Oh it certainly is a lot, but it is far less than what I was expecting with everyone rallying about postal votes being so Liberal swayed. I was more expecting upwards of 70%.
AusPoliGaf |Early 2016 Election| - the government's term has been... Shortened
- Thread starter Bernbaum
- Start date
- Status
Oh it certainly is a lot, but it is far less than what I was expecting with everyone rallying about postal votes being so Liberal swayed. I was more expecting upwards of 70%.
Elaugaufein
Member
Doesn't seem like he did to badly to me. He avoided the usual Green vote collapse of a couple of percent. The major issue is that with the Coalition (rationally) preferencing Labor over Greens, the Greens are dependent on Labor getting knocked out before the Liberals.
Though using the resources in Gayndler on Batman instead may have been wiser but I doubt it would have made enough of a difference.
Dammit. So at best it'll be 73-72, which means Labor could possibly scrape through with Bandt and the two Indies, but it looks like Forde (where I used to live!) will probably eke back over to LNP meaning 74-71 and from there it's an easy pitch to Katter/Xenophon.
I get the sense Shorten might be perfectly happy to pull an Abbott and chuck rocks at a shaky minority government until it collapses and Labor can get majority at a new election.
The biggest risk for him was they did so badly he was spilled in the post election leadership ballot. That threat gone he can wait things out.
The biggest risk for him was they did so badly he was spilled in the post election leadership ballot. That threat gone he can wait things out.
Aarglefarg
Member
Antony Green still saying it looks unlikely the Coalition will reach a majority.
You win this time!
Antony Green still saying it looks unlikely the Coalition will reach a majority.
You win this time!
XD Dad has ABC 24 on, I'm just sitting here playing Stardew Valley.
Aarglefarg
Member
I don't see what percentage of late-counted votes would need to go Coalition over Labor in order to get past the margins in seats where Labor is leading. They should be able to calculate that.
Sounds like a fun time.
Elaugaufein
Member
*Amused by sudden disappearance of Green skepticism*
Aarglefarg
Member
On twitter?
Someone with gif editing skills skills might be able to edit various messages onto the ballot here. https://twitter.com/MattDoran91/status/750165965787115521
It's begging for it, innit? Even a 'it's fucking nothing' would be apt.
Elaugaufein
Member
I meant in terms of thread tone, I know it's different posters but it's still funny.
The number one rule of election results is always trust Antony Green he is light shinning in the darkness.
bobnowhere
Member
Petrie called for the LNP.
Small swing to LNP, they really sandbagged that seat. Maybe they should have spent some bucks in Longman and others that swung +5%!
70 Lib 67 ALP 5 other 8? now
Small swing to LNP, they really sandbagged that seat. Maybe they should have spent some bucks in Longman and others that swung +5%!
70 Lib 67 ALP 5 other 8? now
By this time tomorrow the ABC will almost certainly have given Chisholm, Dunkley and Gilmore to the Libs. Hindmarsh and Forde won't be known for sometime while Labor will likely hold in Herbert, Cowan and Capricornia.
That pretty much assures a hung parliament with a Liberal minority government.
That pretty much assures a hung parliament with a Liberal minority government.
It's going to be really hard for the ALP to hold that lead and the Libs will probably win it, but I don't think the result will be known tomorrow.
Maybe the counting will be quicker than that. Who knows?
30yearsofhurt
Member
Well the coalition has lost 14 seats(-12 on swings, -3 on re-distributions, +1 on Clive Palmer not standing).
They are behind in five of the really close ones (Capricornia, Cowan, Herbert, Forde and Hindmarsh). It looks like they will only win 2 of those (Herbert and Forde). Hindmarsh is squeaky bums and all way too close to call. So -2 (or -3).
So 90 - 14 - 2 = 74. 73 if they lose Hindmarsh.
Even with Katter that only gets them to 75.
Less the speaker they can only guarantee 74 votes in the HoR against a possible 75 against.
These cunts need to learn the gentle art of negotiation in a hurry.
They are behind in five of the really close ones (Capricornia, Cowan, Herbert, Forde and Hindmarsh). It looks like they will only win 2 of those (Herbert and Forde). Hindmarsh is squeaky bums and all way too close to call. So -2 (or -3).
So 90 - 14 - 2 = 74. 73 if they lose Hindmarsh.
Even with Katter that only gets them to 75.
Less the speaker they can only guarantee 74 votes in the HoR against a possible 75 against.
These cunts need to learn the gentle art of negotiation in a hurry.
Why are the Libs going to win Herbert?
30yearsofhurt
Member
Someone told me she'll get swamped in the postals but who knows? 72 seat govt?
I smell another election, especially if Turnbull gets rolled.
EDIT: Actually my numbers are wrong. Libs get one back with Chisholm. So they are looking at 73/74/75 Depending on Hindmarsh and Herbert.
Elaugaufein
Member
There's no way in hell they'd be dumb enough to go to another election straight away if Turnbull was rolled (he's literally the most likeable and competent potential leader they've got). The only way that happens is if they get 75 , roll Turnbull and he spits the dummy and sits as an Independent and decides to nuke everything with a no confidence motion.
That would be beautiful.
I was flicking through the Wikipedia pages of defunct australian political parties today. Everyone thinks the last few years was chaotic but the early years of Australia were all over the place. New (proto Liberal) parties out the arse.
i've never heard this expression before, what's it mean?
30yearsofhurt
Member
.
Still keeping an eye on the updates on AEC, can't rule out Flynn/Ken O'Dowd either now.
bobnowhere
Member
So Hanson is also a rabid Anti-vaxxer. What a shock!
Starting to look like Turnbull might get his slim majority on postals. Nothing left is in the bag for Labor.
Starting to look like Turnbull might get his slim majority on postals. Nothing left is in the bag for Labor.
I still don't understand how ABC's results are somehow more accurate than AEC? Shouldn't the people actually tallying results be far more accurate than a news channel, be it a government news channel aside. I know Green is pretty bloody good but he still is using predictions, whereas AEC is using actual counted votes for their numbers.
The ABC is more cautious at the moment, basically. They haven't actually made any big calls already.
The AEC numbers you see (70 Coalition, 71 ALP) is just who is in front right now. The ABC has taken out the super close seats that could change.
However the AEC has a number of seats (4 now, was more earlier) that they have as not yet determined. The ABC adds those seats to their totals because they aren't actually in doubt, they just haven't had 2PP counting done - they're landslides on first preferences.
The AEC should actually show 73 Coalition, 72 ALP, 1 Green, 4 Independent. That is the actual breakdown of who is ahead right now. Its only a technicality that they're showing Labor ahead.
The AEC numbers you see (70 Coalition, 71 ALP) is just who is in front right now. The ABC has taken out the super close seats that could change.
However the AEC has a number of seats (4 now, was more earlier) that they have as not yet determined. The ABC adds those seats to their totals because they aren't actually in doubt, they just haven't had 2PP counting done - they're landslides on first preferences.
The AEC should actually show 73 Coalition, 72 ALP, 1 Green, 4 Independent. That is the actual breakdown of who is ahead right now. Its only a technicality that they're showing Labor ahead.
bobnowhere
Member
AEC uses the raw numbers at that moment and then assigns seats it views as won to each side. Not sure what margin it uses. Green makes future assumptions, based on history and experience, to fine tune them and going on initial postals Green looks right.
It doesn't use a margin, nor try and predict who won. It just shows who is ahead in actual votes right now. It literally says "Party representation - who is leading?"
Antony Green has taken the closest seats (~1% margin) out of his count and put them in doubt. He hasn't even made predictions on individual seats, just that the coalition will likely win more. Its actually a little disappointing and far from bold.
Elaugaufein
Member
One Nation is basically the Nationals without their good points.
Aarglefarg
Member
Here are the Not Yet Determined seats: http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseSeatsNotDetermined-20499.htm
Click on one of them. Grayndler is a bit weird with how things are named and ordered so it will be different if you pick that one. Now, look at Two Candidate Preferred table. You'll see a low number of votes counted, like 200 or 0 in the Votes column. And it's based on 1 polling place, or 0 polling places or so. Then look at the second table, about the first preference voting. You will see many votes are counted there which aren't yet showing up in the seat numbers. It's fine for people to look at that table and figure out which way things are going.
Candescence
Member
Also, New Matilda has pointed out that the possible election result could potentially kneecap the TPP. None of the crossbenchers or the Greens are remotely keen on it, and Labor is openly hostile to trade agreements with ISDS provisions, and they will gladly torpedo the TPP if it means preventing another one with ISDS from being ratified.
If Australia doesn't ratify the TPP, it suddenly becomes somewhat less valuable as a trade agreement. Ironically, this would be after we already pissed off US Republicans by barring tobacco companies from using the ISDS provisions and giving big pharma the finger. If TPP ratification becomes outright impossible over here due to a Coalition government not remotely having the numbers or Labor being in power and demanding that the TPP be re-negotiated, I can see some Republicans flip the fuck out.
If Australia doesn't ratify the TPP, it suddenly becomes somewhat less valuable as a trade agreement. Ironically, this would be after we already pissed off US Republicans by barring tobacco companies from using the ISDS provisions and giving big pharma the finger. If TPP ratification becomes outright impossible over here due to a Coalition government not remotely having the numbers or Labor being in power and demanding that the TPP be re-negotiated, I can see some Republicans flip the fuck out.
well. theyve been right so far...
Elaugaufein
Member
Is it wrong that this brings a joyful warmth to the chambers of my cold dead heart ?
Predicting the outcome of an election is a bit different from picking up the trend of postal and interstate ballots after an election.
This would be special
No, it's the normal response, don't worry. Your heart is working as intended
I don't see how its possibly 1:4 of Libs forming a majority, punters are way off.
You have 74 practically guaranteed (every seat LNP is ahead in, plus Forde). Hindmarsh is a good shot, as is Herbert. If you miss them, you have middling shots at Cowan and Capricornia. Failing that, postal votes currently indicate Flynn and Longman as longshots.
Its not a lock, but its at least even money if you've been watching the postal returns.
Turnbull is ruined regardless
No lies detected.
Yeah good luck talking about your mandate after you've spent several days blaming every man and his dog for costing you the lower House.
Elaugaufein
Member
If you can't get your proposals through the Senate after a DD you don't have a mandate for them. That's not even debatable. You can* maybe quibble about half-Senates but not a full one.
*But shouldn't. The reason Senators have longer terms is to put the brakes on short-sighted ideas. So they are still obeying their mandate anyway.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked