Australia General Discussion

[Verily]

I'm not sure why the assumption seems to be that the Nationals are strong in the most conservative states. My impression of the Nationals is not as more conservative than the Liberals, just more rural. They'd probably win some of the Plains and Mountains (The Dakotas, Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, Idaho) and be nonexistent elsewhere, except Alaska and Montana (though I agree with Gully on those being ALP). I suppose Hugh takes a similar view of this but expands where he thinks is rural enough for the Nationals to be competitive.

[Verily]

Not surprising at all. The Nationals are doomed by political tides even if not demographic ones; whenever a Nationals MP retires, the Liberals often put up a candidate as well, and more often than not the Liberals take the seat. There's little loyalty to the Nationals as a party over the Liberals.

[Verily]

A little above average at 97%

I had to pinch myself before I remembered that we were talking about Australia.

Most likely, the Gippsland result was voters voting for the Nats because they didn't see any reason to do otherwise. Unlike in a general election, this vote wasn't going to affect who formed the next government. I suppose the Nats should just breathe a sigh of relief that it was they and not the Liberals who made it to the 2PP.