Talk Elections

No BQ. What would this look like?

Wow... this is an interesting one.

My guess is the NDP would be strongest in Tasmania (and the dominant party in the ACT), but the Liberals would be the most powerful party in NSW, South Australia, and Victoria, with the exception of the Northern Territory, Queensland, and Western Australia, which the Conservative Party would do well in.

What politicians do you think would fit in each party? I'd probably put John Howard and Tony Abbott with the Conservatives, Rudd, Keating, Fraser, and Hawke with the Liberals, and Gillard and Whitlam with the NDP.

Also, Senator Bob Brown would be an Elizabeth May-type figure, before finally winning the seat of Denison.

Whitlam could be a left-Liberal like Paul Martin Sr. or Mike Pearson. Alternately he's an NDPer who joins the Liberals for power like PET. Depends if you have AV or FPTP as the electoral system which would determine whether there's a unified LDP, Lib/NDP or Lib/Con coalition, etc.

Fraser: In the day he'd probably be a Red Tory. Nowadays he'd be a Liberal.
Hawke: Liberal
Keating: Liberal
Howard: Conservative
Gillard: NDP or left-Liberal
Abbott: Conservative
Costello: Conservative
Latham: NDP
Shorten: Liberal
Turnbull: Liberal

Does the PC party exist in this scenario?

The conditions required for the original renaming and ideological Balkanization don't exist here, so the "historical" (Sir John A.'s IRL) CPC keeps its name. No PC Party.

Ah, okay. Thanks for the clarification.

This is interesting idea.  I'm guessing Rudd would either be one of the socially conservative Liberals or a Red Tory.  I also think, given how desperate she seems to be for power, that Gillard would be a left-leaning Liberal.  Plibersek, Combet, Andrew Leigh, Albanese, Wong, Carr, Garrett, and Macklin would be Dippers.  Roxon is tricky to say.  Ferguson could also fall into either the Liberals or the NDP.  Wayne Swan is even harder to call.  He's been calling for the fight against income inequality to return to the ALP's platform, yet he's quite the SoCon.  Since someone who opposes same-sex marriage can't get anywhere in the NDP (and rightfully so), he'd be lucky to become an NDP MP.  Burke is a similar case.  In fact, there are probably tons of people like this.  And given how "hippie" the NDP and Liberals both tend to be, I think a lot of the socially conservative working class areas where people like Swan and Burke have appeal would simply vote Tory, the same way lots of socially conservative poor areas in Canada do.  Maybe the Liberals would have them, but even they have a metropolitan image which would alienate them to the working class.  Shorten I'm guessing would be a Liberal.  Crean, Latham, Smith, Weatherill, and others along those lines. 
Given the appeal the Torries have gotten in the west by portraying the Liberals as snobby elites, they'd probably have a similar appeal in Australia.  Pretty much everyone in the coalition would be a Torry.  And the Canadian Greens and the Australian Greens are really different, too, so I kinda think that Bob Brown could well be a Dipper. 

Liberals would win the inner-city areas and minorities.
NDP would do well in Green areas plus "communitarian" leaning areas (so Hunter Valley might be an NDP rather than a Liberal stronghold)
Tories would win rural areas and wealthy suburbs.

At least that's what I think. It'll be interesting to see where the SoCon ALP members go. Also interesting to see if the Turnbull/Fraser types are Red Tories or Liberals.

Might something like BQ appear in North Queensland or somewhere? Although I don't think they're calling for outright state soverignty, lol.

Liberals may win some inner affluent suburbs, I think V-Quadra is reasonably affluent, at least in the parts safest for the Grits?

Wouldn't Carr be a Grit?


Unless you're talking about Kim :P

Yeah, sorry, I meant Kim.  Forgot that he's not the only Carr in the cabinet anymore.  Bob Carr probably would be a Grit. 

Some things we should establish:

1) Voting system: STV or FPTP?

2) Is there a Coalition or some sorts, in either voting system? Say, Lib/NDP v. Con?

3) If not, is there a merger? Like say an LDP or "National" (merged Lib/Con) party?

1. FPTP

2. When together they have numbers to form a majority, there would likely be some sort of agreement between the NDP and Liberals.

I have a blank Australian map in the gallery if we wish to speculate on individual riding results in a "typical" election year (or in a 2011 Orange Crush, or a 2008 Tories just short of majority, etc).

Or just a Liberal minority government asking for support from either Tories or Dippers depending on the situation as is the case here.

Orange Crush came primarily in Quebec, so it might not happen here. Some other guesses:

1980: Either a Liberal or Tory minority government, but more likely a Red-Orange coalition.

1983: Liberal landslide.

1984: Tory majority?

1987: Small Liberal majority due to Tory infighting.

*1990: Tory majority.

1993: Liberal majority, IRL Keating got a big primary swing which would be a much more comfortable majority with FPTP than what he actually did with STV.

1996: Tory landslide.

1998: Liberal/NDP coalition or Liberal minority government.

2001: Tory majority.

2004: Tory landslide.

2007: Liberal landslide.

2010: Tory majority.

*Analogues, since obviously with 4/5 year parliamentary terms the electoral cycle would be different. These guesses are based off primary votes.

The union links to the NDP could see it performing not dissimilarly to Labor in a fair number of seats, I suspect.

Yeah, but would the conservative unions that back the ALP be willing to support a party that supports gay marriage, pot legalization (at least under Layton), etc.?

So there has to be either a permanent coalition like IRL's Lib/Nat one or a merged LDP. Which would be extremely difficult, if not downright impossible given the ideological/cultural disparity. The NDP, even today, will never assent to an economic program like HK Lab's or anything remotely similar. Liberals would have to work with the Tories.

Perhaps like BC? NDP vs BC Liberals? Be interesting to see the development of the NDP in this scenario - it started out as an agrarian socialist party, CCF, didn't? If that's the case, perhaps the Liberals would have had the greater links to the urban unionised workforce?

The other way to approach it is if we look at ridings and have a bit of a guess at their foreign equivalent (either look at a Canadian riding and work out what Australian electorate it resembles, or look at an Australian electorate, and guess how it might have voted in certain Canadian elections by drawing a parallel with a Canadian riding).

84 would still be a Liberal majority. It was 48-45 on primary votes that year.

I'll do a couple of seats right now.

Grayndler

NDP stronghold, winning the counter-culturish areas (Newtown) and the more working-class ones (Marrickville). The areas further from the cities however may vote Liberal.

Sydney

NDP-Liberal swing seat, with the NDP winning areas around Glebe but the Liberals winning wealthier areas in the CBD. A high gay population helps the NDP, however parts of the seat is rapidly gentrifying.

Banks

Would probably "lean" Tory, however the Liberals would have a base with ethnic voters around Hurstville and more poorer places around East Hills/Riverwood.

I suspect the Liberals would be a very, very small party, in permanent coalition with the Tories, and taking seats like Wentworth and Kooyong. Kind of like the Nationals, but exactly the opposite. The NDP would be the primary left wing party by quite a lot.

The Tory/Liberal coalition would be strong, but the NDP would govern very occasionally. Probably lots of 15 to 20 year Tory/Lib governments, followed by 6 to 9 year NDP governments.

A small moderate party forming coalition governments with a more rightwing party? Sounds like you described the Queensland coalition, pre-LNP merger.

Edit: A simplification, of course, but to prove your point. The dominance of the union movement in Australia could only give rise to a Labor Party of some description, which would be the NDP in this scenario. That's why I think we're best off working out comparisons for electorates.

I've heard it suggested by a few Canadians who have been over here (including Mrs Smid, but also various Canadian tourists waiting on tables, etc), that the "feel" of some cities make them quite comparable.

Melbourne and Vancouver, for example, often compete for The Economist's "World's Most Liveable City" and have quite a similar culture.

Sydney is similar to Toronto, as a large, sprawling city.

Calgary and Brisbane, and I suspect Perth also. Queensland has beaches, while Alberta has mountains, but both attract tourists. Both also are some of the top beef producers in the world, but the state/provincial economy is more resource-driven. WA is probably also more like rural Alberta. Western NSW, and rural Victoria are probably similar to either rural Alberta, rural BC or rural Manitoba/Saskatchewan.

Lingiari, in the Northern Territory is not dissimilar to the large northern ridings of Ontario, Saskatchewan or Manitoba. The Kimberly region in it is mining, but I think not enough to compare the seat to Fort Mac. I think there is some mining in Northern Ontario? Earl can probably enlighten me there. If so, Hunter is probably much the same.

Tasmania is small, like PEI, but I think votes more like Newfoundland.

Adelaide is probably a bit like Halifax, although I could be mistaken. Adelaide has a lot of manufacturing. Actually it could be a bit like Windsor and Essex, but with more people. Maybe a combination of Windsor, Essex and London. Sturt and Boothby less so, and rural South Australia, including the Adelaide Hills (Mayo) isn't.

Newcastle and the Illawarra are probably like Hamilton, or perhaps Windsor again.

The question about Northern Ontario is more about Timmins, I think, or Churchill in Manitoba.

Anyway, just some thoughts to make comparisons easier. Others might disagree with me.

And Canberra is  like Ottawa? :D

Probably so, but I can't see Canberra having a Tory-voting O-West Nepean, or O-Orléans. Perhaps if you disregarded those two ridings, but factored in Hull and Gatineau as part of Greater Ottawa. Canberra if smaller, though, I think, but it's probably comparable. Hugh would have a better idea, though.

Edit: Obviously without the Francophone element. Perhaps Ottawa-West Nepean or Ottawa-Orleans may not be dissimilar from Eden-Monaro? Half the seat is very rural, the other half is public service suburbia that spilt out of Canberra, hence why it's a swing seat, and has been the litmas seat since I think 1975? The suburbia part is growing - as reflected in the seat losing tracts of rural areas over the last few redistributions (despite NSW losing seats in that time, meaning the average geographic size of an electorate is expanding).

Only really tiny portions of either Ottawa-Orleans or OWN are rural. Under a very liberal definition of "rural", exactly 1000 votes were cast in 'rural' polls in Orleans in 2011, the rest of the riding is by and large a mix of older (70s-80s) and newer upper middle-class suburbs with lots of public servants and a large Franco population. OWN is even less rural, only one poll seems to be 'rural' and it cast 201 votes in 2011. I know less about OWN, but it's slightly less affluent than Orleans more socio-economically diverse.

I suspected that they may not have a significant rural population (due to their geographic compactness) - particularly compared to Eden-Monaro (take a look at the size of E-M as a comparison), but I suspect the other more rural seats around Ottawa are probably too conservative by comparison, and have too few public servants. Perhaps the old Pontiac, without the Bloc, may be somewhat comparable, but I think that's a bit of a stretch? Maybe the old Wascana might be a better example for it - there are a fair few provinical public servants in that part of town, isn't there? And it was a rurban seat...

There's signigicant numbers of public servants in all of Ottawa's ridings, even the most Tory. OWN by the way is less Francophone than Orleans. The general rule in Ottawa is, the more east you go, the more Francophone, starting in the very English rural areas to the west of the city, to the very French rural areas to the east.

Ottawa has always been a somewhat Tory city. Of course it had a reputation as being a Liberal town in the 90s, but in truth the Tories have historical strength. It must be the Irish Protestant roots.

ACT
Canberra
In 2010, Canberra voted 44.23% Labor,    37.21% Liberal,    18.56% Green.
Meanwhile, Ottawa South  was:
2008: 49.83% L,    33.44% C,    8.47% N,    6.76% G.
2011: 44.01%L,     33.28% C,    18.16% N,   3.03% G.
The presence of a high-profile incumbent should be noted, however.

Fraser
In 2010, Fraser voted 45.81% Labor,    32.41% Liberal,    19.84% Green.
Meanwhile, Ottawa Centre  was:
2008: 39.69% N,    26.05% L,    23.59% C,    9.94% G.
2011: 52.11% N,    21.68% C,    20.12% L,    5.03% G.

NT
Lingiari
Large, sparsely populated, remote electorate, with a large indigenous population. Main industries are mining, cattle grazing and tourism.
In 2010, Lingiari voted 40.08% Labor,    34.26% Country Liberal,    12.59% Green,    ~9% split almost evenly between two independents.
Canadian equivalent = Churchill
2008: 47.40% N,    28.83% L,    20.48% C,    3.29% G.
2011: 21.12% N,    26.18% C,    20.36% L,    2.35% G.

Solomon
Despite being a territorial capital, is effectively a regional city, with the electorate covering the city and surrounding area. Some suburbs are quite conservative, others strongly back Labor, so it's marginal overall.
In 2010, Solomon voted 46.37% Country Liberal,    36.08% Labor,    13.29% Green.
Canadian equivalent = Sault Ste. Marie
2008: 40.46% N,    37.67% C,    16.77% L,     4.33% G.
2011: 41.44% C,    37.23% N,    18.86%L,     2.14% G.

Canberra would be battles between the NDP and Liberals, the Tories wouldn't even try. NDP would likely win both HoR seats, and the senate would split between the two.

Yeah. It's an interesting one - the closest world comparison is Washington and unlike DC it's minority population iirc is non-existent. Most likely they would vote NDP.

Queensland
Groom
The AEC notes: "Groom covers an area of 5 594 sq kms and is located on the Darling Downs region of south east Queensland. The major population centre is Toowoomba which is Australia's largest inland town.
"This area is noted for its rich and diverse range of products and industries including agriculture, retailing and food processing as well as for the provision of educational and community services. Toowoomba is known as the Garden City. The University of Southern Queensland is located in Toowoomba while the Army Aviation Centre is based at Oakey."

USQ has about half as many students as the University of Lethbridge, and also fewer than the post-secondary Red Deer College, but Toowoomba is probably similar to those cities. Since Red Deer has been split into two ridings, I'm going to suggest that Groom and Lethbridge are two similar ridings for the purposes of this estimation.
In 2010, Groom voted 61.25% LNP,    22.67% Labor,    7.3% Green,    5.56% FamFrst,   3.23% Ind.

Lethbridge:
In 2011: 56.51% C,    27.18% N,    8.38% L,    4.36% G,    3.57% CHP.
In 2008: 67.33% C,    14.03% N,    9.21% L,   7.15% G,    2.28% CHP.

Maranoa
Large, sprawling, remote electorate (731,297 square km), predominantly coal, oil, gas, orchards, cotton, grain, cattle and sheep. A conservative electorate in a conservative state. I think it's probably akin to Crowfoot, which is now mostly Battle River and Bow River, although it votes more like one of the rural Saskatchewan seats, such as Cypress Hills - Grasslands. That said, with non-compulsory voting, like in Canada, it would probably be a safer seat.
In 2010, Maranoa voted 65.52% LNP,    19.96% Labor,    5.28% Ind,    5.15% Green,    4.09% FamFrst. After preferences, it was 72.89% LNP.

Crowfoot:
In 2011: 83.99% C,    9.15% N,    3.26% G,    2.33% L
In 2008: 82.04% C,    7.90% N,    5.97% G,    4.09% L

Cypress Hills - Grasslands:
In 2011: 69.85% C,    21.23% N,    6.25% L,    2.68% G.
In 2008: 64.36% C,    15.50% N,    13.26% L,    6.89% G.

Why are you using the new ridings? They haven't been confirmed yet, and are unlikely to be confirmed exactly the way they are.

Still in Queensland, I suspect that the seat of Kennedy is much like Fort Mac. Will expand on this later.

Tasmania, Denison (Hobart) is perhaps similar to Charlottetown, as a small state capital, contained in a single electorate, the capital of the smallest state with electorates substantially below the national average enrolment.

That could be an interesting side discussion - Australia with British Columbian parties.  Tony Abbot could never lead the BC Liberals- they have no time for social conservatives.  Perhaps you could fill the Nationals in for John Cummins and the BC Conservatives (though you'd have to reduce their vote somewhat).  The differences between the ALP and the BCNDP are a bit notable as well

BC basically has the same parties as Australia. Right down to having right wing 'Liberal' parties.

Other than that they don't. There's some superficial similarity, but let us not forget that the Liberals brought in BC's Carbon Tax, while the Left shamelessly condemned it.  And none of the social conservatism of either party is broked here