Goldstein – Australia 2022

The only thing is that the more inland areas of Goldstein are more middle class and marginal compared the Elite/Upper class coastal suburbs. Labor can do well in those suburbs. That is perhaps a difference to this seat compared to Warringah.

Zoe Daniel just won her court battle against Tim Wilson. Moral victory for Daniel that will attract positive attention in the media and further build her profile before the election.

Not to mention, this “loss” reflect poorly on Wilson as he allegedly instigated the dispute. The dispute is largely perceived as “petty” from the division and it is hurtful to Wilson’s personal “libertarian” brand which purports to remain out of people’s lives.

This is for sure one of the top ones to watch for independent chances on election night.

As I’m sure many of you are aware, Tim Wilson lost the case on Zoe Daniel’s corflutes. Yet more egg on his face. Can safely imagine that her supporters are more motivated to evict him than ever.

Going to be very entertaining seat on election night.

Speaking to a relative on the weekend who has lots of clients in Brighton, Sandringham and Bentleigh. She was surprised how many were saying that they had been Liberal voters and weren’t voting Lib this time. Her view is that Tim Wilson is gawn.

A friend in Brighton told me yesterday that they had had three different Zoe Daniels canvassers on their door step in the past week. This would suggest that:
1. The campaign is not co-ordinated
2. If that goes on, it really has the possibility to piss people off and feel they are being harassed – door step spam so to speak.

one week and three doorknockers is shocking uncoordination and points to the political inexperience these candidates (and presumably their doorknockers, campaign managers and volunteers) may well have. It’s quite frankly disappointing.

Any people who vote for the teal .do so because they don’t want Tim…realise Labor is very unlikely to win and Tim won’t be replaced by the liberals…so if they can shift 9 to 10% from the liberals and collect most votes of the remaining candidates especially Labor and the greens…… don’t really worry about too many done knockers

Looking at the swings against the Libs in Goldstein last time, it is interesting to see how patchy it was. There were high swings in the shared booths with Isaacs – where the Lib candidate had been disendorsed and very high swings around Hampton and Elsternwick and some Brighton booths. In Beaumaris, almost no swing. Was there some local issue in Hampton or was it that the ALP were on a roll after almost winning Brighton in the state election? Getting the boundary booths right might save Tim Wilson here.

ReD Boundary, Beaumaris & Brighton.
You’re right in your first sentence. Patchy. Despite your claims for each ‘B’ suburb, there are booths that contradict. (I will add Black Rock to your list of B’s)
The three B’s:
Beaumaris – not all static. Beaumaris North swung -6.4%. Yes. You’re right in that, the remaining booths in Black Rock / Beaumaris were all -4.72% or less. Local factors account for this difference ;- Beaumaris North is an old primary school, with disproportionately dwindling booth attendance, & which has been usurped by renewed big High School at Beaumaris Central – the local Range Rovers find it easier to swap to flash new school, with its superior parking facilities, than do the shopping trolleys. In fact AEC year to year swing for Central has been calculated across two different extant booths.
Beaumaris booth (-0.76%) is the Anglican Church. ( see later theme )
Brighton booths which had yielded 75% for Malcolm Turnbull last time, were surely ripe for a reversal after the spill of August 2018: still, 2 booths adhered to the ‘patchy’ theme & swung to coalition- namely Middle Brighton (topped 76%) (Anglican Church) & Brighton East (+2.66%). One can readily picture ‘Brighton Easters’ as aspirational – losing the ‘East’ tag is a common such aspiration.
Hampton booths (3) all shed: 5, 6, & 8%, & Hampton East 9%. As did Elsternwick booths ranging from Elsternwick (6%) -thanks to Maurice, up through North, to Central (8.5%), & South (9%). Diversity & density are features of these two suburbs, giving them a more ‘inner’ vibe. Neighbouring Caulfield South booth (Uniting ?North Anglican Church) also an outlier for Macnanara. – maybe Protestants were comfortable with Neighbours were turning up the heat on Tim Wilson. You cannot expect Gary Spencer (Isaacs), and Kelly O’Dwyer (Higgins) every election, nor are we likely to have the presence of a Michael Danby or Geoff Lake candidacy repeated any time soon.
So, on the topic of ‘B’ suburbs (which don’t conform to usual distance/price inverse Real Estate relationship), Boundary booths & indeed effect of neighbouring seat contests, I totally agree with you. In fact, for extra-territorial ballots, Tim Wilson will be unassailable also.
Amid the patchiness, boundary contagion & local exceptions & local vagaries, we saw the playing out of the 2019 national theme of reversal for safe Coalition urban seats, where they are inner, or ‘inner at heart’.

I think Goldstein is the most likely of the seats to fall to a teal, actually I’d be surprised if it didn’t change hands. Tim Wilson MP is not seen to be particularly good and the Government is especially on the nose in a seat like this. I think Zoe Daniel will win easily.

Think Tim Wilson is finished here.

The rumours around his alleged prayer room antics have been running rampant for a while now. Zoe Daniel has outnumbered his signs and presence remarkably. The only supporters out for Wilson are very very old.

The footage from Zoe Daniel’s campaign launch has to be seen to be believed. If she can’t win with that kind of organization, with all that campaign money being dumped in her lap, against a Liberal party hack like Wilson who has absolutely nothing going for him, then god help us

tbf though ‘Same Isn’t Safe’ is the singlest dumbest campaign slogan I think I’ve ever heard

Whatever you think of it as a slogan, it seems pretty memorable. People have grabbed onto it.

I think Tony Abbott proved that slogans don’t need to be intelligent to be effective, as long as they’re short and memorable and used over and over.

No? I think it’s quite a good slogan. Catchy and makes the case for change.

While I’m not a Victorian, I still don’t think the Libs are quite done here yet. In fact, I think there’s a lot of wishful thinking hyping up the independent challenges in these safe Liberal seats. Under pressure? Yes. Likely to fall? At least I don’t think so. Happy to be proven wrong on election night.

I agree with Furtive

“Same Isn’t Safe” is confusing to parse, negative, and doesn’t promote the candidate or an actual platform.

If Zoe wins it will be in spite of it.

A slogan is going to be 4 words at most. It’s not a policy platform and doesn’t need to mention the candidate. It’s a message designed to cut through, and it seems evident that it’s achieved that purpose. Much better than something generic like “For the Future”, which for that matter doesn’t seem to have been a bad slogan for SA Labor considering the results.

In any case, I agree that this is by far the most likely Liberal seat to fall to a teal. Tim Wilson simply does not have the ability to distinguish himself from the Liberal brand (profile or charisma-wise) in the way that Frydenburg, Sharma or Zimmerman might be able to. The margin versus Labor isn’t even very big to start with and without something dramatic happening it’s hard to see how the natural 2PP swing + Daniel getting an extra few percent of Liberal voters won’t result in a flip.

The recent news about Zoe Daniel’s 2017 comment regarding “Jewish donors” could negatively impact her, given the large Jewish population in this electorate. As someone who was excited about her candidacy, hearing that she said this is unfortunate and is cause for re-evaluation. However, I still expect her to be in with a strong chance of winning despite this debacle.

Adda, I agree this is probably the teal movement’s best chance.

At state level this area may actually be Labor already.

The Liberals hold Sandringham (entirely within Goldstein) by only 0.4%.

The Liberals hold Brighton (almost entirely within Goldstein) by only 0.6%, although the least Liberal area is the part not in Goldstein – Elwood – so the margin in the Goldstein area would be higher.

And the remainder of the seat is mostly within Bentleigh which Labor holds by double digits and got over 60% TPP in every booth.

Obviously state and federal are very different and fought on different issues, especially in affluent areas like this where state governments are less focused on tax and economic issues than the federal government, but what it shows is that this area isn’t so rusted on, they can and will even vote Labor if the conditions are right, so a teal independent more suited to them only has an even better chance.

It’s Liberal turf but it’s different to the more traditional “old money” areas like the private school heartland of Kooyong and parts of Higgins where there are much deeper, generational Liberal Party ties.

It’s time to channel Tommy Bent – Tim is in trouble.

Trent

Vis a vis your last paragraph – if Brighton does not fit the bill of private school generational Liberal heartland – where does? Possibly even more so than Toorak, Malvern, Kew or Canterbury. The good people of “Bruyyyton” would be disappointed to hear it.

Redistributed you’re absolutely right about Brighton, I just meant that Goldstein overall doesn’t have as much of that generational “old boy” culture as Higgins and Kooyong. The Xavier/Scotch culture where the Liberal Party is in the family blood.

Pretty much the entire seat of Kooyong and the central heartland of Higgins (Toorak, Malvern, Glen Iris) epitomizes that, whereas outside Brighton that just seems less prevalent in Goldstein.

Even rich areas like Sandringham and Black Rock, they seem more like areas that people aspire to after finding success.

Not saying there isn’t old money there too but having grown up near the bayside, culturally it just feels different – no doubt still “elite” but less intrinsically connected to proud Liberal Party heritage almost being in the DNA – than areas like Canterbury, Toorak, Malvern and Kew.

Hope that makes sense! And it’s why I just think Goldstein in general would be more willing to ditch the Liberal Party than the more traditional leafy east heartland.

Its difficult to explain but I understand where Trent is coming from. Brighton looks like parts of Higgins and Kooyong. However, its culturally different.

Trent is pretty much correct – Black Rock and Beaumaris aren’t “old money”, they’re middle-class aspirant types (I work here). A lot of tradies done good, small business owners etc. It’s also not bible-belt cultural conservatives – it’s the kind of place where an expensive private school can have openly gay staff members without anyone caring too much. So definitely Teal territory rather than rusted-on conservatives.

On another tack – Wilson going after the anti-semite angle is more complicated than it looks. Some of Zoe Daniels’ campaign team leaders are Orthodox Jews he’s trying to whiteant. Notice that him digging up the Jerusalem tweet happened on the first day of Passover. There’s a segment of the Jewish community who are Trump-lovers and will vote for the Liberal party no matter what, but there are plenty others who know full well that Wilson’s working to dismantle racial vilification laws in the name of “Free Speech” and giving carte blanche to much more vicious anti-semites.

Tim Wilson has preferenced One Nation and the UAP ahead of Zoe Daniels. He must really be trying to lose at this point since there’s absolutely no benefit for him doing so and it strengthens Zoe Daniels’ message.

That alone will cost him votes.

If I was a moderate Liberal voter in Goldstein tossing up between Wilson and Daniels, and I get a HTV suggestion that demonstrates that Wilson holds far-right extremists in higher esteem than a moderate centrist, that would seal my decision to vote for Daniels.

What an idiot. As you say, his preference suggestions are completely inconsequential to the result because they will never be distributed; so all a HTV card in his case actually does is demonstrate whose views & values align most with his, and his has demonstrated that he sees himself as more aligned with dangerous extremists than a sensible centrist.

That won’t reflect well at all in Goldstein, and as you say will only reinforce Daniels’ message.

Ucomms poll released (a few of those commissioned in the “teal” seats). After excluding 6.3% undecided voters, it shows Wilson and Daniel at 35.2% each, Labor at 13.4%, Greens at 8.2, UAP 3.4, ON 1.9. AFR article isn’t mentioning a 2CP calculation, though for what it’s worth the Kooyong Ucomms some weeks back with Frydenburg at 35 and independent at 31 gave 59-41 to the independent. Commissioned seat polling should be treated with grains of salt, though I’m not surprised to see that this appears to be the “teal” seat with the biggest lead to the independent.

Would be hesitant to trust that polling but I do think that Wilson is done. He could still pull it off of course but it feels unlikely at this point. This is the seat where I am most confident in a Teal independent gain.

I did an estimate for the 2CP from those numbers and got 55.78% for Zoe Daniel (based on preference flows from Wentworth 2019). The seat poll was not commissioned by Zoe Daniel but by The Australian Institute.

I reckon that’s about what I would expect but obviously seat polling hasn’t had the best track record.

I also ran some estimates for that Kooyong Poll and got 55.98% for Monique Ryan (59-41 seems extremely generous based on those results)

I don’t think Wilson’s primary vote will be that low but it must be pretty scary for him to see a seat poll with a primary vote in the 30s.

It seems like Kooyong is getting much more media attention the Goldstein in the last week. The teal coverage had started with a real focus on Zoe.

Not sure what that change tells us.

Tim Wilson to win Goldstein because he’ll get an increased margin when Josh Frydenberg becomes liberal leader after this election. Sorry Zoe Daniel it’s Timmy’s 3rd time as mp.

Paul, Frydenburg potentially becoming leader after this election won’t help Wilson win it this time. Morrison is the leader now and that’s what will matter.

LNP Insider, I think a lot of the media attention shifting to Kooyong is partly just because of the controversies over Frydenburg’s comments about Ryan’s mother in law and the debates; and partly because Frydenburg himself is a much more high profile scalp for the teal movement to claim, and has shifted his own focus back to the seat after being absent while in Sydney for the first couple of weeks.

I still think Kooyong and Goldstein are about equally as likely to fall, in fact probably Goldstein moreso even though it has the higher margin.

I have Goldstein as more likely to go down just because there’s some voters who may be convinced to “keep Josh” in Kooyong so he can become the next leader and keep it in “moderate” hands. That seems to be what his campaign is trying to pivot to now. Plus Wilson is simply not a likeable personality.

^I mean keeping the Liberal party in “moderate” hands

Adda, I agree and Poll Bludger reports that internal Liberal polling has Tim Wilson’s primary vote down to 37% and Josh Frydenburg’s at 42%.

Those figures (which of course should be taken with a grain of salt as with all seat polls) would indicate a -15% swing against Wilson compared to a -7% swing against Frydenburg.

I do note that the 37% figure for Tim Wilson seems to be consistent with some previous seat polling though.

The Liberals have adopted Tim Wilson’s pet thought bubble of allowing superannuation sacrifice towards a first home loan at the eleventh hour, a policy several of them have publicly derided for years. Most commentators are interpreting it either as a hail mary pass to gin up any sort of vague appeal of the LNP towards young voters who presumably can’t imagine life five years from now let alone forty, or just a ploy to make Tim himself seem remotely relevant in shaping LNP policy.

There’s actually a third interpretation, possibly even more sinister than the other two: this is just another bought and paid for policy on behalf of realty, feeling a housing bubble about to pop.

One thing everyone other than Liberal MPs themselves seem to agree on is that this isn’t been done because it’s a sane policy

All I really have to say is that Tim Wilson’s behavior online and in person is both sad and pathetic. I can’t believe this man is a proclaimed moderate of the Liberal party. Hope the Independent wins but I have zero knowledge of this electorate so I can’t say how likely I think it is.

Ohh was Tim the author of the housing …super thought bubble? Explains a lot.. the liberals hate super and industry super funds and we’re rather low in increasing the employer productivity super percentage.

I could imagine moderate liberals are less loyal to Wilson than Frydenburg. Other than SSM, Wilson IMO is up there with the most regressive politicians in Parliament. Despite the ideological turf war with superannuation, it’s voters in seats like this that have the most money in their super and have been at times aghast by the reckless attitude Wilson has taken towards it.

I opened the ABC News website and saw the article about the Super Home Buyer scheme. I said “Oh, **** off!” out loud and closed the tab. It made me angry.

Wilson also suggested some time ago that instead of government providing support to them, domestic violence victims should be able to withdraw from their superannuation.

FL, I think that sinister third option is actually the real reason.

This is clearly a policy designed to stimulate house price growth, deceivingly disguised as a first home buyer scheme.

Trnet, analysis by Canstar shows that over a ten year period (assuming house prices rise, which clearly they won’t in the next year in much of Sydney or Melbourne), the Coalition’s first home buyer scheme would leave residents in both cities susbtantially better off than Labor’s rather hare-brained, and dangerous, ‘government equity’ scheme.

So it’s a good move by the Coalition, and likely to be welcomed by not just first home buyers, parents and even grandparents.

This scheme is simply a thought bubble this is what I will do when.i win the lottery.The liberals have hatred of industry super funds and a reluctance to increase the success level.Now add to this a way to drain young people’s super funds which even if returned later lose lots of compound growth. This also puts pressure on prices of housing to rise. This is just a con. If there is justice Tim will lose his seat.

Should be sgc level

This is most White Anglo-Saxon Protestant electorate within 20 kilometers of the CBD. While I would love to see the Liberals lose this seat, I doubt if they will.