Dunkley

[Northalives]

The Voice was dead once the LNP said no. The average voter does not give two figs about your detailed analysis of Greens obfuscation during the Voice debate. And I highly, highly doubt the Voice itself was on the minds of more than about five voters in Dunkley when choosing to not vote Green. How many voters in Dunkley would have read and remembered the Australian Financial Review article from five months ago from Jacinta Price when deciding their vote?

Like I said, weird bee in your bonnet.

I am discussing the Greens and their constituents specifically. There are Greens voters in Dunkley you know and by their very nature, I would suggest, the vast majority of them are extremely engaged in the politics of this nation otherwise they wouldn't be voting for a so called "minor" party.

You sound like a Greens voter/supporter and you do a disservice to those people of Green credentials who don't keep their brains at half mast

 

[Northalives]

What about a 1 only in the top box? That is counted as a vote.

https://www.aec.gov.au/elections/candidates/files/ballot-paper-formality-guidelines.pdf

From the above.

Two Candidates only
In the case of only two candidates on a HoR ballot paper, if the voter has placed a ‘1’ in the box beside a candidate and
■ left the second box blank, or
■ inserted any other number
the ballot paper will be deemed formal (s.268(1)(c) of the Electoral Act).

 

[Forward Press]

I am discussing the Greens and their constituents specifically. There are Greens voters in Dunkley you know and by their very nature, I would suggest, the vast majority of them are extremely engaged in the politics of this nation otherwise they wouldn't be voting for a so called "minor" party.

You sound like a Greens voter/supporter and you do a disservice to those people of Green credentials who don't keep their brains at half mast

I'd argue the simple reality is that the entry of Socialists and Australian Democrats would attract the primary vote of those so inclined - the more politically engaged that vote for minors - and it matches with the decline in their primary vote for Dunkley.

Dunkley itself is not a happy hunting ground overall for the left of politics.

 

[Forward Press]

https://www.aec.gov.au/elections/candidates/files/ballot-paper-formality-guidelines.pdf

From the above.

Two Candidates only
In the case of only two candidates on a HoR ballot paper, if the voter has placed a ‘1’ in the box beside a candidate and
■ left the second box blank, or
■ inserted any other number
the ballot paper will be deemed formal (s.268(1)(c) of the Electoral Act).

Misleading - because voter intent is clearly for the blank or any other number box to be second to the box labelled '1'.

It is an informal vote in the case of Dunkley and all other elections on a state or federal level because there will never be only two candidates. If a seat has 20 candidates, you label 1-19 and leave the last box blank, and the blank box will be counted as 20.

Apologies if I go hard on this because I take a strong interest in electoral science.

 

[Purple7x08_24]

That's informal voting
So if I mark 1,2,3,4,5 in box order because I can't be arsed it's both donkey and it's formal

It's set up so it's illogical for one to vote that way.

 

[Northalives]

I'd argue the simple reality is that the entry of Socialists and Australian Democrats would attract the primary vote of those so inclined - the more politically engaged that vote for minors - and it matches with the decline in their primary vote for Dunkley.

Dunkley itself is not a happy hunting ground overall for the left of politics.

There is absolutely no question that the Socialists and the Democrats fielding candidates would attract votes from those that way inclined but the fact remains that the Greens have always had a "handy" vote in Dunkley so to speak.

It is usually is about 1.5 to 2% or so below the total Greens vote Australia wide. At the June 2022 election, the Greens in Dunkley got a marginally larger swing to them, 1.95%, than the Australia wide swing to the Greens of 1.85% so to lose 52% of the their total, something is cooking. Just over 3% of the swing against went to the first time candidates and the rest probably went to the Animal Justice Party although they clawed back the .96% or so they lost at the 2022 election.

Regardless though, even with the Socialists and the Democrats fielding candidates, it is still a worry for the Greens. The other interesting thing is that the Socialists are much more to the left of the Democrats, who are more to the right of the Greens so in effect, it seems that the Greens lost a proportion of the "hard-liners", so to speak, as well as a proportion of the "softer" element.

 

[Forward Press]

There is absolutely no question that the Socialists and the Democrats fielding candidates would attract votes from those that way inclined but the fact remains that the Greens have always had a "handy" vote in Dunkley so to speak.

It is usually is about 1.5 to 2% or so below the total Greens vote Australia wide. At the June 2022 election, the Greens in Dunkley got a marginally larger swing to them, 1.95%, than the Australia wide swing to the Greens of 1.85% so to lose 52% of the their total, something is cooking. Just over 3% of the swing against went to the first time candidates and the rest probably went to the Animal Justice Party although they clawed back the .96% or so they lost at the 2022 election.

Regardless though, even with the Socialists and the Democrats fielding candidates, it is still a worry for the Greens. The other interesting thing is that the Socialists are much more to the left of the Democrats, who are more to the right of the Greens so in effect, it seems that the Greens lost a proportion of the "hard-liners", so to speak, as well as a proportion of the "softer" element.

In the end, it matters little as the Socialists and Democrats voters would likely preference the Greens high up anyway, but fair enough it's not ideal for the Greens. Not all primary votes will go to the Greens first up once the minor lefties are eliminated from a count.

I do agree they are 'caught' in that position of compromising what they stand for which could see the hard left desert them. Personally, I do not think we will ever see a Greens Prime Minister in my lifetime but they can settle to be the balance of power party which is arguably easier anyway than actually governing.

 

[Northalives]

Misleading - because voter intent is clearly for the blank or any other number box to be second to the box labelled '1'.

It is an informal vote in the case of Dunkley and all other elections on a state or federal level because there will never be only two candidates. If a seat has 20 candidates, you label 1-19 and leave the last box blank, and the blank box will be counted as 20.

Apologies if I go hard on this because I take a strong interest in electoral science.

Please, don't apologise. I to have a strong interest in electoral science as well. The AEC makes it absolutely clear that the number 1 in one box and the other box left blank is only considered to be formal if only two candidates appear on the ballot paper which, as you say, is a very, very unlikely eventuality.

 

[Northalives]

In the end, it matters little as the Socialists and Democrats voters would likely preference the Greens high up anyway, but fair enough it's not ideal for the Greens. Not all primary votes will go to the Greens first up once the minor lefties are eliminated from a count.

I do agree they are 'caught' in that position of compromising what they stand for which could see the hard left desert them. Personally, I do not think we will ever see a Greens Prime Minister in my lifetime but they can settle to be the balance of power party which is arguably easier anyway than actually governing.

Yes, I agree with you. As for a Greens Prime Minister, I don't think we will see that for a century or more. There are too many reactionaries and conservatives, both on the left and the right of the political spectrum and to "water down" their on going influence will take a very, very long time.

If we take the generations born to the massive immigration of the 50's in Australia, the vast majority of those migrants were non-skilled and as a function of their lack of skills, they tended to stick much closer together, unionised if you like. When they were emancipated however from the dead end jobs and factory fodder in the mid 1980's and beyond and their prosperity grew, the lure of more money became overwhelming and as their kids went to onto higher education and Uni, in many instances, the first time ever in their families history that someone went to Uni and these educated offspring carried on the, "nothing-gets-in-the-way-of-making-a -buck attitude that imprisoned their parents. Not all mind you of course, but enough with rabid capitalistic tendencies which will no doubt, be passed on again to their kiddies.

I'm just ruminating; maybe just rabbiting on to be more precise.

 

[Dont_be_a_Plonka]

According to the AEC sight, there have been 3,809 informal votes. The ballot paper order was as follows:

Nathan Conroy (Liberal)
Bronwyn Currie (Animal Justice)
Chrysten Abraham (Libertarian)
Reem Yunis (Victorian Socialists)
Darren Bergwerf (Independent)
Alex Breskin (Greens)
Heath McKenzie (Australian Democrats)
Jodie Belyea (Labor)

The donkey vote therefore would have benefited Conroy and the Liberals.

Informality is listed at 4.2%.

It is unlikely, but it could account for the entire swing

The page cannot be found - AEC Tally Room

Tally Room Problem

tallyroom.aec.gov.au

Donkey votes are formal and counted guys.
Informal votes only refer to ones for Mickey Mouse or with dick and balls drawn on them.

 

[Forward Press]

Donkey votes are formal and counted guys.
Informal votes only refer to ones for Mickey Mouse or with dick and balls drawn on them.

Isn't that a vote for Scott Morrison?

 

[Dont_be_a_Plonka]

Isn't that a vote for Scott Morrison?

I think this qualifies as 'clear intent'.

 

[The Punter]

One of the majors has some blame in this, but I've never seen so much granular analysis for such an unremarkable by-election result in all my life. The very definition of everyone holding serve.

 

[Gavin Excell]

One of the majors has some blame in this, but I've never seen so much granular analysis for such an unremarkable by-election result in all my life. The very definition of everyone holding serve.

Was thinking that too
Not many startling conclusions to be drawn.
Labour lost some of its margin, Libs had a small swing towards them but not enough to be considered significant.

 

[QuietB]

One of the majors has some blame in this, but I've never seen so much granular analysis for such an unremarkable by-election result in all my life. The very definition of everyone holding serve.

"unremarkable" is spot on

 

[RedStarUncle]

One of the majors has some blame in this, but I've never seen so much granular analysis for such an unremarkable by-election result in all my life. The very definition of everyone holding serve.

Yep... put this in the box of "entirely predictable".

Some swing to LNP... slightly better than now national polls have gone, but slightly worse than you might predict in a by-election given how national polls have gone. Splitting hairs on who benefitted.


Ultimately, it gives the LNP "something to work with" going into the next election, but equally shows there is still a lot of work to do. A year ago they were dead in the water losing Aston. The last 12 months has got them back into the race, but they're not winning it. Question is, does the current line give them any more room to improve?

 

[Goroyals22]

Amazing coincidence that the by election was Sunday and mark butler today signs up for a private health increase…
Plenty of cost of living care there


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[nut]

Amazing coincidence that the by election was Sunday and mark butler today signs up for a private health increase…
Plenty of cost of living care there


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

So the government controls private health costs? Doesn’t make sense..,

Private health is a scam… it’s not needed and it ends up costing the nation more with reduced outcomes for all.
Just look at the cost v GDP.

 

[QuietB]

So the government controls private health costs? Doesn’t make sense..,

Private health is a scam… it’s not needed and it ends up costing the nation more with reduced outcomes for all.
Just look at the cost v GDP.

The wealthy are not putting all that money in the pot without the promise of a private room.

 

[nut]

The wealthy are not putting all that money in the pot without the promise of a private room.

And foxtel….

 

[Not Important]

I don't get why Barry constantly shits on the ABC nowadays.

It's not like, in your words, David Speers has control over when the ABC calls it. Green explained why he was hesitant to call it. And when they got a proportionate number of pre-polls that confirmed the swing across the board wasn't large enough, Green (and the backroom people) called it.

In almost every election, like a good statistician, Green et al. wait for the numbers to confirm what's going on. They don't call it based on the vibe like you or I or every political pundit does.

I mean, the "Liberal stooge" in PK was pushing Green to call it earlier, because she - like everyone else - read the tea leaves. But Green, like a qualified, unbiased numbers person, did his thing.

Let's not forget Baz's 2016 Trump call.

well, he doesn't constantly s**t on the abc. as with kerry o'brien he sees the abc going down the commercial media street. speers is an classic illustration of what's wrong with the abc.

O’Brien said the corporation’s focus on marketing strategies, ratings, demographics and “chasing ambulances” had been disastrous and led to the public losing trust in the ABC.

“I think over a long period of time, the ABC has drifted more and more close to a commercial model,” he said.

Kerry O’Brien criticises ABC, saying management needs ‘clarity of thought’ as Ita Buttrose departs

Former 7.30 and Lateline host uses interview ahead of chair’s final day to argue ABC in danger of losing its way and drifting closer to commercial model

www.theguardian.com

 

[kalex6251]

are ley and hume still as deliriously chipper about the result as they were last saturday night

 

[Maggie5]

Amazing coincidence that the by election was Sunday and mark butler today signs up for a private health increase…
Plenty of cost of living care there


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

LOL!
Private Health Insurance is always reviewed/increased about this time of the year under all governments.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Donkey votes are formal and counted guys.
Informal votes only refer to ones for Mickey Mouse or with dick and balls drawn on them.

drawing a dick and balls is still fine as long as all but one box has been filled with a indicated order.

Of course the AEC would prefer you number the boxes in Base 10 using the standard Arabic numerals as used in English script.

 

[Dont_be_a_Plonka]

drawing a dick and balls is still fine as long as all but one box has been filled with a indicated order.

Of course the AEC would prefer you number the boxes in Base 10 using the standard Arabic numerals as used in English script.

This is true.
Any added artwork is always appreciated by bored scrutineers and AEC staff.