WI: Australian Federal Election 2013: Gillard survives 26 June spill

[BigVic]

If Julia Gillard survives the 26 June Labor Leadership ballot against Kevin Rudd and the 14 September 2013 (Original date) election goes ahead, how many more seats would the Coalition would've won under a Gillard-led Labor Government

2PP Newspoll 14 September '13
Lib/Nat Coalition 57.3%
Australian Labor Party 42.7%

Liberal National Coalition wins the election with a net gain of 30 seats
Lib/Nat Coalition 105
Australian Labor Party 42
Independent 1
Katter's Australian Party 1
The Australian Greens 1




Composition of the Australian Parliament

Government
Coalition (105)
Liberal (67)
LNP (26)
Nationals (10)
Country Liberal Party (2)

Opposition
ALP (42)

Cross-benchers
Greens 1
KAP 1
IND 1

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

I think the Coalition would have won a larger victory, around 100 seats. In your results, is the independent Andrew Wilkie?

[Knives]

I think the Coalition would have won by the same.

[Smid]

Former Prime Minister Gillard was a tough campaigner and her unpopularity was already factored into the polling. Former Prime Minister Rudd was erratic, obnoxious and an undisciplined campaigner. Labor could not have pulled out a win but I think that an incumbent Prime Minister Gillard would have held a similar number of seats as Rudd did, possibly more. I know the polls didn't suggest that, however the polls moved during the campaign, declining for Rudd, but I suspect they would have improved for Gillard.

Obvious caveat is that this would require Rudd to behave as well as Gillard did after she lost the leadership. Of course he wouldn't, and that would lead to a less disciplined campaign, so perhaps that would undermine Gillard's main advantage over him.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Larger coalition victory; Queensland would have swing especially hard possibly reducing the ALP QLD delegation to just Rudd. Although, on paper it would only be two or three per cent lower than Rudd's share in 2013; I think Gillard would have performed much worse in the marginals (and there were a lot of big Labor names ended up in marginals that only needed a teeny coalition push - Swann, Anna Burke, Fitzgibbon, Dreyfus, even Bowen)

On the bright side, Jaymes Diaz would probably be elected, delighting us all for what would be otherwise a dark few years.

Senate wise, the coalition barely has much room to grow - maybe a handful of extra seats in QLD, TAS and VIC?? But The ALP primary would bottom to embarrassing levels, possibly increasing the level of lunatics, or as they prefer to be called in Australia, "crossbenchers". Predicting the results of Senate results is a completely useless exercise, but it would increase the chance of Labor candidates randomly dropping below the "I Love Cake" party at some critical stage at the count. It's worth noting that 2013 was already pretty humiliating for Labor, especially in WA and SA, so only a few seats would be at risk.

[Vega]

On the bright side, Jaymes Diaz would probably be elected, delighting us all for what would be otherwise a dark few years.

I'm assuming this isn't a joke, but is Diaz of the Turnbull mold when it comes to the Liberals?

[Smid]

On the bright side, Jaymes Diaz would probably be elected, delighting us all for what would be otherwise a dark few years.

I'm assuming this isn't a joke, but is Diaz of the Turnbull mold when it comes to the Liberals?

Diaz was a candidate in a marginal who would never have risen beyond being a backbencher. The only reason anyone knows about him is because of a disastrous media interview in which he couldn't answer a question relating to the detail of a policy and kept repeating the first dot point.

He was pretty useless but it is still disappointing that politics in the media has descended to these sorts of "gotcha" moments. He probably had never presented in front of TV media before, had probably had no media training and is criticised for his inexperience. There are more incompetent members than him on both sides of politics and it is pretty tasteless for his stumble to be dragged up the way it is. He was running in a Labor-leaning seat that probably would have fallen otherwise, but the fact is, he was never ministerial material and his only mistake was inexperience.

[Vega]

On the bright side, Jaymes Diaz would probably be elected, delighting us all for what would be otherwise a dark few years.

I'm assuming this isn't a joke, but is Diaz of the Turnbull mold when it comes to the Liberals?

Diaz was a candidate in a marginal who would never have risen beyond being a backbencher. The only reason anyone knows about him is because of a disastrous media interview in which he couldn't answer a question relating to the detail of a policy and kept repeating the first dot point.

He was pretty useless but it is still disappointing that politics in the media has descended to these sorts of "gotcha" moments. He probably had never presented in front of TV media before, had probably had no media training and is criticised for his inexperience. There are more incompetent members than him on both sides of politics and it is pretty tasteless for his stumble to be dragged up the way it is. He was running in a Labor-leaning seat that probably would have fallen otherwise, but the fact is, he was never ministerial material and his only mistake was inexperience.

Thanks for that. I imagine after a few terms in Parliament he would have been more ready for the limelight, perhaps.

He did keep it close, though; 52-47 isn't too bad. It could have been worse. But as you said, it was a marginal.

[BigVic]

Sophie Mirabella would've retained the seat of Indi (Gulp).

[Vega]

Cross-benchers
Greens 1
KAP 1
IND 1

You don't think they would at least get a second MP with the Labor collapse and new votes going to them?

[morgieb]

On the bright side, Jaymes Diaz would probably be elected, delighting us all for what would be otherwise a dark few years.

I'm assuming this isn't a joke, but is Diaz of the Turnbull mold when it comes to the Liberals?

Diaz was a candidate in a marginal who would never have risen beyond being a backbencher. The only reason anyone knows about him is because of a disastrous media interview in which he couldn't answer a question relating to the detail of a policy and kept repeating the first dot point.

He was pretty useless but it is still disappointing that politics in the media has descended to these sorts of "gotcha" moments. He probably had never presented in front of TV media before, had probably had no media training and is criticised for his inexperience. There are more incompetent members than him on both sides of politics and it is pretty tasteless for his stumble to be dragged up the way it is. He was running in a Labor-leaning seat that probably would have fallen otherwise, but the fact is, he was never ministerial material and his only mistake was inexperience.

Thanks for that. I imagine after a few terms in Parliament he would have been more ready for the limelight, perhaps.

He did keep it close, though; 52-47 isn't too bad. It could have been worse. But as you said, it was a marginal.

Getting a 2% swing AGAINST you when Labor were losing pretty heavily nationwide is pretty pathetic. Any Liberal with a brain would've picked that seat up in 2013.