Australia 2022 Election

[Pulaski]

It's hardly a new feature of politics to not outline any unpopular cuts or taxes before an election. Albanese is simply using Abbott's playbook.

Either way, the focus on leaders in the Australian context is, as ever, misleading, especially when I don't expect Albanese to be a long-serving PM at his age. It will be interesting to see if he commits to 2025 and who gets anointed as his successor. Chalmers would be the obvious go-to, but Jason Clare has picked up some unlikely popularity during this campaign.

[Pulaski]

In Sydney a candidate for the "Australian Citizens Party," formerly known as the Citizens Electoral Council, is running. These guys are affiliated with the LaRouche nutjobs and are most famous here for managing to get a number of their members in the audience of an episode of Q&A years ago and asking "questions" like "climate change theories are Hitler Nazi Race Science that will destroy Africa."

(Not exaggerating, that's almost verbatim what one of them said)

Their website's got some amazing stuff - their main focus is Australia Post (?) and turning it into a national bank, but delving deeper you get the nonsense about CO2 not being a pollutant and even their old pamphlets "WHO KILLED DIANA??" and "Charles Darwin was a FRAUD!"

They also appear to be in the tank for the Chinese government (pun intended), with a long article about Xinjiang and how any lurid allegations are manufactured by the "British Empire."

While their mentions of wanting to end Australia's inhumane treatment of asylum seekers may sound nice, it's important to note that this is just an extension of their pro-immigration stance - made entirely in attempts to entice new ESL immigrants into their fold as they're more vulnerable to indoctrination.

So unfortunately it looks like Palmer's Vanity Project will be above at least two parties in my preferences.

[Pulaski]

I don't expect Albanese to be a long-serving PM at his age.

I mean... he could be PM for 20 years and he'd still be younger than Joe Biden is now, but everywhere isn't like the US.  

That’s an incredible fact you pulled out just there. The guy really is ancient isn’t he?

I think not only are the political cultures obviously different in this regard (Howard was considered to be getting too old for the job by his defeat at age 68), but I think the job of Prime Minister is more strenuous in a big way: Parliament. Biden holds press conferences, but they’re at times of his choosing - our PM faces questions every week from his opponents and has all manner of walking back and forth for votes and divisions in between.

(Not trying to say our system’s better or worse, or that our Prime Minister has an inherently tougher job - just that in some ways it might be more wearing on an older person).

[Pulaski]

Let’s not get into Covid restrictions again.

[Pulaski]

Let’s not get into Covid restrictions again.

Yeah, when we start to get into "list of nasties" labels inclusive of Trudeau and Ardern, I'm left thinking of the kind of person whom, if ranked choice balloting existed in Canada, would put PPC first...

Given the context and the amazingly low death tolls in our countries (the point of restrictions and why 2022 is different), that sounds like a 'list of heroes' to me. I think the more interesting verdicts on Covid responses will be the elections of state governments that actually made the decisions. It should cause the pro-Covid crowd to go nuts if Dan Andrews wins comfortably later this year. He's not on my list of heroes though because he could have been more competent in 2020 and stopped the outbreak (and therefore the lockdown) earlier.

The "pro-Covid" crowd? You mean like those Voluntary Human Extinction guys?

Moving on, YouGov is publishing a seat-by-seat projection based on polls using "multi-level regression with post-stratification," words I recognise from statistics classes but don't understand from not paying attention during those classes. Apparently this method did well at predicting a hung parliament in the UK in 2017 but underestimated the Tories in 2019, so make of it what you will. At the moment it only has projections for seats where independents/crossbenchers are genuinely competing, and it's predicting:

- Kooyong for the Independent (please God yes!!!)
- Goldstein for the Independent
- All incumbent crossbenchers to retain
- The rest (Wentworth, North Sydney, Mackellar, Hughes) for the Liberals.

A little surprised that so many are predicted to stay with the Libs, particularly Wentworth, but if Frydenberg loses his seat I'm happy.

The article I linked to also mentions that apparently Liberal polling has them down in Bennelong, Reid, Robertson and also in Labor seats of Gilmore and Parramatta that they hope to win.

If Frydenberg loses and Constance doesn't get in I'm at a loss to think who'd compete with Dutton for the Liberal leadership (if Dutton retains Dickson, which isn't a certainty either). Alex Hawke maybe?

[Pulaski]

Let’s not get into Covid restrictions again.

[Pulaski]

https://www.themandarin.com.au/188810-election-2022-almost-700-million-kicked-in-for-a-defence-reno/

The federal government has announced yet another renovation and expansion to a defence facility, with the promise of $694.4 million for the General John Baker Complex, which is home to the joint operations command for the Australian Defence Force here and overseas.

Defence minister Peter Dutton has made yet another spending promise in his portfolio, with $30 million towards the renovation and expansion of army reserve and cadet facilities in Tasmania.

That investment is a portion of a $1 billion that has been set aside to renovate army reserve and cadet facilities around the country.

A re-elected Coalition government would put in place a technology skills passport that will assist with getting Australians work ready.

It seems the Coalition is seeking to present itself as having lots of meat to its defense policy.

Frankly I find it impossible to distinguish the foreign and military policy of the ALP and Coalition.

There isn't a difference.

[Pulaski]

At the end of the day, offshore detention works. It work's really well combined with a policy stating that you will never settle in Australia if you come here illegally.

Presumably you're aware of some of the horror stories from Manus and Nauru and they don't sway you, so I will simply say that offshore processing's a hideously expensive and time-consuming process where contracts get awarded without tender to dodgy companies set up by mates of Liberal Party donors. On some occasions boat captains have been bribed to turn back to Indonesia, and Australia's been forced to pay compensation to people they've unlawfully detained. And to resettle tiny numbers of refugees our government's had to pay money to Cambodia, and the UK will pay money to Rwanda - so we help prop up corrupt, repressive regimes, only increasing the likelihood that people in those areas will try to flee in the future.

Better fiscal managers indeed.

To cap it all off, plenty of those people did end up in Australia. Over 1000 got brought here from offshore processing, mostly for medical treatment (and plenty of these transfers were done either before or after the Medevac law), and have been released into either community detention, granted bridging visas, or kept in detention for years and years (again, at great expense to the taxpayer) before lots of them were quietly released in the leadup to this election.

Of those that didn't end up in Australia, lots ended up in PNG - one of the poorest and most dangerous countries in the world by any metric. Presumably this doesn't matter to you, but I would've thought the fact that we subside the PNG government up the yinyang, particularly their healthcare system that these people are now availing themselves of, would matter to you - we're indirectly paying for these people anyway!

Lots were also resettled in the US - and we're all aware of the snivelling, pleading phone call in which Turnbull begged Trump to continue the deal and revealed that in exchange Australia has to take people from the US from places like Costa Rica - and plenty of them are considered not so nice guys. So hardly a "win" for us on that ground either.

And then, of course, we finally accepted New Zealand's offer to resettle some people there - an offer that had been on the table for literal years, meaning we wasted millions keeping these people locked up in the interim.

Once Australia introduced offshore detention ~2013, the number of boats and illegal refugees dropped to.....zero. Absolute zero. We have not had one since.

That's just not true. Plenty of boats still came and were turned back - often with only enough fuel to reach the nearest Indonesian islands, so who knows whether there were more deaths at sea.

Of course, I have no idea of the real numbers, because the government now keeps that data secret!

I understand that not a huge amount of voters in Australia have been swayed by the deaths, the stories of psychological torture, the horrific human rights abuses that have occurred on Manus and Nauru (of course, these are the ones we know about - again, the government has made it extremely difficult to get any information now, even prohibiting doctors from speaking out about genuine concerns they have for people's health there). What I don't understand is why Labor hasn't been making an argument to costs and process. The asylum seeker debate is a complex one, and I have a more nuanced opinion of it at 30 than I did at 20, but offshore processing represents a phenomenal expense to the taxpayer for the numbers of people we're talking about, and achieves zero of its intended outcomes.

[Pulaski]

I have already voted, and this woman is not in my electorate, but her CV is super impressive.

https://www.katechaney.com.au/

We need to clone this woman 100 times and unleash her thinking into society.

Will be super keen to see how she goes. Just incredible to fit that career into her CV plus 3 kids.

Where was this woman when I was a young man dating?

I note her declared policies include the humane treatment of asylum seekers, permanent residency for proven refugees and an end to offshore processing.

[Pulaski]

That's just not true. Plenty of boats still came and were turned back - often with only enough fuel to reach the nearest Indonesian islands, so who knows whether there were more deaths at sea.

In 2015, the Abbott government admitted to paying people smugglers to turn back, which to me, sounds like an incentive to fill a leaky boat with desperate people.  Because the government is so secretive about these things, we have no idea really how much money the Australian government pays to people smugglers and how many people have died under the watch of said smugglers.  Needless to say, pretending that this issue is as simple as saying "just turn boats back!" and then acting as though there are no longer any migrants, is one of the great bipartisan disgraces of Australian politics.

It's particularly hypocritical of Albanese, who, when asked about Labor's policy this week and last, has confirmed Labor will turn boats back and said that it works. Albanese voted against this becoming official Labor policy at the 2015 conference - he even cast the vote himself, rather by proxy like Wong and Plibersek, because, in his words, he wouldn't be able to turn boats back himself.

[Pulaski]

I have already voted, and this woman is not in my electorate, but her CV is super impressive.

https://www.katechaney.com.au/

We need to clone this woman 100 times and unleash her thinking into society.

Will be super keen to see how she goes. Just incredible to fit that career into her CV plus 3 kids.

Where was this woman when I was a young man dating?

I notice that the how-to-vote card on her website is really not a how-to-vote card at all; it says to place her first and then makes no recommendation about the remaining spots. Is this the norm for independent liberal candidates?

Yeah, quite common. It's to avoid the tricky question about which side she's expected to align with in a hung parliament; there'd be quite a few disenfranchised Liberal voters who wouldn't be too pleased if she confirmed she'd support Labor.

[Pulaski]

54-46 Labor in latest Newspoll.

No change from last time; seems like the concrete is setting.

Early voting already open.

Think it's just about over.

[Pulaski]

On a more general point, why have far-right parites been so uniquely electorally successful in australia compared to other  anglo countries ?

Have they, though? I'd argue the UKIP/Brexit has done better than our populist right parties, and the US's main center-right party is basically a fascist one at this point. One Nation is not that big....

Canada....well look at Quebec. Admittely Anglophone Canada is pretty anti far-right, but equally it's not like their Tories are that moderate.

New Zealand - New Zealand First can be considered a right-wing populist party, although Winnie is admittedly a lot more moderate on fiscal matters than Pauline (he's also Maori which makes the racial debate differ).

Ireland - how many immigrants actually live in Ireland?

Yeah I agree, I'm not sure I would describe the far right as being inherently more successful in Australia.

But if one does, there are a couple of potential reasons, one of which is how white Australia is and has always been compared to the UK and US. Another is our electoral system of compulsory and preferential voting, which has generally had a moderating effect on both major parties. Up until the late 90s the Liberals would probably have been described as more moderate than their British or American counterparts. Far right voters may have found more of a home in the Conservative or Republican parties than the Liberal Party up until then.

[Pulaski]

But if one does, there are a couple of potential reasons, one of which is how white Australia is and has always been compared to the UK and US.

Australia is less white than the UK.

Really? Australia I think is about 85% white.

[Pulaski]

Ah. Either way I was probably wrong saying that. I'm surprised about that though; I'm always hearing Farage types in the UK talking about white people becoming a minority in their own country.

[Pulaski]

WA now:

Thanks for doing these seat by seat explainers, they are really interesting. I’ve noticed that you expect non-UNS for different states which has previously been a feature of Australian elections. Generally speaking what are the basis for you expecting different states to swing different ways? Is there credible state level polling, is it the popularity/unpopularity (measured in polls?) of state governments, the appeals the federal party are making, or perhaps even something else?

There definitely seems to be more variance by state that's emerged in the past 15-20 years. Big swings in Queensland in particular were huge deciding factors in the 2007, 2010 and 2019 elections and it's emerged as probably the most conservative-leaning state - previously WA would have been vying for that title due to its mining interests, but as morgie mentioned a hugely popular state government seems to be one of the big deciding factors there. Generally I don't think before covid that state governments and their popularities had huge bearings on federal voting intention - New South Wales had a popular Labor government in the late 90s to mid 00s but still supported Howard's Liberals during that same period.

Overall I think that, despite the state variance, the real divide is the same one that's emerging in other western countries - that between cities and regions. There's a non-zero chance that the Libs come out of this election with no seats anywhere near inner Sydney, for instance. This, for me, better explains why Victoria is a Labor-leaning state (Melbourne makes up well over 70% of the total population of Victoria), Queensland is LNP-leaning (a number of regional towns means Brisbane makes up a little less than 50% of the population), and NSW is more of a battleground (Sydney is around 65% of the population).

[Pulaski]

Is there any truth to the sterotype that Melborune is Australia most left-wing city ? if so, why is that the case ?

Really, Canberra is the most progressive city, being a hive for public servants and academics and consistently giving the Greens the balance of power at the Territory level. But it often gets overlooked due to its small size (including by me in the original version of this post!)

Of the big cities, Melbourne would take the title, though this wasn't always the case; the modern Liberal Party was born out its wealthier eastern suburbs. I suspect it's at least in part due to its association with being the "cultural capital" of Australia, which really started with the Victorian Labor government in the 80s and its efforts to draw in more art and culture into the city. A lot of bohemian artsy types reside there now for sure.

But I've never lived in Melbourne, so I'll defer to anyone who has if they want to offer up alternate ideas.

[Pulaski]

Is there any truth to the sterotype that Melborune is Australia most left-wing city ? if so, why is that the case ?

Really, Canberra is the most progressive city, being a hive for public servants and academics and consistently giving the Greens the balance of power at the Territory level. But it often gets overlooked due to its small size (including by me in the original version of this post!)

Of the big cities, Melbourne would take the title, though this wasn't always the case; the modern Liberal Party was born out its wealthier eastern suburbs. I suspect it's at least in part due to its association with being the "cultural capital" of Australia, which really started with the Victorian Labor government in the 80s and its efforts to draw in more art and culture into the city. A lot of bohemian artsy types reside there now for sure.

But I've never lived in Melbourne, so I'll defer to anyone who has if they want to offer up alternate ideas.

Melbourne has a green MP though and probably a solid third of citizens are thejuicemedia fans.

True, but it also has a number of Liberal MPs in its east.

All 3 of Canberra's seats are solid Labor - but I don't think it's long before the Greens make a play in the seat of Canberra, they got 23% of the primary vote last time and only narrowly came in third behind the Libs. Labor's held government in the ACT for 20 years, most of that time needing the Greens to secure a majority. The ACT legally recognised same sex couples long before any states, and legislated for civil unions and marriage well before the tide had truly shifted in the rest of the country. There's also a chance that the ACT returns no Liberal senator for the first time at this election - former Rugby player David Pocock is running as a progressive independent and is apparently a decent shout, though apparently Labor are worried he might win at the expense of their Senator, rather than the Liberal.

That article also mentions the ACT's recent transition to 100% renewable energy.

I'd certainly put Melbourne as #2, but Canberra, for me, pips it.

[Pulaski]

WA now:

Thanks for doing these seat by seat explainers, they are really interesting. I’ve noticed that you expect non-UNS for different states which has previously been a feature of Australian elections. Generally speaking what are the basis for you expecting different states to swing different ways? Is there credible state level polling, is it the popularity/unpopularity (measured in polls?) of state governments, the appeals the federal party are making, or perhaps even something else?

There definitely seems to be more variance by state that's emerged in the past 15-20 years. Big swings in Queensland in particular were huge deciding factors in the 2007, 2010 and 2019 elections and it's emerged as probably the most conservative-leaning state - previously WA would have been vying for that title due to its mining interests, but as morgie mentioned a hugely popular state government seems to be one of the big deciding factors there. Generally I don't think before covid that state governments and their popularities had huge bearings on federal voting intention - New South Wales had a popular Labor government in the late 90s to mid 00s but still supported Howard's Liberals during that same period.

Overall I think that, despite the state variance, the real divide is the same one that's emerging in other western countries - that between cities and regions. There's a non-zero chance that the Libs come out of this election with no seats anywhere near inner Sydney, for instance. This, for me, better explains why Victoria is a Labor-leaning state (Melbourne makes up well over 70% of the total population of Victoria), Queensland is LNP-leaning (a number of regional towns means Brisbane makes up a little less than 50% of the population), and NSW is more of a battleground (Sydney is around 65% of the population).

Just to provide another opinion, this article analyses the respective states' votes against the national 2PP at every election since 1958 and concludes that most states are actually converging towards the national trend - with the exception of Victoria's leftward trend and Queensland's rightward trend.

So yes, I don't think it's really a state thing so much as it is a city/country thing.

[Pulaski]

Essential today has Labor 48-46 on its weird "2PP+" metric.

A narrowing race, but too little too late I think. Millions have already voted, and one guy thinks as many as 50% of voters could prepoll.

I'll post my full predictions on Saturday but I still think a small Labor majority or a hung parliament with Labor heavily favoured are the most likely scenarios.

[Pulaski]

Talking of which, the PM had his very own Boris Johnson moment at a photo-op in Tasmania today.

Lucky the kid got straight back up so everything was okay.

[Pulaski]

Pauline Hanson has caught covid and she’s unvaccinated.

I’ll refrain from saying anything else lest my post get reported.

[Pulaski]

Are their any hotly contested seats that have significant Chinese-Australian votes?

Chisholm, Reid and Banks (all-Liberal held) all have sizeable Chinese-Australian populations. The member for Banks is understood to have done a lot of work building connections with the Chinese community, so his seat is not considered as likely to fall as the other two.

Parramatta also has a number of Chinese-Australians, but also has Lebanese and Indian sections. It’s a Labor marginal, but polling has suggested that the Liberals will struggle to take it.

[Pulaski]

Last Ipsos had Labor 53-47, but Coalition up on primary thanks to late undecideds.

Definitely a narrowing in this last week but money still on a Labor government emerging either way.

[Pulaski]

Are their any hotly contested seats that have significant Chinese-Australian votes?

Chisholm, Reid and Banks (all-Liberal held) all have sizeable Chinese-Australian populations. The member for Banks is understood to have done a lot of work building connections with the Chinese community, so his seat is not considered as likely to fall as the other two.

Parramatta also has a number of Chinese-Australians, but also has Lebanese and Indian sections. It’s a Labor marginal, but polling has suggested that the Liberals will struggle to take it.

There's also Bennelong with a significant Chinese-Australian population and is hotly contested.

Yes, good point.