Ben was joined by Shaun Ratcliff from Accent Research to discuss the state of play as the federal election year kicks off. They discuss the state of polling, including the MRP polls conducted by Shaun in conjunction with Redbridge throughout 2024.
This podcast is supported by the Tally Room’s supporters on Patreon. If you find this podcast worthwhile please consider giving your support.
You can listen to an ad-free version of this podcast if you sign up via Patreon for $8 or more per month. And $8 donors can now join the Tally Room Discord server.
This podcast is sponsored by Zencastr. Use my special link to save 30% off your first month of any Zencastr paid plan.
You can subscribe to this podcast using this RSS feed in your podcast app of choice, but should also be able to find this podcast by searching for “the Tally Room”. If you like the show please considering rating and reviewing us on iTunes.
A good discussion Ben.
One point I would like to note is that Shaun is another expert analyst, who when stating that some people “voted strategically in 2022 because they believed their preferred party could not win”, didn’t bother to point out the extremely low likelihood of this being required under our system. Not doing so presents a false impression that the Australian Federal electoral system is like the UK and Canada, where strategic voting is a real thing you need to do if you want to keep your least preferred party out of winning.
I was also interested in your point that compared with 100 years ago (or for the first 40 years of Federation) our elections were Labor vs Anti labor and now its moving to Liberal (Conservative) vs Anti Liberal (Conservative). However rather than one anti Liberal (Conservative) party being the natural and regular choice in any given area, there will be a contest as to who come 2nd, as was inferred for the Brisbane Green held seats where it could easily flip to Labor coming 2nd. There are also area where the IND and Labor primaries are close, and if people vote according to their actual preferred order and not complicate the order by assuming “some parties can’t win”, a more accurate position will be evident.
Regarding strategic voting:
– Even if voting strategically is unnecessary, that doesn’t mean that voters won’t change their votes on an incorrect assumption that it is necessary.
– I don’t think you can dismiss the value of voting strategically. We know that teal candidates are more competitive in these seats than Labor candidates are, by looking at the 2CP-2PP gap. So if enough people vote Labor sincerely, it’s possible they could knock out a teal and the Liberal could win. It’s tricky to know for sure but you can’t entirely dismiss it.
@raue I think that incorrect assumption is what won the greens Ryan and Brisbane
Monique holds most of the same values as Labor so it’s quite likely many Labor voters actually really liked her and wanted her to win, and weren’t just voting strategically.
@adam yes but they were strategically voting for her because if she didn’t get enough primary vote she would not make the 2cp and Labor would be matched up against the Libs in which the Libs would win.
That’s right Ben. Even with our preferential system, in certain circumstances it does benefit for voters to vote strategically in the House of Representatives.
If we picture the typical teal seat as being made up of three groups: conservatives (40%), moderates (30%) and progressives (30%).*
Let’s assume that conservatives prefer Liberal candidates, left-leaning voters generally prefer Labor and Greens candidates, and moderates generally prefer teals. And that conservatives and left-leaning voters mostly prefer teals over the alternative at the opposite end of the spectrum.
Because of the single member districts we use in the House of Representatives, making the two-candidate preferred (2CP) is essential for a candidate to win in this scenario. As conservatives generally outnumber moderates and left of centre voters in these seats, as long as the Liberal candidate is able to gather up these votes, they are guaranteed a spot in the 2CP.
However, conservatives are not a majority in these seats, so can lose to a candidate that can combine the bulk of left of centre and moderate voters. If we assume moderates are roughly equally split in preferring parties on the left and right, left-leaning voters preference Labor and the Greens above the teals, and one of these two end up in the 2CP, they may lose agains the Liberal candidate.
If you are a voter in one of these electorates with left of centre political preferences, you have to consider whether giving your favoured candidate your first preference will result in a 2CP lineup that maximises the chances that someone to the left of the Liberal candidate will win.
Now, in some teal seats the Labor candidate may be favoured over the Liberal candidate in the two-party vote. However, voters do not know if this before the election, and have to decide the order in which they will prefer candidates with a level of uncertainty about how other voters will themselves vote, and who will make the 2CP.
It’s clear in these electorates that some traditionally left of centre voters did make this calculation, and switched their first preference from Labor and the Greens to an independent candidate, as it provided the best chance of unseating the Liberal candidate.
* representative shares only
In most teal won seats they take 40% of the alp/greens via direct tactical voting or via preferences. The remainder on the range of 10 to15% comes off the libs.
Of course the libs get the rest.
The choice for the voters here is a liberal… like always. Since Menzies was born. or a teal
The job of the teal is to take votes off the liberals which the traditional left of centre parties cannot.manage.
That might be correct in principle, Mick, but the numbers are understating the progressive element.
If you look at the nine seats where an independent has won basically following that model, the Labor 2PP ranged from 41.4% in Mackellar to 51.6% in Mayo. Indeed Mackellar is the only one with a 2PP under 44%. So it’s not 40%, it’s at least 44%, often in the high 40s. North Sydney and Warringah were around 48.5%, and Kooyong was 46%.
And that’s 2022. I don’t think those seats are going to be trending to the right in the near future.