Click here for full federal election results updated live.
Saturday, May 28
As I should have noted yesterday, the AEC has published all-important three-candidate preferred counts for Brisbane and Macnamara, where the results hinge on who will finish second and third out of the Labor and the Greens. With “88% of the total expected ballot papers” accounted for in Brisbane, the Greens lead Labor by 29.55% to 28.56% (with the LNP on 41.89%), which is sufficient for the ABC to have called the result.
Macnamara on the other hand is exquisitely close three ways, with the Liberal candidate on 33.56%, Labor member Josh Burns on 33.50% and Greens candidate Steph Hodgins-May on 32.93%. This suggests 46.9% of minor candidate preferences are going to Liberal, 35.9% are going to the Greens and only 17.2% are going to Labor. For the Greens to win, two things need to happen after the remaining 6500 or so outstanding votes are counted: they need to close their 495 vote deficit against Labor, and the Liberals need to not fall to third.
The first of these seems entirely possible. If the outstanding batches behave like those already counted, they should make up around 200 out of 3300 pre-polls and 100 out of 1100 declaration pre-polls. If the 300 or so provisionals behave like they did in 2019, they should make up a further 40 or so. Then there’s the COVID votes, of which there are about 1000, and which are apparently also expected to favour the Greens. Postals are diminishing in number, but each batch continues to be better for the Greens than the last, to the extent that today’s was the first on which they gained on Labor.
As for the Liberals, the 3CP count has them 545 ahead of the Greens and 50 ahead of Labor. There seems no particular reason to think they will either gain or lose in large degree relative to Labor out of any of the remaining vote types, so everything that was just said about the Greens relative to Labor applies to the Greens relative to Liberal as well. The question is whether the chips just happen to fall in such a way that Labor gains 50 votes or so at their expense. I am flying blind here with respect to the COVID votes, and also with how many postals can be expected – postals can arrive until Friday, and I can’t really tell you how many tend to trickle in in the second week.
All of this amounts to bad news for Labor in its quest for 76 seats, with Brisbane now out of the picture and the odds most likely leaning against them in Macnamara, which I for one thought they had in the bag earlier in the week, and which my results system is continuing to call as Labor retain due to its inability to think in three-party terms. The likely retention of Lyons only gets them to 75: they now need a late break in their favour in Gilmore or, less likely, Deakin. A great deal hinges on the absents, declaration pre-polls and COVID votes in these seats, on which we remain none the wiser, with no progress in either count today.
Friday, May 27
My results system is now registering Ryan as a Greens gain from the LNP, as the fresh two-candidate count finally advances enough to tip the probability dial over 99%. Similarly, Wannon has been restored to the Liberals after further booths were added in the Liberal-versus-independent count that was begun yesterday, and Nicholls is now being called for the Nationals as Rob Priestly’s independent bid falls short.
Labor aren’t dead yet in Deakin, where rechecking today gained them 138 on postals and 37 on ordinary votes, while costing the Liberals 169 and 30. However, there was little in it in today’s batches of absents, which broke 236-232 to Labor, and declaration pre-polls, which broke 463-462 to Liberal. Labor will perhaps need about 55% of what’s outstanding to reel in a Liberal lead that today shrank from 1032 to 655.
The contention related yesterday by Antony Green that late counting would favour the Greens in Macnamara was borne out in that the latest batch of 1951 postals were much stronger for them than earlier batches and they also performed well on the first 965 declaration pre-polls, particularly relative to Labor. Their situation will apparently continue to improve from here, but the secret of the final result remains hidden in the preference flows, on which I can offer no hard information.
It seems rechecking of ordinary and postal votes turned up 157 extra ordinary votes for the Liberals in Lyons, but little else. The first absents from the seat broke 696-621 to Labor. That leaves Labor’s lead at 678, down from 784 yesterday. For the second day in a row, the only progress in Gilmore was rechecking, which cost the Liberals 41 votes and Labor five. Counting will continue over the weekend.
Thursday, May 26
The ABC is calling Lyons for Labor after the correction of errors gave Labor a 582-vote fillip on ordinary votes. My system isn’t quite there yet though, in part because each batch of postals so far has been better for the Liberals than the last, the latest breaking 1508 (56.1%) to 1178 (43.9%). However, it may also be because the ABC has formed a more considered view than I have as to how many outstanding votes remain.
I have been assuming for some time that Labor will win Macnamara, which together with Lyons would put Labor over the line to 76 seats and a majority. However, Antony Green has dropped by in comments with an account of his own decision to hold off on such a call, informed by Labor member Josh Burns’ own lack of confidence. Specifically, both Labor and the Greens believe the Greens will enjoy a surge when absents and “an estimated 1000 COVID votes” are added to the count. On top of anything else, this is the first intelligence I have received as to how many COVID votes might be expected, here or anywhere else.
The very first absent and declaration pre-polls were added to the count today, mostly in Deakin, which respectively got 455 and 449 (there were also 787 absent votes added in Lingiari). The absents in Deakin broke 251-204 to Labor, but the pre-polls went 249-200 against. However, there was a turn in Labor’s favour on postals, which broke only 1493 (51.1%) to 1427 (48.9%) in the Liberals’ favour, compared with 58.8% to 41.2% on the previous batches. With the Liberal lead at 1032, Labor will need everything to go right on the remaining postals (perhaps about 3000), outstanding absents and declaration pre-polls (seemingly around 3500 apiece), COVID votes (around 1000, I guess) and provisional votes (a couple of hundred).
I’m not sure of the details, but rechecking of ordinary votes in Gilmore today was to the advantage of Andrew Constance, who gained 25 while Labor lost 149. No new postal votes were added to the count. Another 4095 postals in Brisbane didn’t fundamentally change the situation described here yesterday, with Labor continuing to hold a 0.7% lead over the Greens on the primary vote that I don’t think will be quite enough for them when preferences are distributed. Liberal member Celia Hammond conceded defeat to independent Kate Chaney in Curtin, perhaps because the latest batch of postals sharplhy reversed earlier form in breaking 1955 (52.3%) to 1780 (47.7%) to Chaney.
My system has withdrawn Wannon as a confirmed Liberal retain, not because such a result has become objectively less likely, but because the AEC has concluded Labor will run third and begun a fresh two-candidate count between Liberal member Daniel Tehan and independent Alex Dyson. This has so far accounted for only about 10% of the vote, and is presently giving Tehan a fairly modest lead of 52.2-47.8. Based on the relationship at polling booth level between the Liberal primary vote and the share of preferences, I am expecting this to inflate quite substantially and do not believe Tehan is in trouble.
Wednesday, May 25
My results system today called Dickson for the Coalition, bringing them to 51 seats, to which I think it more than likely that Casey, Menzies, Cowper, Nicholls and Moore will shortly be added. Labor remains on 74, and I don’t think there is any real doubt they will further gain Bennelong. Batches of postal votes are being added to the count in diminish number, but we still haven’t seen any absents or declaration pre-polls, which we can at least make broad guesses about based on past performance, or the COVID-19 electronic assisted voting results, which are anyone’s guess.
Here’s the latest from the seats that may add further to the Labor count, any one of which will get them to a majority:
Brisbane. The result remains at the mercy of unavailable information on how minor candidate preferences are flowing between the Greens, Labor and the LNP. A source familiar with the matter has passed on an informal tally based on observation of pre-poll and postal vote counting that suggests around 50% of preferences are flowing to the LNP, 32% to the Greens and 17% to Labor. If this is accurate, Labor will need a primary vote lead of about 1% when all the votes are in to remain ahead of the Greens during the preference distribution. Currently the gap is 0.7%, having increased today from 34 votes to 528 following a batch of postal votes that was actually weaker for Labor than the previous. However, that’s likely to be sent down rather than up by absent votes, on which Greens do well. So it would appear the Greens remain favourites.
Gilmore. Labor had a better batch of postals today, which only favoured the Liberals by 754 (51.3%) to 715 (48.7%) compared with 5895 (54.5%) to 4913 (45.5%) from the previous batches. With further unfavourable adjustments from ordinary vote rechecking, that increased Andrew Constance’s lead only from 104 to 112, with postals now set to slow to a trickle. This isn’t quite the lead Andrew Constance would have wanted ahead of what’s likely to be a Labor gain when absents are added.
Lyons. There seems to be an improving trend here for the Liberals on postals, the latest batch of which broke 1103 (55.6%) to 882 (44.4%) their way compared with 2966 (50.9%) to 2857 (49.1%) against them previously. If the remaining postals break the same as this latest batch, there’s going to be next to nothing in it.
Further:
Curtin. Liberal member Celia Hammond has brought Kate Chaney’s lead on the raw count inside 1%, but today’s postals were actually a bit weaker for her than previous batches, favouring her by 1075 (55.3%) to 868 (44.7%) compared with 6729 (59.4%) to 4605 (40.6%) previously. They were also notable fewer than number, and have still left her 1640 behind. As noted here yesterday, the 2019 result suggests absents are unlikely to favour her. The dynamic may be a little different this time given the redistribution has pushed the boundary substantially northwards, and many absent votes are cast just outside an electorate’s boundaries, though I can’t specifically think why this would make them a whole lot more favourable to the Liberals.
Yes – thanks for your great analysis Trent and your explanation Antony.
I really appreciate Antony Green’s contribution. I do not envy his task of translating complex information into “news” and his earlier post provides a great insight. Thank you sir.
Poll Bludger is at its best when it deals with actual psephological matters!! (As opposed to the usual, interminable, political bickering and sniping). For me, as a keenly interested amateur watching the progress of late counting in close seats, the couple of weeks after an election are fascinating.
Kudos also to the AEC for providing extensive access to its counting data to the general public. Given the complexity and nuances of the counting process in a preferential system with multiple candidates, this access to data really allows those of who interested in the late count to keep track of going on.
The fabled loss by the Liberals of the 2nd ACT Senate seat, much predicted and much failed, could be about to happen…
The Canberra Liberals have all but conceded Zed Seselja will lose his Senate seat in what is being described as a “bitter blow” for the local branch on top of the Coalition’s federal election drubbing.
In a leaked email to branch members, president John Cziesla also claimed the “left” had spent more than $12 million in an “unprecedented” decade-long campaign to win the Liberals’ seat, and accused the media of not scrutinising Senator Seselja’s opponents during the campaign.
With almost 80 per cent of the vote counted, Senator Seselja is still yet to concede defeat despite election analysts predicting independent David Pocock will clinch the ACT’s second seat on the back of preferences from the Greens and Kim Rubenstein.
But the branch is coming to the realisation that its near 50-year hold on one of the ACT’s two Senate seats is slipping away.
“While counting of the ACT Senate vote continues at something of a glacial pace, it is clear that Zed’s path to retaining the Senate seat is very narrow and Pocock remains the front runner to gain the seat on preferences,” Mr Cziesla said in an email to members seen by The Canberra Times.
https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7754916/a-bitter-blow-liberals-losing-hope-as-seselja-senate-defeat-looms/?cs=14329
Antony, thanks for your detailed explanation including your interactions with the candidate.
I suspect the caution on behalf of the candidate may not necessarily be overly rooted in rationality.
Obviously the flipside is not correctly calling a majority government in a timely manner, notwithstanding Payne’s Law.
Hopefully this thing is done today
Thank you William for splitting the threads. Very helpful.
Trent, that is very interesting about the boundary determinations.
It sounds like that, had the AEC gone with that redistribution, we would have quite possibly had an extra blue and green candidate rather than 2 red ones (and in turn, quite possibly, the difference between majority government or not!)
Obviously you cannot say that outright as:
1. All the subsequent strategic decisions of all players would have been made in the knowledge of this change
2. Labor does appear to have a decent buffer at least in Macnamara in a run off with the Greens (as presumably such and change would have resulted in a red v green run off).
Point 2 goes to a potential idiosyncratic outcome of the AV voting methods in three cornered races. Labor could end up winning the primary vote and defeat either of the other two potential candidates in a run off but still lose the seat. (I.e. win under FPTP or Condorcet but not AV)
Revisionist, great point with #2 and the impact of the reduced Liberal vote slipped my mind in my half-asleep state last night.
You’re absolutely right and an ALP win in Macnamara on those boundaries would be far more likely than Greens because the Liberals would certainly have finished third considering how much better they did around Caulfield than in Prahran, Windsor and South Yarra, surely making it a GRN v ALP count.
So ironically for the Greens, due to the tanking Liberal vote the current boundaries have actually made this closer for them than the more Green-friendly proposed boundaries would have!
It will be interesting to see what boundaries the Greens propose at the next redistribution.
In 2010 we had a hung parliament.
In 2016 Coalition won with 76 seats in house.
In 2019 Coalition won with 77 seats in house.
In 2022 ALB likely to get + / – 76 seats.
What are the forces that have made such small majorities more likely in recent times (is it because of close 2PP or are external factors causing the 2PP to be close?) and do people think these trends will continue???
I wouldn’t think any boundary twiddle clearly intended to up the Greens’ chances in either Higgins or Macnamara would go over well with the AEC. In any event I don’t think either Higgins or Macnamara looked likely to be over or under quota for the next redistribution after the changed made this time?
Don’t know where to track postal batches but it certainly seems like the last batch in Brisbane actually reduced the lead Labor has over the Greens.
I would have thought the odds of Labor winning that are quite small now given that we have pretty solid information on how the preferences are going to flow.
“Arkysays:
Friday, May 27, 2022 at 11:05 am
I wouldn’t think any boundary twiddle clearly intended to up the Greens’ chances in either Higgins or Macnamara would go over well with the AEC. In any event I don’t think either Higgins or Macnamara looked likely to be over or under quota for the next redistribution after the changed made this time?”
Yeah you need to make a case based on the set of principles the AEC use to determine boundaries (which presumably Labor did last time). Presumably the case with the switching of Prahran and Caulfield would be based on the resulting electorates being more culturally coherent
Certainly though I had never thought before about how particularly crucial boundaries can be in 3 cornered situations. Interesting stuff.
While the covid vote is unknown, it might be interesting to look at last year’s NSW local gov i-vote trends for inspiration.
A number of punters said they chose it to avoid possible covid contact with the rest of humanity.
Antony Green’s caution in calling the ‘winning seat’ reflects US broadcasters’ caution in calling a state that would give enough college votes to secure the presidency.
Looks like firth batch of declaration pre polls going 55-45 to sukkar in Deakin.
Labor needs to make up 1000 votes with 3,500 absentees left….almost 65-35 or perhaps a little less if there are very favourable covid votes.
Deakin is goneski. I reckon it is about as likely as the Greens winning Macnamara.
I reckon we are left with:
– Gilmore going down to the wire (perhaps marginally Labor)
– Brisbane likely Greens ….but Labor with an outside plausible chance
Just been thinking about the Brisbane minor party preference flows reported by AG – ‘35.1% to Greens, 15.6% to Labor and 49.3% LNP’. Is it just me or is the Green figure somewhat implausible? I get that all/nearly all AJP preferences would flow to the Greens, but that’s only @25% of the minor party vote. I can’t see many/any of LDP, UAP or PHON voters preferencing the Greens ahead of Labor. Then again, what would I know?
@ Nearly there
Apparently there’s a decent cohort of right wing rabble party voters that preference the Greens ahead of the Libs (and Labor).
I think the Greens “same-same” schtick probably dove tails well with the anti-establishment sentiment of some of those voters. Also, the Greens have the donkey vote there (which might explain the superior flow of preferences compared to macnamara)
Thanks Revisionist!
Nearly there @ #114 Friday, May 27th, 2022 – 12:16 pm
There was a suggestion that perhaps the Greens are picking up protest votes against the majors. But I suspect like you, it’s hard for me to put myself into an LDP or UAP or PHON mindset.
There was quite a coordinated “put the majors last” campaign among various “freedom”, anti vaccination and other conspiracy movements. This may explain the suggested Greens friendly preference flow. Not that I am giving Brisbane away just yet.
Yep as @Matt31 said, the ‘put the majors last’ campaign coupled with what was probably a protest vote against the Qld Labor state govt’s vaccine mandates. My gut tells me Labor would have been put dead last on quite a few of these people’s tickets
@Matt31 & brucemainstream: I agree, especially in Victoria where the “freedom parties” are entirely based on frustration with lockdowns & vaccine mandates, those people entirely associate that with Labor and I assume the vast majority will have put Labor dead last as a result.
On another note, which is late postals and the impact Covid may have had on them, I have been predicting that the last batches of postals will likely break more similarly to the ordinary vote than they will to the postal vote. The main reason being that late postals are likely to be people who planned to vote on the day but tested positive on the Sat-Tue prior to the election.
This does appear to be playing out. We’ve seen in Deakin that the later postals are breaking far more favourable to Labor than the early ones (I think the LIB 2PP on them is now about 51% compared to 58% in earlier batches).
Another batch of postals in Macnamara just got counted too and the same phenomenon is occuring. Just as a reminder, the early postals in Macnamara were breaking roughly:
– 40% Liberal
– 34% Labor
– 15% Greens
The last batch was:
– 31.2% Liberal
– 29.8% Labor
– 27.2% Greens
That’s a big correction back towards the ordinary votes now so I think it’s definitely the Covid factor, and I see no reason that the remaining postal votes in those seats won’t continue to break like the last batch, or move even further towards the ordinary vote.
One key element of the three-way contests in Brisbane and Macnamara is that the preferences of ONP, UAP & LDP will probably favour the Liberals ahead of anyone else, and so long as the Libs remain in the top two, those votes will provide an inadvertent benefit for whichever party is coming second (as they will in effect become wasted votes). The main problem we have in projecting a winner in either seat is that we can’t properly distribute preferences until every single last vote is in at the end of next week.
@ Revisionist
Yes, the first batch of postals counted today did actually have more primary votes for Greens than Labor (about 40 I think but don’t quote me on that), which was quite surprising! There will be another batch counted soon so we’ll see if that is a new trend or an outlier.
A check count (or fresh count – people use different terms) of all the Election Day polling booths is also happening today, which usually leads to small adjustments either way as counting mistakes or informal ballots are discovered, so that can lead to totals shifting slightly. (And occasionally a major error like a whole bundle of votes being put in the wrong pile – hopefully that won’t happen, but very occasionally it does).
@Nearly there
Those preference figures are based on actual counting done by AEC staff, so they are accurate. UAP, PHON & (to a lesser extent) LDP all have more preferences going to Greens than Labor (although more than half go to the Libs, which means they don’t impact the Greens vs ALP contest.)
@David Brown: “Antony Green’s caution in calling the ‘winning seat’ reflects US broadcasters’ caution in calling a state that would give enough college votes to secure the presidency.”
Which of course created a ridiculous situation in 2020 because Fox News’ early Arizona call (which did turn out to be correct, mind you) put networks in a position of NOT calling objectively clearer wins for Biden later that would have put Biden over the top for the Presidency, because they weren’t sure about the already-called Arizona.
America would be so much better off for having a trusted Antony Green like figure. So much drama in the 2020 Biden v Trump count because people there didn’t understand the different timings of when postals and pre-poll would be counted and don’t understand things like small red rural booths coming in earlier than big progressive city booths. Thus the early strongly red vote in Pennsylvania being overwhelmed by an inexorable tide of blue booths and blue postal votes looked “fishy” to some instead of the inevitable outcome of the way the vote was counted.
It really does take a while to count absents, provision and declaration votes. I know they’ll be counted soon, but the wait does feel interminable at times.
Surely the ACT Libs should be exploring why they scored 29, 21 and 27% FP in the 3 house seats there? Pretty hard to see 25% of the vote translating into a 34% quota, you need a lot of things to go right.
and a likable candidate.
I appreciate a Greens win by a large margin is a certainty in Melbourne, but am wondering why the count is going so slowly there. Just for my own curiousity but seems strange. Are there limited resources to count postals and declaration votes in both Macnamara and Melbourne?
Arky @ #124 Friday, May 27th, 2022 – 1:01 pm
Speaking of Murdoch and early calls, the DT called a Labor majority of 77 on Sunday, May 22.
Lead for Michael Sukkar in Deakin apparently cut to around 720 after a poor batch of late postals.
While he will survive, if he didn’t it would be a pretty big loss for the Liberal front bench.
Deakin now just “Lib ahead”….not “Lib Likely”
Wow, actually makes Deakin still possible
I wouldn’t have said there’s enough absents (particularly after what’s already counted) to erase even that reduced margin for Sukkar, but the COVID phone votes are the great unknown.
@a r: “Speaking of Murdoch and early calls, the DT called a Labor majority of 77 on Sunday, May 22.”
Dollars to donuts the DT writer was yet another of the numpties who misinterpreted the AEC site as calling seats for Labor rather than saying who was in front on the count at a point in time.
Deakin absents, 500 of 3,529 counted so far..
Lib – 44.84
Lab – 55.16
+47 on the first batch of 500
The Sukkar lead of 719 should be enough, but with late postals more even due to Covid isolating voters, this could be closer
There also appears to be roughly another 2800 postal envelopes issued but not received in Deakin.
I believe a lot of them only appeared in the last 2 days as well; ie. The “issued” number itself grew by about 3000 a couple of days ago.
The same situation occurred in Macnamara too where approximately 4500 extra postal envelopes were added under “Issued” in the last couple of days; most of which have not yet been received either. It was around 19,000 issued and 18,000 received on Wednesday, now it’s 24,000+ issued and 20,000+ received.
I’m curious about these ones. How many will be received? Will they be mostly related to Covid? If so, will they continue to break the way of the more recent batches – that is closer to the ‘ordinary’ vote – or perhaps even more like the ordinary vote than the recent batches? Or perhaps totally different altogether?
There are a few wildcards still. I think the Covid factor has made it more difficult to model projections based on previous elections’ post-counts. Not just the telephone Covid votes, but the very sharp change in how late postals are breaking too.
AEC said there was about 75,000 Covid isolating phone voters – roughly 500 in each of 151 electorates – straight average.
It would be a first if this cohort tipped one of the close seats like Deakin and Gilmore..
657 now in Deakin…coming in fast
Now down to 650 in Deakin #daretodream
Seems to be coming from the late postals rather than the absents / declaration prepolls.
Also… distribution of COVID votes amongst electorates I imagine would be highly uneven.
ALP lead over the Greens in Brissie out to 701
Edit and Gilmore down to 253 vote margin……come in spinner
I reckon you can almost put a fork in Brisbane, BeaglieBoy
The problem is we have apparently accurate “AEC 3cp throw” data that implies the Greens will get 35.1 %to 15.6 %(or near enough) preferences from minors. Even if that comes in to an 18% advantage that would give them perhaps 1,200 votes.
Recent Postals having been giving Labor little and the Greens will make up ground on absents.
Hello there to one and all…….
long time admirer of William’s website AND all round political junkie here……………the 2022 election results pages are awesome Kevin and they leave the ABC’s election stats totally wanting and a benchmark if (our very important) national broadcaster wants to up their game for Vic2022 and beyond……
To The Revisionist……….yes certainly Deakin is still in play and the COVID19 phone votes leave a result hanging in to next week
To AR……thanks for the shot of the DT front page with the appalling example of lazy journalism of their 22 May front page declaring an ALP majority on at least 77. The biggest civic event for our country in the 2022 year and they still can’t get the facts right ??? WT* Is the writer of that front page still on their payroll ??!?!
To Buglar……..I have it on good authority that Macnamara, Cooper and Melbourne districts all belong to the one central vote counting pod/area at the central counting centre and that staff are focusing on what is not known………..a result in Macnamara……..and possibly a result that the country may be waiting on in the coming days to see if ALP get to 76 or 77
A comment from a ‘friend’ who worked on the phones on 21/05 to take the COVID votes…….”the voters that rang to have their vote counted where quite switched on people who very much new their rights and wanted their vote to count” From this I think we can safely say that in seats such as Brisbane and Macnamara and Gilmore and Wannon that if the seat is a strong performing GREENS seat then the COVID19 voting will be very good for the GREENS. However, it is brand new territory so like all of you i’m keen to see if there are trends and patterns.
Btw – I believe Wannon should be back in the ‘in doubt’ column. The gap bw The LP vs Ind is now around the 700 level and a hell of a lot of vote counting still remaining.
Finally, I feel that the GREENS are still in the race for Macnamara albeit they are going to need every bit of good fortune during the remaining counting levels. If they do win the seat I think I would be right in saying that the voters in Windsor, St Kilda Rd/Queens Rd area, St Kilda and Prahran would have to win the prize for giving us all three of the best vote counts in Victoria in the last ten years.
Hibbins win in 2014 and 2018 at state level and their possible win in 2022 at fed level.
Keep up the quality commentary guys………and thanks again William for the next level stats.
Greens could win Brisbane because of Free-dumb. Oh well good luck to them and a win is a win – especially when it’s Tory seat.
See how absents etc break. If Albo has a good term maybe next time.
Cheers Bruce.
@ Nexus 7
“A comment from a ‘friend’ who worked on the phones on 21/05 to take the COVID votes…….”the voters that rang to have their vote counted where quite switched on people who very much new their rights and wanted their vote to count” From this I think we can safely say that in seats such as Brisbane and Macnamara and Gilmore and Wannon that if the seat is a strong performing GREENS seat then the COVID19 voting will be very good for the GREENS. However, it is brand new territory so like all of you i’m keen to see if there are trends and patterns.”
Do you think that Greens voters are more likely to “know their rights” than, say, Labor voters?
I suspect, particularly in wealthier electorates like Macnamara, that assumption could be a spurious one.
In terms of Macnamara, the most recent batch of postals seem to have pushed Labor’s PV lead over the Greens to near 2,300.
The Greens would need to sustain a 10% PV advantage over Labor in the remaining votes to get in front after preferences (which we have very good information on). …..which is just not possible. Macnamara is done
The Curious-Snails’ take
Labor still appears to be in with a fighting chance in the seat of Brisbane with the ALP candidate Madonna Jarrett by no means out of a race not expected to be finalised until next week.
Labor is still more than 600 votes ahead of the Greens Stephen Bates in a seat which was held by the LNP’s Trevor Evans, who has conceded.
Experts, including the ABC’s election analyst Antony Green, are still convinced the Greens will triumph in the end.
But the seat of Brisbane, with Labor on 24,508 first preference votes and the Greens on 23,880, will remain a focus of attention for the new Federal Labor Government which is still one seat short of forming a majority government at 75 seats.
Counting today is focused on absentee ballots but the final count is not expected to be finalised until mid way through next week at earliest.
The veteran Queensland Senator Pauline Hanson also looks increasingly likely to hold her place in the upper house despite a strong challenge for the state’s sixth Senate spot from Legalise Cannabis Australia.
Electoral Commissioner Tom Rogers said that despite some anticipated staff shortages due to COVID-19, the AEC remains on track to return the writs to the Governor-General on or before 28 June 2022.
“Our motto for the count is ‘right, not rushed’,” Mr Rogers said.
“The count is progressing well and it is likely that the results in some seats will start to be declared from mid-next week.
“This can only occur once it becomes mathematically impossible for any other candidate to win.”
Mr Rogers said margins were so thin in a number of seats the AEC would need to wait until it had received and counted all allowable postal votes before distributing preferences and declaring a result.
https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/national/federal-election/election-lengthy-battle-of-brisbane-as-hanson-likely-to-keep-senate-seat/news-story/f5c91315224b0e8b3d7c904a5958066f?amp
Is that a fact that the Greens do better from absent votes compared to the ALP? Or is that a Brisbane specific result? In Deakin, the ALP has 129 (33.87%) and Greens 86 (18.9%) from absent votes so far. Although that is a better result for the Greens compared to ordinary votes on the day. How about Provisional and declaration pre-poll?
But if the above count 3CP count is anyway accurate, then yeah, I can’t see the ALP winning Brisbane unless they increase their margin to 1000+ votes before preferences.
Greens seem to consistently over perform in absentees and Labor underperform in seats that I have looked at
I would suggest it is a function of demographics (age and wealth) , where Greens voters are more likely to find themselves outside of their electorates they are registered in when voting
@ The Revisionist
The vote counting at the moment in Macnamara is gathering a bit of pace – I too feel that they are an outside chance but there are approx 9000 votes yet to be counted according to AEC and the minor party preferences for ALP vs GREEN favours the GREENS approx 2 to 1. The big unknown is whether all the COVID votes have been added to the figures and await counting as well. But yes I’d rather be in the shoes of the ALP right now for sure.
How refreshing to read an actual psephological discussion on this site instead of the usual swearing about our most hated politicians and angry playground fighting with each other.
Very good contribution from Antony Green, too.
Long may it last.