaugn ground on and reached its conclusion – no rabbits.

    Neither hat nor rabbit. But lots of hares.

  34. Steve777
    I think its simplistic to blame the media. The all powerful Daily Telegraph went into bat for its dear beloved Tony Abbott for a return of only four booths in a traditionally safe seat.

    I am sure some people are influenced by the media but it is possibly more a case of confirmation bias then anything and there are elections where the media plays a part aka 2013.

  35. Mexicanbeemer @ #1142 Tuesday, August 13th, 2019 – 11:18 am

    Steve777
    I think its simplistic to blame the media. This same all powerful Daily Telegraph went into bat for its dear beloved Tony Abbott for a return of only four booths in a traditionally safe seat.

    I am sure some people are influenced by the media but it is possible more a case of confirmation bias then anything and there are elections where the media plays a part aka 2013.

    I think it’s lazy to blame the media, lets the ALP brainiac central operatives off the hook.

  36. Mexican B “Steve777
    I think its simplistic to blame the media. The all powerful Daily Telegraph went into bat for its dear beloved Tony Abbott for a return of only four booths in a traditionally safe seat.

    I am sure some people are influenced by the media but it is possibly more a case of confirmation bias then anything and there are elections where the media plays a part aka 2013.”

    Hello MB. My point wasn’t to blame the media so much as to say that what happened during the campaign was for the most part predictable, including the lies and the media bias. Labor needed a counter plan but didn’t have one.

    Regarding media bias, in total it doesn’t change many minds but it doesn’t have to – just a percentage point or so at the margins. In fact, I suspect that the Telegraph and Australian don’t so much convert Labor or Green voters as keep the less committed Coalition voters in the fold – the ones Labor needs to cross over.

    But again, it was all predictsble.

  37. mundo says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 11:16 am
    briefly @ #1133 Tuesday, August 13th, 2019 – 11:07 am

    mundo…you are naive.

    I was waiting but I didn’t think it would be you Briefo
    Maybe so, I still reckon it’d work. Wouldn’t do any harm.

    The Lib-Libs have spent the last 40 or more years telling the electorate they are strong on jobs. This is false. But they keep humming that tune. In a repressed labour market, this is strong marketing. People must work. They absolutely must have work. It is an essential. Without work, one is utterly rooted in this country. Voters really do not like the Lib-Libs. But they vote for them on the strength of the jobs claims.

    Labor will have to spend the next few decades hammering the Lib-Libs on jobs, incomes, the economy. The Reactionaries have won most of the elections since WW1. They will keep on winning. They’re very good at it. The proposition that Labor is only ever inches from power is mistaken. Labor have won from Opposition just 4 times in the last century. We are weaker now in terms of PV than at any time since before WW1. Labor has come to power from Opposition and governed strongly for more than one term just once in since WW1 – when Hawke came to power in 1983.

    We are in a chronically weak position. We act as if the distance between us and victory is only ever a strong tackle on the half-back line and a rebound goal. This is just wrong. We have to face this if we are going to win again. We have to unite all those voters who want change. This is an enormous task…and as long as the Greens want to obstruct Labor, probably also an impossible one.

  38. I am sticking with China showing further restraint.

    Noticeable movements of military these days are often PR. As are angry, threatening statements by military leaders.

    I remember seeing endless lines of military heading to Tashkurgan after 9/11. It wasnt because they were going to advance into disputed areas there. Or to ward off the Taliban. Or to strengthen the border in case the US invaded Afghanistan. It was purely a domestic statement of who is in control – a warning to the Uighur and a relief to the Han (and others) who had moved to the region.

    China is expanding its influence across the globe with oodles of soft power. A brutal crackdown in HK jeopardises that. So, a rational PRC will prefer to crackdown in HK in more subtle ways.

  39. briefly @ #1146 Tuesday, August 13th, 2019 – 11:30 am

    mundo says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 11:16 am
    briefly @ #1133 Tuesday, August 13th, 2019 – 11:07 am

    mundo…you are naive.

    I was waiting but I didn’t think it would be you Briefo
    Maybe so, I still reckon it’d work. Wouldn’t do any harm.

    The Lib-Libs have spent the last 40 or more years telling the electorate they are strong on jobs. This is false. But they keep humming that tune. In a repressed labour market, this is strong marketing. People must work. They absolutely must have work. It is an essential. Without work, one is utterly rooted in this country. Voters really do not like the Lib-Libs. But they vote for them on the strength of the jobs claims.

    Labor will have to spend the next few decades hammering the Lib-Libs on jobs, incomes, the economy. The Reactionaries have won most of the elections since WW1. They will keep on winning. They’re very good at it. The proposition that Labor is only ever inches from power is mistaken. Labor have won from Opposition just 4 times in the last century. We are weaker now in terms of PV than at any time since before WW1. Labor has come to power from Opposition and governed strongly for more than one term just once in since WW1 – when Hawke came to power in 1983.

    We are in a chronically weak position. We act as if the distance between us and victory is only ever a strong tackle on the half-back line and a rebound goal. This is just wrong. We have to face this if we are going to win again. We have to unite all those voters who want change. This is an enormous task…and as long as the Greens want to obstruct Labor, probably also an impossible one.

    ‘Labor has come to power from Opposition and governed strongly for more than one term just once in since WW1 – when Hawke came to power in 1983.’
    What was different about thus period?

  40. Oakeshott Country says:
    Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 10:59 am

    What has the privatisation of Medibank got to do with Healius (formerly Primary Health)?

    Medibank private lost the defense tender and now it is with Healius.

    If medibank is privatized why would you not go out to tender; using an entity you have control over has gone. The Liberals stuff up everything

Leave a Reply

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