Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 21, 2014, 05:09:09 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Election What-ifs?
| | |-+  International What-ifs (Moderators: Bacon King, Dallasfan65)
| | | |-+  US with Australian parties
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print
Author Topic: US with Australian parties  (Read 4035 times)
後援会
koenkai
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1283


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -2.52

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: September 07, 2012, 06:13:16 pm »
Ignore

Could the American Democrats nominate someone like Kevin Rudd these days? A pro-life, anti-gay marriage, religious "Big America" politician?
Logged

The opinions and views expressed above are mine alone and do not represent the opinions or views of any other individual, organization, or government.
Anton Kreitzer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2761
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: September 08, 2012, 03:00:39 am »
Ignore

Some good stuff here, please keep it going, although I think New Hampshire would have voted ALP once, maybe twice between 1972-2010, I'm thinking 1983.
Logged



Australian Election Series - 1982 Election Coming Soon!
Smid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6023
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: September 08, 2012, 06:42:08 am »
Ignore

Some good stuff here, please keep it going, although I think New Hampshire would have voted ALP once, maybe twice between 1972-2010, I'm thinking 1983.

Yes, and those rural communities could potentially have provided a baton of support for the Nationals, although begun to move towards the Liberals - similar to Hume or Farrer in NSW. Of course, we need to see what happens in Hume if there's a three-cornered contest next year with Album Schultz's retirement.
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: September 09, 2012, 02:19:02 am »
Ignore

Vermont

This has to be the trickiest state in the Union to analyse. Before the 1980's Vermont's voting patterns were largely based on history, sticking to its traditions of Rockefeller Republicanism, but since then being ultra-safe Democrat. In Australian terms, I can't really get a feel on it.

However, right now it would be very solidly Labor, and perhaps the Greens could finish 2nd here. It was the first state to abolish slavery, and elects and likes a socialist. It is the 'healthiest' state in the Union, and has IBM as a heavy manufacturing employer. It also has a yuppie ice-cream store as it's major tourist attraction. Yeah, this state isn't in much doubt.

1972: Labor
1974: Labor
1975: Liberal
1977: Liberal
1980: Liberal
1983: Labor
1984: Labor
1987: Labor
1990: Labor
1993: Labor
1996: Labor
1998: Labor
2001: Labor
2004: Labor
2007: Labor
2010: Labor (with the Greens finishing 2nd on 2PP)
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: September 12, 2012, 08:41:55 am »
Ignore

Massachusetts

As a whole, Massachusetts would be pretty heavily Labor leaning, although it can be tight in close years and it would have been more competitive in the past. But with the decline of the DLP, any signs of working-class Catholics voting Liberal via preferences is non-existent.

Western Massachusetts

Much of Western Massachusetts has a feeling of a small town. This area although once Liberal voting appears to be shifting left with the rest of New England. However, I'm not really sure how to pin this down.

Greater Boston

With it's history of tensions, a high Irish Catholic population and a manufacturing based economy turning into a more service based one, as well as a reputation for world-class universities, this area would be heavily Labor since Federation most likely. Although a more populist appeal has allowed the Liberals to make some breakthroughs here, it is still heavily Labor.

Southeastern Massachusetts (Cape Cod, etc.)

The main area of Liberal strength in Massachusetts. Quite wealthy and rural, it would prevent Massachusetts from being ultra-ALP.

Overall

Solidly Labor. It has 1. a major manufacturing/industrial base (or at least traditionally did), 2. a yuppie, progressive base, 3. a massive Irish Catholic population and 4. a large number of universities. However, the Liberals could go close in a very good year for them.

1972: Labor
1974: Labor
1975: Liberal
1977: Liberal
1980: Labor
1983: Labor
1984: Labor
1987: Labor
1990: Labor
1993: Labor
1996: Labor
1998: Labor
2001: Labor
2004: Labor
2007: Labor
2010: Labor
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: September 12, 2012, 05:17:03 pm »
Ignore

Rhode Island

This is basically Massachusetts, but even more extrapolated - heavy manufacturing and shipping base, Catholics, progressives, etc.

Providence would be heavily Labor due to the working-class progressive population, heavily industrialised economy, large Hispanic/Portuguese population and high poverty rates. The rest of the state however would still contain some elements of New England traditions, however the Liberals would generally struggle to win any counties, let alone the state.

1972: Labor
1974: Labor
1975: Labor
1977: Labor
1980: Labor
1983: Labor
1984: Labor
1987: Labor
1990: Labor
1993: Labor
1996: Labor
1998: Labor
2001: Labor
2004: Labor
2007: Labor
2010: Labor
Logged
Smid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6023
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: September 12, 2012, 08:44:36 pm »
Ignore

May even have elected the DLP in the years before your dates start...
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: September 12, 2012, 09:02:47 pm »
Ignore

May even have elected the DLP in the years before your dates start...
Nah, the DLP never won any seats in federal elections, although maybe they would've handed the Liberals the state on good elections.
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: September 14, 2012, 10:46:14 pm »
Ignore

Connecticut

Unlike Connecticut's neighbours, Connecticut tends to be more swingy. Traditionally, Connecticut's economy was manufacturing-based, which made the state fairly Labor, but this has declined.

However, Labor still have some strongpoints, in Bridgeport as it still has a strong manufacturing population, New Haven, with Yale helping Labor with the yuppie vote, and Hartford, which has a very high minority population (although the high incomes would keep it tight). Connecticut also has a feel of a small-town. Yet Labor's advantage is wiped out due to the very affluent New York suburbia, which makes the state generally Liberal-leaning. However Labor could easily win it on their good years.

1972: Liberal
1974: Liberal
1975: Liberal
1977: Liberal
1980: Liberal
1983: Labor
1984: Labor
1987: Labor
1990: Liberal
1993: Liberal
1996: Liberal
1998: Liberal
2001: Liberal
2004: Liberal
2007: Labor
2010: Liberal
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: September 15, 2012, 04:03:05 am »
Ignore

Any comments?
Logged
Smid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6023
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: September 15, 2012, 04:34:04 am »
Ignore

Any comments?

I think you're on the right track.
Logged
Anton Kreitzer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2761
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: September 15, 2012, 12:04:09 pm »
Ignore

Any comments?

I think you're on the right track.

So do I! Looking forward to the rest of the states!
Logged



Australian Election Series - 1982 Election Coming Soon!
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: September 24, 2012, 08:32:42 am »
Ignore

Remember this?

New York

Outer Long Island (Nassau and Suffolk Counties)

Pretty solid Liberal strongholds. Labor do "OK" among the more minority areas, but all of the congressional districts are Liberal-held. (although a couple may flip in a good year)

I also think the DLP would've done very well in the past here.

New York City

Manhattan

Very solid ALP, however as it's a lot more whiter and wealthier than other parts of New York, there is a lot of room for the Greens and (in the past) the Democrats. Greens most likely finished 2nd here in 2010, and the Dems might have done so in 1990.

The Bronx

Most likely the best area for the ALP in the country. Regularly get 80%+ of the vote, and sometimes even 90%+.

Brooklyn (Kings)

Also a very solidly ALP area. Has more whites than The Bronx and a significant Orthodox community however (NY-09 is probably Liberal held though it depends on the candidates), which makes the Liberals slightly better than the Bronx. Yet the ALP would probably gain 70%+ of the vote.

Queens

While Queens isn't quite like Manhattan with reference to their economy, it still has a large diverse economy. Notably, half of its residents were born overseas. It is probably the most ethnically diverse place in NYC. Generally it would vote ALP, however not as extreme as other boroughs.

Staten Island

Less densely populated, more white and more suburban than the other boroughs, it would be the only one that leans Liberal.

New York Suburbs

Pretty Liberal, probably cracking 60%+ on a good year. Labor do however have some strength in more ethnic areas such as Yonkers.

Upstate New York

A swing region, and crucial to Liberals hopes of winning the state. Upstate cities such as Buffalo and Albany, which tend to have more of a manufacturing base are Labor voting. The more rural areas however vote Liberal, and this generally means this area votes Liberal normally.

Overall

There is a noticeable Labor lean, but in a good year for the Liberals they can definitely win here. Footnote: the 2001 results are due to a hypothetical "rally around the flag" in New York (because of you know...9/11 and all that). 2004 I think Latham would have been unappealing to Upstate voters.

1972: Labor
1974: Labor
1975: Liberal
1977: Liberal
1980: Labor
1983: Labor
1984: Labor
1987: Labor
1990: Labor
1993: Labor
1996: Liberal
1998: Labor
2001: Liberal
2004: Liberal
2007: Labor
2010: Labor
Logged
Anton Kreitzer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2761
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: October 15, 2012, 07:12:22 pm »
Ignore

Looking forward to how the rest of the US will vote, especially the likes of Colorado, Wisconsin, Florida and Alabama to name a few!
Logged



Australian Election Series - 1982 Election Coming Soon!
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: February 09, 2013, 10:45:38 pm »
Ignore

Pennsylvania

Philadelphia metro

Very, very solidly Labor city. Not only is it very urban, it had an old manufacturing base, and more importantly a huge black and an emerging Hispanic population. Labor would win 70%+ here, with the Liberals doing OK-ish around the North near Bucks and Montgomery County.

The suburbs are more of a mixed bag. Although the area is very white, it has a large Catholic population, so it's very possible that a strong Labor machine would woo these areas in recent years and maybe back in the 1950's and 60's it would have an important DLP vote. My guess is that the more inner suburbs (Delaware and Montco) would probably lean ALP since the 1980's but the more exurban areas would still be pretty strong Liberal.

Dutch Country

Mostly farmland with some small cities. Although Philadelphia is expanding towards here, there is no real evidence of that changing the region's political demographics, although the Hispanic vote is making it less obvious. Yet it is still staunchly Liberal/National.

Lehigh Valley

Largely a working-class and industrial area largely based on small cities, this area would largely lean ALP but can vote LNP and is trending towards them despite the growth of Philadelphia exurbia.

Scranton-Wilkes Barre

Similar to the Lehigh Valley, but Joe Biden land still supports the ALP by and large.

Central Pennsylvania/The "T"

In general, the area votes LNP, how strongly however depends on the area. The heart of the T, near Dutch Country, is very rural and based on farming, so that would be staunchly LNP, however areas near SWPA, and parts of the Northern "T" have economic roots in manufacturing, so they can vote ALP from time to time.

Erie

Erie itself is largely a working-class city, but the actual district would lean Tory due to the allegiance of the rural areas.

Pittsburgh and surrounds

SWPA is one of the main ALP areas in the country. Why? Well, Pittsburgh is a major industrial city, and the area has a lot of coal mining. Liberals do OK in the suburbs, but not nearly well enough to prevent the ALP winning all three districts around this area 95% of the time.

Overall

Pennsylvania leans ALP, mainly due to the high proportion of Catholics and the appearance of two major cities. Yet due to support in the "T", the state is not entirely out of reach for the LNP. Not a lot politically has changed for a long time - ALP trends in the suburbs has been cancelled out by the decline of industrial areas.

1972: Labor
1974: Labor
1975: Liberal
1977: Liberal
1980: Labor
1983: Labor
1984: Labor
1987: Labor
1990: Labor
1993: Labor
1996: Liberal
1998: Labor
2001: Labor
2004: Liberal
2007: Labor
2010: Labor
Logged
DC Al Fine
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7098
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: February 10, 2013, 05:51:15 pm »
Ignore

Comments, critique, etc. is appreciated.

A little mention of prominent 3rd parties is always nice. I.e. " Greens came a strong second in Vermont"
Logged

Economic: 3.1
Social: 2.78

Quote from: Don Colacho
The Gospels and the Communist Manifesto are on the wane; the world’s future lies in the power of Coca-Cola and pornography.
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: February 10, 2013, 06:03:20 pm »
Ignore

Comments, critique, etc. is appreciated.

A little mention of prominent 3rd parties is always nice. I.e. " Greens came a strong second in Vermont"
I have alluded to strong third parties in some of my posts (i.e. Greens doing well in urban/left-wing areas, DLP traditionally doing well in suburban Catholic areas, etc.)

Thing is, there aren't a lot of third parties in Australian politics. They rarely seem to win seats or even go particularly close to doing so.
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: February 10, 2013, 06:05:29 pm »
Ignore

Could the American Democrats nominate someone like Kevin Rudd these days? A pro-life, anti-gay marriage, religious "Big America" politician?
Depends. Probably not these days but if Howard/Costello was dominating they could do it.

Someone like Gillard would be DOA in an American context, whereas Abbott would be loved.
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: February 10, 2013, 06:14:27 pm »
Ignore

To describe third-parties:

Greens: Would poll best in urban areas, particularly those which are pretty latte liberal and fairly white. Also has appeal with rural hippies.

Democrats: Irrelevant now, and tricky to decide even back in the day, as they did the best in the Senate and a lot of their vote was regional based. I imagine they would do well in traditionally Liberal wealthy areas.

DLP: See what I said about the Democrats, except their main goal was to keep Labor out of power. Their strength would probably be in heavily Catholic suburbs.

One Nation: Would poll best in rural, heavily white and working/lower-class areas during their brief period of relevance.

Any others I may have missed?
Logged
Anton Kreitzer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2761
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: February 12, 2013, 10:01:09 am »
Ignore

To describe third-parties:

Greens: Would poll best in urban areas, particularly those which are pretty latte liberal and fairly white. Also has appeal with rural hippies.

Democrats: Irrelevant now, and tricky to decide even back in the day, as they did the best in the Senate and a lot of their vote was regional based. I imagine they would do well in traditionally Liberal wealthy areas.

DLP: See what I said about the Democrats, except their main goal was to keep Labor out of power. Their strength would probably be in heavily Catholic suburbs.

One Nation: Would poll best in rural, heavily white and working/lower-class areas during their brief period of relevance.

Any others I may have missed?

What about the Liberty and Democracy Party? I can see them doing well in the mountain/western states. Also, Family First and the Christian Democrats would do well with evangelical Christians.

Keep up the good work!
Logged



Australian Election Series - 1982 Election Coming Soon!
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: February 16, 2013, 12:49:16 am »
Ignore

Dire. I posted up a New Jersey post, but it lost itself. There should be a way to keep the post if somehow you click off the page. Very frustrating if you wrote something big!

A small write-up here as I cbf writing the whole thing out again.

New Jersey

In general, the state leans Liberal. Although Labor do have some strength in minority heavy areas such as the Gateway Region, this is counteracted by Liberal support in wealthy Central Jersey, touristy Jersey Shore and suburban areas. But the ALP's hopes of winning are not impossible. The state has trended ALP recently due to a heavier minority presence.

1972: Liberal
1974: Liberal
1975: Liberal
1977: Liberal
1980: Liberal
1983: Liberal
1984: Liberal
1987: Liberal
1990: Liberal
1993: Labor
1996: Liberal
1998: Labor
2001: Liberal
2004: Liberal
2007: Labor
2010: Liberal
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: February 16, 2013, 11:06:56 pm »
Ignore

Delaware

This state is very small - only three counties, making the state fairly homogenised and simple to analyse.

New Castle County

Wilmington, with its large minority population and poverty rates, is staunchly Labor, however the rest of the county is whiter, more suburban and wealthier, therefore more inclined to vote Liberal.

Kent County

This county is smaller than New Castle County, however the county is more homogenous than New Castle and therefore has higher poverty rates and a higher black population. It would be a swing area.

Sussex County

This county has a smaller minority population, is more agrarian than the other two counties and more white. The main Labor support here would be with the small black population.

Overall

Delaware would lean Liberal, but could vote ALP in the right circumstances.

1972: Liberal
1974: Liberal
1975: Liberal
1977: Liberal
1980: Liberal
1983: Labor
1984: Liberal
1987: Liberal
1990: Liberal
1993: Labor
1996: Liberal
1998: Liberal
2001: Liberal
2004: Liberal
2007: Labor
2010: Liberal
« Last Edit: November 16, 2013, 02:10:34 am by I Can't Get That Sound You Make, Out Of My Head »Logged
Anton Kreitzer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2761
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: February 18, 2013, 04:16:28 am »
Ignore

Dire. I posted up a New Jersey post, but it lost itself. There should be a way to keep the post if somehow you click off the page. Very frustrating if you wrote something big!

A small write-up here as I cbf writing the whole thing out again.

New Jersey

In general, the state leans Liberal. Although Labor do have some strength in minority heavy areas such as the Gateway Region, this is counteracted by Liberal support in wealthy Central Jersey, touristy Jersey Shore and suburban areas. But the ALP's hopes of winning are not impossible. The state has trended ALP recently due to a heavier minority presence.

1972: Liberal
1974: Liberal
1975: Liberal
1977: Liberal
1980: Liberal
1983: Liberal
1984: Liberal
1987: Liberal
1990: Liberal
1993: Labor
1996: Liberal
1998: Labor
2001: Liberal
2004: Liberal
2007: Labor
2010: Liberal

Delaware

This state is very small - only three counties, making the state fairly homogenised and .

New Castle County

Wilmington, with its large minority population and poverty rates, is staunchly Labor, however the rest of the county is whiter, more suburban and wealthier, therefore more inclined to vote Liberal.

Kent County

This county is smaller than New Castle County, however the county is more homogenous than New Castle and therefore has higher poverty rates and a higher black population. It would be a swing area.

Sussex County

This county has a smaller minority population, is more agrarian than the other two counties and more white. The main Labor support here would be with the small black population.

Overall

Delaware would lean Liberal, but could vote ALP in the right circumstances.

1972: Liberal
1974: Liberal
1975: Liberal
1977: Liberal
1980: Liberal
1983: Labor
1984: Liberal
1987: Liberal
1990: Liberal
1993: Labor
1996: Liberal
1998: Liberal
2001: Liberal
2004: Liberal
2007: Labor
2010: Liberal

Despite the loss of your original NJ post, this is good stuff. Please keep it going!
Logged



Australian Election Series - 1982 Election Coming Soon!
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5297
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: November 16, 2013, 02:31:17 am »
Ignore

To describe third-parties:

Greens: Would poll best in urban areas, particularly those which are pretty latte liberal and fairly white. Also has appeal with rural hippies.

Democrats: Irrelevant now, and tricky to decide even back in the day, as they did the best in the Senate and a lot of their vote was regional based. I imagine they would do well in traditionally Liberal wealthy areas.

DLP: See what I said about the Democrats, except their main goal was to keep Labor out of power. Their strength would probably be in heavily Catholic suburbs.

One Nation: Would poll best in rural, heavily white and working/lower-class areas during their brief period of relevance.

Any others I may have missed?

What about the Liberty and Democracy Party? I can see them doing well in the mountain/western states. Also, Family First and the Christian Democrats would do well with evangelical Christians.

Keep up the good work!

It's hard to analyse the LDP's strength. I suppose they would have a vague base (like get around 5%) in the Republican West, however a lot of their support would be with Liberal voters confusing them with the actual Liberal party (which is how they got 9% in the recent Senate election). We don't have a lot of libertarian sweet spots, though in general the LDP are pretty marginal apart from the 2013 NSW Senate election, so I don't know for sure.

Family First and Christian Democrats are tricky too, and which one goes well depends on the state. In our country, the CDP poll best in mine and your states, whereas Family First do best everyone else. A lot of their support appears in Protestant suburbs (i.e. suburbs not dominated by Catholics) and rural areas, and I imagine this would carry on to America too, as long as the suburbs aren't too blue-ribbon. I can see them polling 5-10% in the South/Mormon belt in say 2004, but their support has kinda slumped since then (though they do still have a smallish base).



On a similar note, it might be worth analysing a new party which popped up (Dropolich's and Muir's mobs are so marginal that analysing them would be pointless): The Palmer United Party.

It's hard to know where the party would succeed the most. I guess Perot's map in 1996 (1992 was way too strong to analyse where Palmer would poll well) would give us a fair indication, as well as Palmer's home base (where ever that would be). I say Perot as both of them are cut from fairly similar cloths (IIRC) - both are very wealthy men who made their millions from natural resources. Also, both of them leaned towards the right, but ran on somewhat unorthodox platforms. Palmer's support seemed stronger in rural areas and suburbs than inner city areas, so I guess that would carry onto performing in similar regions in America (although Palmer was elected in a regional city [Sunshine Coast, though that's more like a heavily urban region ala Central Coast]).



Anyways, will do Maryland and maybe West Virginia later tonight.
Logged
Anton Kreitzer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2761
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: November 21, 2013, 05:07:13 am »
Ignore

To describe third-parties:

Greens: Would poll best in urban areas, particularly those which are pretty latte liberal and fairly white. Also has appeal with rural hippies.

Democrats: Irrelevant now, and tricky to decide even back in the day, as they did the best in the Senate and a lot of their vote was regional based. I imagine they would do well in traditionally Liberal wealthy areas.

DLP: See what I said about the Democrats, except their main goal was to keep Labor out of power. Their strength would probably be in heavily Catholic suburbs.

One Nation: Would poll best in rural, heavily white and working/lower-class areas during their brief period of relevance.

Any others I may have missed?

What about the Liberty and Democracy Party? I can see them doing well in the mountain/western states. Also, Family First and the Christian Democrats would do well with evangelical Christians.

Keep up the good work!

It's hard to analyse the LDP's strength. I suppose they would have a vague base (like get around 5%) in the Republican West, however a lot of their support would be with Liberal voters confusing them with the actual Liberal party (which is how they got 9% in the recent Senate election). We don't have a lot of libertarian sweet spots, though in general the LDP are pretty marginal apart from the 2013 NSW Senate election, so I don't know for sure.

Family First and Christian Democrats are tricky too, and which one goes well depends on the state. In our country, the CDP poll best in mine and your states, whereas Family First do best everyone else. A lot of their support appears in Protestant suburbs (i.e. suburbs not dominated by Catholics) and rural areas, and I imagine this would carry on to America too, as long as the suburbs aren't too blue-ribbon. I can see them polling 5-10% in the South/Mormon belt in say 2004, but their support has kinda slumped since then (though they do still have a smallish base).



On a similar note, it might be worth analysing a new party which popped up (Dropolich's and Muir's mobs are so marginal that analysing them would be pointless): The Palmer United Party.

It's hard to know where the party would succeed the most. I guess Perot's map in 1996 (1992 was way too strong to analyse where Palmer would poll well) would give us a fair indication, as well as Palmer's home base (where ever that would be). I say Perot as both of them are cut from fairly similar cloths (IIRC) - both are very wealthy men who made their millions from natural resources. Also, both of them leaned towards the right, but ran on somewhat unorthodox platforms. Palmer's support seemed stronger in rural areas and suburbs than inner city areas, so I guess that would carry onto performing in similar regions in America (although Palmer was elected in a regional city [Sunshine Coast, though that's more like a heavily urban region ala Central Coast]).



Anyways, will do Maryland and maybe West Virginia later tonight.

Great to see this restarted, and good points about the LDP, Family First, Palmer United and the CDP!
Logged



Australian Election Series - 1982 Election Coming Soon!
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines