At the end of the first week of the three-week early voting period, the Tasmanian Electoral Commission relates that 16,817 votes have already been cast at pre-poll voting centres, more than double the 7,650 from the equivalent stage of last year’s election. There is no further news on the polling front, which doesn’t come as too much of a surprise, unless you count a social media post from RedBridge Group director Kos Samaras saying he “believe(s) there is another in the field (not ours) that has the Liberals in front by a fair chunk”, which would be consistent with the DemosAU poll and inconsistent with YouGov. The indefatigable Kevin Bonham says he is “aware of a third (private) poll which I may say more about that falls somewhere between these two, with a far lower but still quite high independent vote (around 12%) and the Liberals slightly ahead, with both majors in the low 30s”.
The dominant electoral story of the past week is the Liberal Party’s suggestion that it will challenge the eligibility of Jessica Munday, high-profile non-incumbent Labor candidate for Franklin, on the grounds that her seat on the WorkCover Tasmania board constitutes an office of profit under the Crown. This would presumably involve a challenge through the Court of Disputed Returns in the event that she is elected, which if upheld could lead to another candidate being declared elected or a fresh election being held in Franklin. Kevin Bonham notes the obvious recourse of a recount of the existing votes, as occurs when a seat falls vacant, “would be unsatisfactory as this would reward a party that had run an ineligible high-profile candidate”.
A legal opinion prepared for the Liberal Party goes so far as to raise the prospect of “the result of the general election across all electoral divisions being declared void”, which from this bush lawyer’s perspective seems a bit of a stretch – a view that has the concurrence of Kevin Bonham (again). Labor has responded with legal advice from former Solicitor-General Michael O’Farrell endorsing its position that a constitutional amendment from 1944 distinguishes the state provision from its federal equivalent, such that it does not apply to Munday’s case.
UPDATE (6/7): The Sunday Tasmanian today reports on two rounds of recent EMRS polling for the Liberal Party, from samples of 550 each. The more recent, from June 29 to July 1, had the Liberals leading Labor 34.5% to 28.2%, with the Greens on (I gather) 13.9% and independents on 17.8%. An earlier round from June 15 to 17 had the Liberals on 32.3%, Labor on 28.7%, the Greens on 14.0% and independents on 19.2%. The Nationals hardly registered in either. Results from Franklin, which one would hope combine the samples from both polls, are Liberal 39.2%, Labor 23.0%, Greens 16.1% and independents 21.7%, with the Liberals seemingly expecting a result of Liberal three, Labor one, Greens one and David O’Byrne one, with the last seat a race between independent candidate Peter George and a second Labor candidate. The Liberals are “hopeful of picking up a fourth seat in Braddon after seeing the EMRS results and believe they are also a chance of securing a fourth in Bass”.
How’d the keys go in the 2024 Presidential election? Asking for a friend
Listened to a bit of local Burnie (Braddon) radio. Lots of Lib ads. The premier spouting classic Labor values of health, education, workers.
Kind of highlights the issue Labor faces in Tasmania in that the Libs hold the center ground, see the instant matching of the big Labor health announcement yesterday. Lots of grouped corflutes for the Libs, more a cohesive team advertising strategy.
meher babasays:
Monday, July 7, 2025 at 5:47 pm
“How’d the keys go in the 2024 Presidential election?”
Lichtman got the Major foreign/military success key wrong, and more than 60% of Americans felt like they were in a recession too. If you consider both of those things, his keys correctly predicted it.
For Lichtman’s opinion on the matter:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Keys_to_the_White_House
TLDR, he won’t admit he got those 2 keys wrong.
My keys, which are largely the same, also correctly predicted it.
Let me see if I get what you’re saying here.
Lichtman and his keys got it wrong, but if he hadn’t gotten it wrong, he would have been right.
I can’t argue with that!
Seems like the Liberals are well on top this time around, it’s going to be a pretty ordinary result if they improve their position compared to last time given everything that’s happened
Hopefully the Greens and Independents can pick up an extra seat or two and make things harder for them that way
What a disaster for Labor, if that’s what plays out
Labor has finally put out some advertising with a point to it: TV ads and fliers in letterboxes each pushing the message of “the Libs have been hopeless for 11 years, don’t give them 15” and focusing on the Spirit of Tasmania stuff-up.
This is more like it, but they most certainly should have been running this staff well before early voting commenced.
There seems to be no other explanation to what has happened other than that Labor was highly confident that the Libs wouldn’t want, or procedurally wouldn’t be able to, call on an election right away and, in particular, that Rockliff would be dumped and they would be campaigning against a relative dud like Abetz, Ferguson or Barnett.
As the old saying goes, “assume makes an ass out of u and me.”
Where will the Tasmanian Jackettes vote exit and which groups will be the beneficiaries?
Hard Being Green: “What a disaster for Labor, if that’s what plays out”
——————————————————————————–
Tasmanian politics has been an ongoing disaster for Labor pretty much since Paul Lennon left the scene (there was lots not to like about Lennon, but he was widely seen as a strong and capable leader). Bartlett was a dud IMO, Giddings was much better, but was thrown into a bad situation with limited time to show what she could do. (If Lennon had decided to annoint Giddings rather than Bartlett, it might have been a different story.)
Bec White was another leader with plenty of ability, but the stars were always crossed for her. Winter is ok, but ideally would have needed another 5-10 years in state politics to be truly ready.
If you look at the Libs, Will Hodgman was made leader a bit too early (after only 4 years in the House) But he had been well-known to the public for some time before he entered Parliament and his father was a much-loved figure. Gutwein had been in Parliament for 18 years before he became party leader and Premier, while Rockliff took up those roles after 20 years in Parliament.
Winter on the other hand is 40, but looks like he’s only in his early 20s, which would be great news for him in the media or many other walks of life, but not so much in politics.
And, if Labor loses badly and Winter is sacrificed, they only have even less well-known potential leaders waiting in the wings. Willie is a good performer, but could be accused of being pale, male and stale. And I suspect that Jess Munday, beloved though she seems to be among the Labor Left, is nowhere near as well known publicly as Labor people think she is. To my outsider’s eyes, Ella Haddad is the best performer waiting in the wings, but no Labor people I talk to think she’s any sort of show to ever become leader.
Of course, one former Labor politician who is still young enough to make a come back and who has a terrific public profile is Lisa Singh, who I reckon would be a really effective state leader. But I’m not sure she even still belongs to the party. And she has utterly unacceptable views about the environment (ie, she wants to protecct it) and on the question of whether or not Labor should run its best candidates for the Senate or use it as a retirement village for no-name trade unionists from dying industry sectors.
Some interest in Tassie politics from a tree and nature point of view, dating back to being at the Franklin Blockade and bushwalking in Tassie before and after.
My bashing (mild) in Queenstown by the same inbreds who threatened Bob Brown with a tyre lever (from memory) aside.
It strikes me that it’s Tweedledee and Tweedledumber between Labor and Liberal there.
On key things, doesn’t seem much difference. Certainly not in the fetishising of those who want to strip the place of its unique nature.
At risk of igniting the usual internecine greens alp infighting…. I wonder if the widely healed beliefs that 1) no one can get a majority, 2) the alp will refuse to form government, amd 3) the alp is the dog that caught the car, might be a substantial drag on Labor.
It is Hare Clarke though, so anything will happen….
The problem with both of the major parties in Tassie is that they and their slowly dwindling electoral bases are to a large extent stuck in the mindset that I would describe as “Old Tasmania.” It’s the mindset that entertains thoughts like “wasn’t it great when we had heaps of jobs in the pulp mill at Burnie/Forestry Tasmania/building dams for the Hydro scheme/batteries at Electrona/etc. In those days, our kids didn’t grow up wanting to do well at school go to Uni when there were all these great jobs here that didn’t require much education. And that meant they stayed in Tassie and we got to see our grandkids more often than once or twice a year.”
The left faction of Labor is particularly embedded in this sentimental mindset, and they get a bit of support from Albo, who is also seems to have a sentimental attachment to rust belt industries and would like to see more of them in Australia. The Labor right is a bit more with the program and, since Gunns Forestry went bust, so are the Libs to some extent: although the forestry-loving McQuestins and Eric Abetz remain far too powerful in the party for my liking.
What I would call the “New Tasmania” encompasses the university and the broader science sector, particularly Antarctic and Oceans research, niche agriculture, wine, spirits, tourism, a great lifestyle for highly-paid remote workers, clean energy beyond hydro, etc, etc. It lots of jobs for tertiary-educated people, highly-skilled tradies, and people who are good at interacting with people and providing them with services (people who are also needed for the burgeoning health and aged care sector, which is a given). And, I’m afraid, far fewer jobs for low-skilled, relatively unproductive people who work on production lines, wear uniforms and drive around in trucks doing not all that much, etc, etc..
Sadly, the two major parties were probably more attuned to New Tasmania 15 years or so ago than they are now. David Bartlett, despite his many faults as a leader, was right into all that stuff: the “smart island” and so forth. And Hodgman was quite good on this stuff as well. But in 2025, the biggest issue is footy: a profoundly Old Tasmania issue.
There is a big constituency for New Tasmania among tertiary-educated people, including the growing number of refugees from the mainland. Up to now, a large proportion of these people have tended to vote for the Greens, who at least agree with New Tasmania, although I can’t see that they have too many good policy ideas in this space. I have some hope for Peter George, if he gets in.
The disappearance of the JLN is no great loss: Jacqui is, if anything , even more embedded in the Old Tasmanian way of thinking than the two major parties.
Whenever I have posted these thoughts on PB in the past, I have offended some of the native-born Tasmanians on here. And I’ll no doubt have done so again this time, for which I apologise. It’s hard for many Tasmanians to accept that we should be trying to take Tasmania in the direction of places like Cornwall and the US New England rather than back towards an industrial past. Lennon tried to do that with the Bell Bay paper mill and ultimately came a cropper. Even if the project had gone ahead, it would have had few jobs for low-skilled workers due to the ever-growing use of robots and AI in manufacturing. Where the low-skilled workers are increasingly going to get jobs is in the service sector, and they need to be trained accordingly. I’m afraid that this poses problems for those (often, but not exclusively, blokes) who are not temperamentally well-suited to customer service work, but most of them are surely capable of being trained.
I would like Dean Winter to become Premier, because I think he gets a lot of this stuff, even if many in his party don’t. But unfortunately I don’t think it’s going to happen.
meher babasays:
Monday, July 7, 2025 at 10:56 pm
“I can’t argue with that!”
Glad at least 1 of the anti-key posters finally admitted defeat.
meher babasays:
Monday, July 7, 2025 at 10:56 pm
“Let me see if I get what you’re saying here.
Lichtman and his keys got it wrong, but if he hadn’t gotten it wrong, he would have been right.”
Lichtman’s keys were correct, and so were mine. Lichtman didn’t follow his own definitions.
Hard Being Greensays:
Monday, July 7, 2025 at 5:02 pm
“Arange the keys were designed for US Presidential elections not Hare-Clark in Tassie”
That’s what I thought too, until I tested them and realised they worked with every democracy on Earth.
Meher Baba thanks for the run through of Labor leaders, they probably all had potential at some stage
Lisa Singh would be awesome but I can’t imagine that happening
I’m thinking part of the reason Jess Munday was overlooked for the Senate vacancy is because some thought she could play a more important role in the Tassie Parliament, being elected will be a good start
“Hard Being Greensays:
Monday, July 7, 2025 at 5:02 pm
“Arange the keys were designed for US Presidential elections not Hare-Clark in Tassie”
That’s what I thought too, until I tested them and realised they worked with every democracy on Earth.”
Surely the point is, that they can still predict the ‘vote winner’ but that doesn’t necessarily equate to being the party who forms/leads the next government (especially in somewhere like Tasmania with the increase to 35 seats on a Hare-Clark system).
For example, the party coming first could get 30% and just 10/35 seats and be nowhere near government depending on possible governing partners.
BTSayssays:
Tuesday, July 8, 2025 at 6:14 pm
“Surely the point is, that they can still predict the ‘vote winner’ but that doesn’t necessarily equate to being the party who forms/leads the next government (especially in somewhere like Tasmania with the increase to 35 seats on a Hare-Clark system).
For example, the party coming first could get 30% and just 10/35 seats and be nowhere near government depending on possible governing partners.”
Pretty sure nearly all of us can agree on that, including Arange.
The replacement senator had to come from the north
Key update:
Definitely True 8
Probably True 2
Probably False 0
Definitely False 4
7 false keys needed for the opposition to win the popular vote.
So in Tassie Labor doesn’t just have to please the factions they have to worry about north vs south as well, interesting
I’m sure Josh will do a good job in the Senate after taking the union delegate path
Another poll or two would be nice, hopefully some more before the election
MI: “The replacement senator had to come from the north”
——————————————————————————
What I heard was that they had to be prepared to live in the north. Dolega was living in Hobart, but had grown up in the N-W and expressed a willingness to move back there. Munday, the mother of three young kids, is presumably unwilling/unable to make such a move.
Dolega has a pretty skinny CV for a Labor Senator, having never been previously run for any political position nor been involved in significant industrial politics (he was the local CPSU work health and safety organiser for 10 years having previously been a low-level officer in the ATO). That the party could not find a more prominent and/or politically experienced person from the left faction who is currently living in the northern half of the state must be a matter of concern going forward.
As you have said, the next Labor leader might well need to come from the north of the state. There haven’t been that many in the past half century that I can think of: the only ones that come to mind are Harry Holgate, Michael Field (sort of, in that he came from the northern part of Lyons) and Bryan Green: none of whom exactly covered themselves in glory (although I think Field has been a little underrated by many).
With Michelle O’Byrne having pulled the pin, the current bunch of Labor members from the north are Anita Dow, Shane Broad and Jen Finlay. I have not been at all impressed by Dow from what I’ve seen of her. Broad looks good on paper, but hasn’t made much of an impact either. That leaves Finlay, who seems to be quite impressive, but I’ve never heard talk about her becoming leader.
I very much doubt that Labor can win a third seat in Braddon, but they will get one or possibly two new members in Bass. Do you hear talk of any of them being potential stars of the future?
MB, I’m aware of someone they are trying recruit in Bass who would be a lightning rod. But there’s been some resistance. Finlay as the ex mayor of Ltn has a solid following up there, but is virtually unknown in Clark or Franklin.
MI: “MB, I’m aware of someone they are trying recruit in Bass who would be a lightning rod. ”
——————————————————————————
Well that sounds ideal. However, thanks to Winter forcing an early election and the fact that there are no by-elections under the Tasmanian system, the lightning rod might not even be able to get into Parliament before 2029.
(Of course, we can’t be confident that the next parliament will last much longer than the last one: even if the Libs can win 16 seats, they will most likely still struggle to form a lasting arrangement with a couple of independents to get themselves to 18 votes for confidence and supply. It’s likely to be a messy situation.)
MB, once the outcome is known and the leadership of Labor also decided I’ll have more to say on all of this.
It’s a poll…we’ll sort of
Interesting findings though, maybe the perception doesn’t match the reality? i.e. the voters are actually ok with a power sharing government
https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/tasmanians-want-a-power-sharing-government-poll/
And maybe related given he is doing an event with Christine Milne for the Australia Institute here’s a link to a fascinating interview on 6 News with former Tasmanian Premier David Bartlett
Note. I think he is spot on with a lot of what he says although calling the Greens the left wing of the Labor Party maybe goes a little far lol
https://youtu.be/xQKFRin6aMc
HBG
Even that Australia Institute poll was done by YouGov nearly a month ago, I’m not sure they’d get the same % in favour even now.
Though it’s a strangely worded question leading people on a bit, lumping Greens and Independents together so that those polled can imagine their favourite of the two when they ‘agree’ that they’d like a ‘power-sharing’ government. NB The headlines and parroted takeaways from the AI are also going further than what people were actually asked and being very simplistic, presumably to suit their narrative (idk anything about the AI).
I know they can claim that’s a reasonable conclusion to draw, but voters don’t necessarily join dots in straight lines like that and, had that been the wording on the question, might have answered differently.
Likewise they should have asked separately re working with the Greens and with Indys, to get a more insightful perception into Tassies’ mindset.
Actual question wording:
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement: If the Labor Party is not elected
in its own right, then Labor* should seek to form a government by working with the Greens and
independents on the crossbench?
*Then same question asked re Libs.
Quite ridiculously, they include Greens and Independent voters in their poll – who funnily enough have large % in favour of working with the larger parties, more esp Greens who even break 63-23% for the above question asked re the Liberals – instead of just asking Lab and Lib voters.
Only about 15-18% ‘Strongly agree’ to the proposition, and about 15% are ‘not sure’.
That said, one interesting snippet is that Independent voters give close to identical responses whether it’s Lab or Lib (49-24-27 not sure; and 50-26-24 not sure), they are also the most ‘unsure’ group.
Lab and Lib may also see a silver lining in those numbers – with only half of Indy VI agreeing, surely a good chunk of the other half are susceptible to being peeled away?
New thread.