South Australian Parliamentary Elections Thread (March 15, 2014)

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think this one is going down to the wire. The polling trajectory is looking better for the Government, plus Wetherill still leads as preferred premier, something which IS a factor when the race is close.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think expecting a uniform swing in this election is a bit of a folly. There will be some very weird swings in each direction exacerbated by local issues. And despite people saying 'State elections are about state issues... if the Libs fail to gain what was a fait accompli 6 months ago, it will reflect VERY badly on Abbott.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Let's suppose that Labor holds on -barely- to power this year.  In the long-term, would it be better for the Liberals to lose this year, with the certainty that four years hence they would be winning in a landslide due to voter fatigue with one-party rule?  

That's kind of the thesis from the 2007 NSW election. In fairness, the ALP had no right to win that election, it just so happened that Debnam was an awful leader and they couldn't provide a compelling argument to change government. That then led to hubris in NSW Labor, the dumping of Iemma for Rees and then Rees for Kenneally and the final straw for the voters... and the ALP losing Government for a decade. 

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

This is about factional wars, not policy of any description. The SA ALP is probably verging on the most actively divided, much like the SA Libs.

Farrell still has a bee in his bonnet about being (through a dodgy party vote) placed first on the Senate ballot and shifted back to his rightful spot in second place - Wetherill and Wong dated in the past and retain a close relationship. This is pretty much spite on Farrell's part - never piss off a factional warlord who loses it seems.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Aaaand Farrell drops out.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think it will be close - although not as close as Hugh thinks.

The Libs will get a very small majority, something like a 52-48 TPP result in the end.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think the undecideds will break very, very strongly to Labor. If they don't already hate him, they're not going to be in an anti-Weatherill mood come election day, surely?

A lot of it comes down to the campaign, if Wetherill can argue HE needs more time to get things done and they LIKE what he's doing... then the undecideds will probably break for him. But if there is a lazy mood of 'change' the largely un-engaged undecideds will probably go with the flow. 

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The Lindsay pamphlet was outright race-baiting ... this thing? My God, I'm actually agreeing with Cory Bernardi (there is not water hot enough or cleaning product corrosive enough to clean my mind of that thought) ... but this is a storm in a tea-cup. Mind you, must be a pleasure for the Libs to have someone else to be accused of racial insensitivity.


Onto the election itself... I have a weird feeling this could end up being a lot like 2010... the Libs under-perform in those crucial marginals, they have a chance to get big swings to them in safer seats (on both sides) and maybe pick up Mt Gambier from the Indy. I haven't paid a lot of attention, but I don't see the ALP losing more than 6.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The Lindsay pamphlet was outright race-baiting ... this thing? My God, I'm actually agreeing with Cory Bernardi (there is not water hot enough or cleaning product corrosive enough to clean my mind of that thought) ... but this is a storm in a tea-cup. Mind you, must be a pleasure for the Libs to have someone else to be accused of racial insensitivity.


Onto the election itself... I have a weird feeling this could end up being a lot like 2010... the Libs under-perform in those crucial marginals, they have a chance to get big swings to them in safer seats (on both sides) and maybe pick up Mt Gambier from the Indy. I haven't paid a lot of attention, but I don't see the ALP losing more than 6.

If you haven't paid a lot of attention, how have you come to that conclusion?

LOL... As in I haven't been obsessing over it ... I've been paying less attention than I normally would, but that's still enough to make a reasonable judgement.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

These are the seats I'm sure are probably gone.

Hartley
Bright
Ashford
Elder
Reynell

Honestly? A Lib minority Government would not shock me.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

New polls out today showing Labor narrowly holding on in Newland and Mitchell. I will be so delighted if Tom Kenyon holds his seat!

Polnut how come you think Reynell will fall?

I'm wondering the same thing, maybe the retiring member effect?

Also, do you have a link to these Mitchell/Newland polls?

Yes, retiring member. It's last on the list, because I'm the least sure about it.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'm leaning toward predicting a hung-parliament

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

2 final polls out with widely differing results:
Reachtel 55-45
Newspoll 52.3-47.7

If it's ReachTel, that's decent Lib majority - Newspoll, the Government could retain the majority on those numbers.

My gut-feel, final prediction will be tomorrow, will be closer to Newspoll ... 52-48 LNP. The biggest swings kept within safe seats and the Libs will under-perform in the marginals.

Ugh - I'm thinking... Libs 23 ALP 22 IND 2 ... Libs form Government with Indy support.

I'll need to think more tomorrow ...

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

So, the ALP are gonna be out of government everywhere except the ACT. They ever been at an ebb that low before?

The period after the 1996 election was pretty bad for them... but not that bad. Things will start to turn back now.

On the result - who the hell knows? But I will say the Libs ran a dreadful campaign and in many ways a lot of us did expect the polls to tighten towards the end. That being a product if the fact that the SA ALP Government isn't exactly loved, nor is it hated as QLD or NSW labor were, but because of that, the Libs couldn't play small target and rely on the Government's unpopularity to carry them over the line, and they just haven't done a good job.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

T-minus 90 minutes until the polls close.

Will be watching this race closer than Tasmania.

Well Tasmania is just a matter of scale.

I'm going to stick with my prediction... but equally, I think the Libs can get the 24th seat they need.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The swings, as expected, are completely without uniformity. Although it does seem the ALP is over-performing where they need to to make it respectable... the Libs are going to have to fight tooth and nail to get there.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Looks like I was WAY off - got Florey, Newland, Colton, Elder, Mitchell, Mawson and Light wrong!

Obviously a tad optimistic on my side of things.

...again

Don't feel so stupid predicting a hung-parliament now

If the ABC numbers hold on, the ALP could actually form a Government....

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

While there are a lot of pre-polls and postals to come, I'd only expect the results to be impacted in Mitchell... and that could push the ALP to a majority, probably with an Indy (probably Brock) as Speaker.

It does seem the difference between 23 and 24 seats.

I thought a hung parliament was likely ... but this I was NOT expecting.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

It seems likely the Independents will side with the ALP... I never, ever thought this would be the outcome.

Putting Marshall up there was a sign of hubris on the part of the Libs. The guy was an empty suit and they assumed that SA would fall the same way as QLD and NSW did… relying on a small-target strategy and the unpopularity of the government to drag them over the line.

When push came to shove, as the election got closer… there was no wave, there was no sense of momentum, it became a race. The big problem was that the Libs were cornered and Marshall was exposed as the relative political weakling he was. Who’d have thunk the ALP would get swings TO them in ANY of their marginals?

It should be noted that Marshall got a 2.7% swing against him in his own seat, which drags him down to a 2.1% margin.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think the state issues saying is fair and usually reasonable. I DO think that Abbott did not help their SA colleagues. In fact, my Lib friends were horrified when Abbott showed up in South Australia last week "Oh God, that's the last bloody visual we need in the marginals"

While the bleating over the 2PP v seat issue from the Libs is going to be the line, what is important for the Libs to realise is that if they hadn't wasted their swings in their and Labor safe seats, and actually focused better on the marginal seats, they'd have won.

If you look at the swings in the marginals... in half of the ALPs 10 most marginal seats, the swing against them at the moment is at 1% or less, and they received swings to them in two seats in that list of 10.

For the record... I do think it's ridiculous that the Libs can win the 2PP so convincingly and still lose... but considering the tiny swings they needed to pick up those few seats... it was a dreadful performance from the Libs.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think any chance of replacing Weatherill with Snelling or Koutsantonis is possibly out of the question if the independents get behind Labor.

At the moment, Wetherill is a hero to the party ... he's safe for now. And yes, if there's written agreements with the Independents, any moves for the life of the next next parliament will be much harder.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

On Facebook, Smid mentioned this has more to do with the electorate boundaries than anything else. Labor is getting trounced in the popular vote.

On one side I agree with Smid that it's a ridiculous situation, however, this is not US style Gerrymandering. But the other side of this is that the ALP ran a much better marginal seat campaign than the Libs. It would have taken 1000 votes across three seats to change this result. This is not like it was a foregone conclusion.

Again, while the point Smid and other Liberals have been making is valid, it also isn't relevant now and risks making the Libs look like sore losers.

So this was partly due to boundaries, but you simply cannot ignore the weaknesses of the Liberal campaign.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

So it looks like Weatherill gets another term then, yes?

It's not set in stone, but you'd rather be in his shoes than Marshall's

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Embarassing for Liberals. I'm pretty sure everyone expected them to win.

The voters, even more than the media, expected it.

Have to wonder, had she stayed, if Redmond would've done better.

I wonder the same thing myself regarding Redmond.

While I certainly get the logic of having a fresh-face... the basic fact was that Marshall just seemed to be out-matched by Wetherill and one has to wonder that if someone more experienced would have performed better.

If I remember correctly, Redmond has the Libs ahead when she was removed? But I could be wrong. I just vaguely remember that there was some kind of "wtf" moment when Redmond was removed... that it was more about internal dramas.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The Liberals at least have the moral authority to govern. Reminds me of a similar scenario that resulted in the 1985 Ontario election. (Liberals won the PV, but lost in seats, but formed the govt with the support of the NDP)

I think that's a fair consideration - but I tend to follow the rule that in a parliamentary system, if seats are what matter ... then the seats are what matter. It should be noted that in SA, in the last 20 elections, the party who won the popular vote only formed Government 11 times.

So while I understand the position, the Liberals won the most votes, they just didn't do it where it mattered.