US with Australian parties

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

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.

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Any comments?

I think you're on the right track.

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

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

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

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

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!

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

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!

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

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!

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Great to see this back! I think MD would have stayed Labor in 2010 though, otherwise good analysis. The rise of One Nation, as you stated, would also be a significant turnoff to quite a few Marylanders.

Also, would the Nationals come 2nd in WV? I think they'd be the main non-Labor party there.

Please keep this going by the way

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Great to see this back! I think MD would have stayed Labor in 2010 though, otherwise good analysis. The rise of One Nation, as you stated, would also be a significant turnoff to quite a few Marylanders.

Also, would the Nationals come 2nd in WV? I think they'd be the main non-Labor party there.

Please keep this going by the way

Yes, though I suspect that the Liberals and Nationals would just run one candidate if the system was akin to America but the parties weren't.

I imagine for seats themselves the Nats would be the main party in all of the WV seats barring perhaps the Charleston one.

And thinking about it you're probably right for Maryland 2010, but I'll wait and see what happens after I do all 50 states and see what the EV totals were for both parties.

Sounds good, and speaking of the next states, I'm guessing:

• Washington DC is obviously a Labor stronghold.
• VA will be a Liberal-leaning state, although one Labor would win in good years (1972, 1983, 2007), with a rising Green vote over the past decade.
• KY would mainly vote Labor, although not as strongly as WV.

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Great to see this back! I think MD would have stayed Labor in 2010 though, otherwise good analysis. The rise of One Nation, as you stated, would also be a significant turnoff to quite a few Marylanders.

Also, would the Nationals come 2nd in WV? I think they'd be the main non-Labor party there.

Please keep this going by the way

Yes, though I suspect that the Liberals and Nationals would just run one candidate if the system was akin to America but the parties weren't.

I imagine for seats themselves the Nats would be the main party in all of the WV seats barring perhaps the Charleston one.

And thinking about it you're probably right for Maryland 2010, but I'll wait and see what happens after I do all 50 states and see what the EV totals were for both parties.

Sounds good, and speaking of the next states, I'm guessing:

• Washington DC is obviously a Labor stronghold.
• VA will be a Liberal-leaning state, although one Labor would win in good years (1972, 1983, 2007), with a rising Green vote over the past decade.
• KY would mainly vote Labor, although not as strongly as WV.

Kentucky probably won't be for a while fwiw. I'll likely do it with the Midwest rather than the South.

Wait and see for the other two, please

For the most part you're not too wrong though

I will, just thought I'd share my predictions, so to speak.

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Going from your early posts (pre-2013) in this topic, here's the "2013 map" so far morgieb:

Assumptions for 2013:

1. I think ME-2 would go Liberal, while ME-1 would stay Labor.
2. NY would stay Labor, as Abbott wouldn't be the best fit for New Yorkers, city or upstate.
3. PA would narrowly go to the Liberals, and would be one of the tightest contests of the election.

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

PUP would not perform well anywhere in a non-compulsory voting system. It appeals most to the voters who only show up to vote in order to not be fined. Next most appeal in electorates with mining (remember, that's where he made his fortune, and they appreciated his anti-Greens stance during the 2013 federal election).

I can vouch for Smid here, I know a few people who have voted for PUP (some of them twice), and most of them would not be registered if it wasn't mandatory to do so.