Australian Federal Election - Results Thread

[Sibboleth]

The Democratic Labor Party that elected a Senator today isn't the same one as the group that allowed the Liberals to recieve the votes of Catholic workers back in the day, is it?

It's a re-founded DLP. Re-grouped Groupers. Haha.

[You kip if you want to...]

Is there any particular reason that the media seems to be focusing on Abbott's speech over Gillard's? I'll assume that the Australian media is ran by Murdoch too.

[Cubby]

Shouldn't this be over?

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

What's up with Denison?  Why does the AEC show Labor winning because the Lib was in second place, but ABC thinks Wilkie was second and thus got elected with preferences?

[Mr. Morden]

The "kingmakers":

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11049458

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

MISS US YET?

[I left.]

I actually do miss Howard, yeah.

[Hashemite]

What's up with Denison?  Why does the AEC show Labor winning because the Lib was in second place, but ABC thinks Wilkie was second and thus got elected with preferences?

state electoral commish in Australia are often very late in changing 2PP results when they're not lib vs. alp. I remember it took them a long, long time in SA during the 2009 Frome by-election, long time after everybody knew Geoff Brock the indie had won.

The Democratic Labor Party that elected a Senator today isn't the same one as the group that allowed the Liberals to recieve the votes of Catholic workers back in the day, is it?

It's a re-founded DLP. Re-grouped Groupers. Haha.

the DLP's win is one of those fun fluke of STV things, just like Family First-Sanity Last's "win" in 2004. Ironically, I think the DLP got less votes today than FFP but still won a seat while Fielding got creamed bad.

[Hashemite]

I actually do miss Howard, yeah.

Please change your avatar to blue.

[Χahar]

I actually do miss Howard, yeah.

Please change your avatar to blue.

Yeah, seriously.

[You kip if you want to...]

Some updates trickling in from the AEC, nothing major.

[oakvale]

I actually do miss Howard, yeah.

Please change your avatar to blue.

Yeah, seriously.

[Platypus]

FWIW, in a ranking of recent anglosphere right-wing leaders, Abbott is near the middle.

David Cameron
John Key
John McCain
Tony Abbott
Stephen Harper
John Howard
George W. Bush

He's still horrible, but he isn't as horrible as Howard, Harper or Bush.

Also, not to be too, BRTDish, but fark the Greens.

...and finally, time for Victoria and Tasmania to split off from the rest of Australia.

[You kip if you want to...]

FWIW, in a ranking of recent anglosphere right-wing leaders, Abbott is near the middle.

David Cameron
John Key
John McCain
Tony Abbott
Stephen Harper
John Howard
George W. Bush

He's still horrible, but he isn't as horrible as Howard, Harper or Bush.

Also, not to be too, BRTDish, but fark the Greens.

...and finally, time for Victoria and Tasmania to split off from the rest of Australia.

Eugh, you know how horrible the right-wing is when David Cameron is the best they have. Anyway, I think i'd put him below Harper, but above McCain.

[Platypus]

I think McCain, Abbott, Harper and Howard are all pretty much lineball, but Abbott certainly isn't the most conservative of the bunch. McCain is awkward because he's at least as conservative as Abbott, but in the US context that's quite moderate, so I wasn't sure where to place him. I'm pretty happy with the order, the only change I might consider is switching Abbott and McCain.

[Ebowed]

I actually do miss Howard, yeah.

That is one of the more nauseating things I have had to read today.

[Mr. Morden]

The commentary I've read makes it sounds like, if people had to bet, the LibNats forming government is at least a bit more likely than Labor, simply because Liberals + Nationals + the 3 conservative Independents is likely to get you to a majority.  While the 3 conservative Independents all have problems with the Coalition, they do represent conservative constituencies, and if it's Coalition 73 Labor 72, they'd probably be more likely to cut a deal with the Coalition, rather than deliver victory to Julia Gillard.

What do those who follow this more closely than I do think of that?  If someone put a gun to your head, and forced you to bet on which party you think will form a government out of this, which way would you go?

[Platypus]

I'd say it's 55-45 to the coalition's advantage. If Labor gets government, we'll see a full term though, and if it's the Libs we should expect a DD within a year.

[redcommander]

FWIW, in a ranking of recent anglosphere right-wing leaders, Abbott is near the middle.

David Cameron
John Key
John McCain
Tony Abbott
Stephen Harper
John Howard
George W. Bush

He's still horrible, but he isn't as horrible as Howard, Harper or Bush.

Also, not to be too, BRTDish, but fark the Greens.

...and finally, time for Victoria and Tasmania to split off from the rest of Australia.

John Key is by far the best out of the group. Cameron has been somewhat of a disappointment.

[Smid]

I heard from a friend who was scrutineering in Brisbane today that it is pretty much all over there - Labor would need something like 80% of the remaining postal votes to pull in front.

As for conservative independents... as plenty of people said, they left the Nats for a reason. Russell Savage backed Steve Bracks over Kennett, even though he had much more in common with a Liberal Government. It gets more interesting if Labor needs either Wilkie or the Greens in the mix... I don't think the country independents would support them. I'm hearing conflicting news out of Corangamite about the postals.

The DLP didn't re-group, it's been around the whole time, contesting the occasional electorate here or there. They're still pretty much just Catholics. Apparently their scrutineers at the Senate count say that it's a contest between them and Family First, but personally I think there are about a quarter of a million postals out there still to count and I think those postals will strongly favour the major parties, so I think the final result for the Senate could change and the DLP drops off, but let's just wait and see.

[Mr. Morden]

I guess one prerequisite for the Coalition having a realistic chance at forming a government is that they would need at least 73 seats on their own.  Otherwise, even the three conservative Independents wouldn't be enough to get them to 76.  So I guess one question is "What is the probability that they end up dropping below 73 seats?"  This article:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/labor-leads-race-for-minority-government-20100822-13akb.html

suggests that postal votes in Hasluck are likely to be heavily Labor, which could put them over the top there, meaning that the Coalition would drop to 72.  Of course, there are a couple of other too close to call seats where Labor's leading that could well offset this.  How many seats do people think are truly in play at the moment?  Everyone seems to have a different count.

[YL]

the DLP's win is one of those fun fluke of STV things, just like Family First-Sanity Last's "win" in 2004. Ironically, I think the DLP got less votes today than FFP but still won a seat while Fielding got creamed bad.

Isn't it more a feature of the Australian version of STV, with compulsory full preferencing and above the line voting?  I'm not aware of similar things happening in Northern Ireland.

[Vasall des Midas]

I actually do miss Howard, yeah.

Please change your avatar to blue.

Yeah, seriously.

Tbh Howard was more brown than blue.

[Vasall des Midas]

As long as it's 76-74 right-left, a Coalition government is the likely (though not certain) outcome. If it's 77-73 or 78-72 it becomes a near-cert. 75-75 will likely lead to a Labour government. (74-76 won't happen, but makes Labour governing a certainty.)

[Platypus]

Heard a little birdie saying Labor will be looking at adding a 151st seat or removing the 150th should they govern. Neither would change senate numbers, and both would be in the territories so they can do so. The loss would be in the NT, making one semi-safe Labor seat instead of one safe Labor and one swing seat; the coalition would hate it. The addition would be in the ACT (which truly does deserve a third seat, population wise) and would mean that Labor would almost certainly gain an extra seat.

While it would be in Labor's favour to do either, I also think it would be in democracy's favour. The likelihood of 75-75, which means 74-75-1 with the speaker and a government permanently at risk of no confidence without the speaker voting (no tie at 74-75) is real, but with a 151st seat the most equal it could be is 75-75 allowing the speaker to vote. Much better (also for the coalition should they find themselves in such a position one day).

Of course, there hasn't been anything said by a single member of the parliamentary party, and it depends on the outcome of this election anyway, but I think long term for Australia's sake a 151st seat (or at least no 150th seat) is the way to go.