Kooyong – Australia 2022

whipped FOR the tax cuts*

Like most Brisbane seats, Ryan is much more demographically divergent than a Melbourne seat like Kooyong. It includes some very Green areas eg like inner city seats as well as urban fringe areas.

Voices for Kooyong are running a full-page ad looking for a candidate. It claims:

‘Our polling indicates that if an election were held today a candidate of the calibre of Zali Steggall or Helen Haines (Indi) would win in Kooyong’

But they’re not releasing any of that polling afaik, so…

If the “Voices of … ” people really want to make a difference they should target New England, Capricornia, Hunter, Hinkler, Dawson, Hume where the climate change dinosaurs actually hang out. And try and take out Canavan, Hanson, Palmer, McKenzie in the senate. The Nats and the other QLD Neanderthals are the one to take out.

FT, take a look at the question that polling asked, by Redbridge apparently. Yikes! Leading question if ever I saw one.

Redistributed: The ostensible justification is that the ‘moderates’ vote the same as the hard right anyway. Practically speaking they’re targeting the seats they think they can win, which doesn’t really make them any different from every other party/movement/cabal/whatever Voices wants to call itself.

Wreathy – Can you post a link?

https://redbridgegroup.com.au/climate-200-kooyong-poll/

This is the Redbridge poll. It is not an accurate voter intention poll because of leading questions and an earlier question that paints steggall in a very positive light. However, it may be useful in gauging the *potential* vote if a really strong campaign is run with a good candidate.

Thanks Sprout. And agreed.

Also, It obviously won’t be that easy during the election campaign, but it’s pretty funny how fickle so many voters turn out to be in the face of a few leading questions and cliches.

A few aspects of those surveys that are worth a comment:
– Agree with above comments that the questions are very leading.
– UAP getting 7% in Kooyong and 9% in Flinders – seriously?
– 54 to 56% of respondents by mobile phone? How many people – even elderly people use their landline?
– Why was their not a base – no “no Zali type independent” – question in Flinders? Didn’t it fit the narrative?
– And voting for an “independent” – not even counting the “Zali type” – you need to have the independent to start – a flaw also in the The Age/ SMH polls.

redistributed, because yes. the UAP will win between 5-10% of the vote at the next federal election.

No really, the UAP has also polled strongly in western Sydney taking anywhere between 10 and 25% of the primary vote. that 3rd place finish will help the coalition get re-elected even if the lose the primary vote to Labor. Kelly has a strong chance making the top 2 in Hughes now.

Frydenburg will benefit from UAP preferences but if you want to know the real reason the UAP are getting allot of primary votes this time is because of the 1 letter word that had lingered on allot of peoples minds, ”Lockdowns” Yes, people are sick of the constant lockdowns and because Palmer is opposed they are looking to the UAP, normally they would be right-wing liberals and while they could potentially cost the government re-election. I don’t see them preferencing Labor under it’s current leadership. they may hate Morrison too, but they would rather have him than Albo.

Frydenburg will win and I predict will be the next PM should Labor fail to win nationwide. He will return us to surplus once more.

correction* 1 word.

I’ll also add this will probably return to it’s traditional LIB vs ALP. if the UAP vote is as strong as reported in polls (which I believe may decline when the election is called but who knows what will happen) then you have to ask yourself, will the UAP prefer the Greens or Labor? politically the Greens are the polar opposite and they are even more anti-coal and anti-mining than Labor as you would never find a Fitzgibbon in the Greens. Then that would hurt the Greens coming out in the top-2.

Strategically speaking progressives should vote Labor not the Greens if they really want Frydenburg out.

I wonder what the mood/feeling is for those living in states that have ‘lockouts’, where travel is prohibited to those places with outbreaks. As a Queenslander living alone, I am feeling a similar level of despair to those in the lockdown areas unable to reunite with family until Christmas time.

“Frydenburg will win and I predict will be the next PM should Labor fail to win nationwide. He will return us to surplus once more.”

@Daniel

I wouldn’t trust the Liberals on a surplus. The Liberals debt has well exceeded past Labor even before the pandemic and now sits at a trillion. They say what they mean but don’t mean what they say after hypocritically banging on about Labor’s debt. And both Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull debt exceeded well past Labor with promises of return to surplus. It makes Joe Hockey’s ‘we have to live within our means’ speech laughable.

I still think Frydenberg will retain his seat though. It was reported though the Liberals are concerned about state MP Tim Smith drink driving car accident. Smith’s seat of Kew is located almost entirely within Kooyong and think Smith could be a drag on Frydenberg’s vote. So there is still some concern from the Liberals.

Should the Libs lose the election and by chance Josh Frydenburg lose Kooyong, the Libs are in a world of leadership pain as there is no obvious contender to step up – Dutton is electoral poison in Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide – and no doubt much of Brisbane. That leaves Greg Hunt or possibly Dan Tehan. The Libs talent pool is incredibly shallow and a good performer like Simon Birmingham is in the senate. In other words – should it be needed, they will sandbag Kooyong like there is no tomorrow.

WOW
IMMENSE AMOUNTS OF ABSOLUTE DRIVEL on this thread

PN

Daniel was obviously referring to a BUDGET surplus . Your pretence relating it to NATIONAL DEBT gross debt etc is puerile. IF (a big if) a surplus appears It will come from windfall resource revenue rather than any real effort or talent. Hardly a great achievement . Surely you realise the silliness around the whole subject of spending/ deficit since 2007 ?

Redistributed
” a good performer like Simon Birmingham ” are you out of your mind ? The man is truly useless, & bereft of any personality.. his sole accomplishment, is make the mediocre look talented.
“The Libs talent pool is incredibly shallow” Maybe / probably it is. However it’s not tainted & foul with the detritus, & residue of too many 3-4 time FAILED ministers from the Rudd -Gillard govt.
I’ve made this point before . there are about a dozen senators (from both sides) who need to find lower house seats & about 3 dozen deadwood MPs that need to be sent to the knackery.

“That leaves Greg Hunt or possibly Dan Tehan” what do you find compelling about politicians in dire need of a total personality transplant ?
Andrew Hastie & the senators are the leadership material.

@Winediamond

I knew Daniel was talking about the budget to surplus and the trillion figure was a national debt figure. Seriously, you have deliberately skewed things to make it seem I was confused when I wasn’t. There wasn’t anything factually incorrect in what I wrote.

Debt doubled from the Liberals from 2013 – 2019 after Labor’s time in office from 2007 – 2013. Tony Abbott after he beated his chest about ‘live within our means budget’ went down in the polls. He then panicked and started accumulating debt well past Labor. It’s why he stood for nothing as a PM. You should read Peter van Onselen article you might learn something.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/budget-2020-turning-a-blind-eye-to-debt-on-coalitions-watch/news-story/37e8c5246c535e85df1bb05ee10039cb

I still think Liberals hold this. I have heard that Labor room for gains in Victoria will be somewhat limited. It’s possible Labor finish above the Greens on two party preferred vote though as high-profile candidate Julian Burnside won’t be running for the Greens this election.

Very concerning Greens numbers in that poll. Bandt has been much more openly left wing and perhaps it is actually costing them small-l liberal votes. It could also imply a lot of 2019 was just a personal vote for Burnside, which many suspected. The Greens are pushing this as one of their winnable seats so they will need to work a bit harder to build a case.

On the other hand the independent candidate backers who ran thst poll have a vested interest in minimising the Greens.

One interesting factor is there may be a Kew byelection thanks to Tim Smith’s 0.131.

PN
i didn’t “deliberately skewed things to make it seem I was confused when I wasn’t.” I actually believed that you were being disingenuous. I apologise.
I read your link to PVO’s article. Not one of his better efforts. IN PVO’s haste to blame “fiscal conservatives” he entirely missed the true reality. There is little (genuine) interest, let alone intent for fiscal discipline from any quarter, or party. That is the point he failed to make.

Why would pollies not want to print, & borrow endless money & get credit for spending it ?. They get rewarded for spending our money ,not saving it. Nor does it need to be well spent. Both sides are fully culpable, completely guilty. Who cares who is the instigator, or the enabler ?. Both sides are complicit in the betrayal of our country(s best interest, & future)

This was the shallowest, & most selective part ::
“Keep in mind that the debt Labor accrued in government from 2007-2013 was doubled by the Coalition in government from 2013-2019 before the coronavirus even started. And there was no GFC during the latter period.” To expound this & to ignore the unfunded fiscal “spending time bombs” Labor bequeathed is just fraudulent. labor then opposed any REDUCTION in any spending even comically refusing its own budgeted spending cuts !. No wonder the govt gave up flogging the dead horse of fiscal discipline. Since TA there have been a succession of “box ticker” masters of expediency.
Until the real problem is recognised there is little point is suggesting solutions
cheers wd

One thing I don’t like is independents, Labor and Greens not working together to defeat conservatives.

@winediamond

Yeah sorry winediamond but your argument is virtually Labor has to take total blame in government for debt. But when the Liberals in government it’s Labor’s fault isn’t going to wash. The spending Kevin Rudd did in the stimulus during the Global Financial Crisis was recommended by Treasury to assist Australia’s economy to get through the GFC. That is not a body that encourage deficits if anything a lot of the organization are made up by fiscal conservative ideological public servants. And you also suggest that ‘pollies not want to print, & borrow endless money’. But Labor tried to deliver a surplus for 2013 but they didn’t get there. And it was actually Joel Fitzgibbon who criticised Labor for trying to pursue this when the economic conditions were not there realistically to deliver one.

And Tony Abbott’s budget in 2014 had cuts in spending that he lied about during the 2013 election. But he then panicked when he went was down in the polls and started spending like a drunken sailor to hold on to the Prime Minstership. If it meant well surpassing Labor in debt to stay in power and standing for absolutely nothing then so be it. It wasn’t Labor that did that which you conveniently ignore.

The truth is the media in general turn a blind eye to the Liberals in terms of debt but drag Labor over the coals for their debt which was actually half the size of the Liberals before the pandemic. The criticisms of the Liberals about debt you can hear a pin drop. And Josh Frydenberg’s comments expose him as the biggest hypocrite of all.

“both the Rudd and Gillard governments have displayed their addiction to debt” and that “the messages for Australia are clear: ‘Big government is bad government’ and ‘Live within your means before it is too late.’ ”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/commentisfree/2021/may/02/we-need-to-end-the-fear-mongering-about-government-debt-in-australia

Putting aside media bias and what WD personally thinks about fiscal policy, he’s got a point that the public generally don’t really care all that much about budget surpluses and deficits. Most people are much more interested in what the government’s spending on them and how the general economic environment affects their life. ‘Yes I want more public spending on xyz, no I don’t want to pay for it’ is the general attitude of the median voter. Presumably Labor knows this, it’s hard to justify their rolling over for the 3(a) tax cuts otherwise.

Labor can campaign on economic stewardship but unless it’s contextualised for ordinary people then it’ll probably go down like a lead balloon. ‘Josh Frydenburg raised the deficit’ is a fair criticism. ‘Josh Frydenburg gave out $40b of your tax dollars on executive bonuses while cutting JobSeeker and laying you off from your job’ hits closer to home. Even in blue-ribbon Kooyong.

Frydenberg*

Hey everyone, I’m in this electorate so hopefully, I can provide some insight.

This electorate is very fertile for an independent / Tree-Tory candidate. The local vibe is that he isn’t as popular as he was the last election and some of the JobKeeper fiascos definitely decreased his popularity.

Furthermore, Covid I think has had a pretty big impact – many Victorians are upset at how the federal government has treated us, and especially so with Frydenberg heavily criticising the state government here and siding with the federal government on Covid-related issues DESPITE being from here.

Unfortunately, Burnside is not running again, but we do have a Tree Tory type here (Dr. Monique Ryan) who is running on a small l liberal platform who is making her entire platform Covid, anti-corruption, the environment, and women in parliament, which could very well be a winning message.

Sadly I heavily doubt we will flip, BUT this election could very easily be closer or as close as 2019, especially if the Greens, Labor, and Monique coordinate their campaigns and preferences to only favour each other. The Libs are going to be forced to dump a bunch of money AGAIN into what should be a safe electorate, hell Frydenberg is already buying signs in junctions and the election isn’t for months.

Will be eagerly paying attention to the pulse here, and for the results on election day.

Thanks,
Zak

If Frydenberg takes the leadership, as NewsCorp is planting the seeds already- does this seat then become out of grasp for the Diet Liberal Independents?
Seems like they would sandbag this seat to protect the leader if that were the case.
https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/josh-frydenberg-will-put-his-hand-up-for-pm-at-right-time-but-supports-scott-morrison/news-story/1ab06236f25a01ae3e3f0af1e7df3ff5

That 60 minutes interview last night was a debacle, and I think the Libs are going to get cold feet before the poll but it is an even money bet whether he goes or stays

Unless Scomo fell under an actual bus, the Liberal leadership will not change before the election. At best – a la Kevin Rudd in 2013 and Mike Moore in NZ in 1990 – it would be a furniture saving exercise. Whoever took on the job would have their career damned forever. Australian history also shows that the first leader elected after an election defeat never gets the PM gig. So either Frydenberg (if he survives) or Dutton (if he survives) have that also to face. Should both lose their seats – it will be a very interesting Liberal leadership election post election.

What’s you read on that scenario then redistributed?
Someone there or not there yet? If not Frydenberg or Dutton, then who?
No one screaming out other than Fletcher or Taylor. Maybe Stuart Robert.
I think Dutton would have more of an appetite to be Opposition Leader than Frydenberg, who will probably be like Costello and not want to do the hard yakka in opposition.
I definitely agree Opposition Leader straight after Government has zero chance of being PM.

If Frydenberg does manage to lose his seat that would politically be it for him. There’s always state politics I guess.

Does anyone know what the initials…… TEAL. Stand for

s

It’s not an acronym, it’s a colour which is a mix of blue and green.

redistributed & LJ Davidson

“I definitely agree Opposition Leader straight after Government has zero chance of being PM.”
Never a truer word.

The question is whether Josh is willing to take the first bullet !? Personally i doubt it. My guess is that it will be Dutton. Pete will be so eager to get into Albo (with gloves off) that even History won’t intimidate him, or give him pause. Besides with a (waiting) defined benefit super pension what has he really got to lose ? The press already hate him so he will get plenty of attention, people know who he is.

I was listening to a podcast series put out recently by Climate200 called “The Independents”, which sees (or perhaps hears) a “Voices” candidate interviewed in each episode. Obviously, the interview was very friendly for the candidates, but I can’t help but think that the opportunity of this podcast would be better used by asking slightly more incisive questions (with ample preparation for the interviewee of course) that would be able to bring on side those who are interested in the movement but unsure about the motives. I post this in the Kooyong thread as one remark by Monique Ryan stuck out to me, she said that she was a great collaborator with the Pharmaceutical industry and that (or something along these lines) “no socialist country has ever made pharmaceutical advancements”. To me, this sounds like a line out of Morrison’s red scare playbook. I feel that all these Greens/Labor voters who think that these “Voices” are politically identical to them will be in for a rude awakening when they realise the close ties to industry that these people have. The ideas that they campaign on are very popular, a federal ICAC polling at 81% in 2020. They can use this to pick up these lefties who are “sick of party politics”.

Morrison is fighting a two-front war (3, if you include the civil war that is the NSW Liberals) this election, and as Hitler would tell you, they don’t end well (a gross oversimplification of WWII). Having to attempt to gain seats in the conflict zone of NSW to make up for losses elsewhere, as well as having to fight to retain their seats in the Voices areas, (not to mention Morrison and his cabinet actively trying to sink his ship) will see the Liberal machine stretched thin. The efforts so far to go on the offensive against the Voices have been limited at best. Besides the old Liberal standby of a three-word slogan, “Voices for Labor”, and a shot across the bow at Zali Steggal’s coal links, the effort has been pathetic. There is a lot to base a fear campaign on against them.

In my opinion, a Voices candidate would be far superior to a Liberal being re-elected, as these seats are generally held by those who toe the party line (Frydenberg) or only break ranks when the battle is already lost (Sharma). The criticism of the Liberals by the Voices that they represent the party rather than the electorate is true, by and large, and could just as easily be applied to Labor.

Before I finish my post I’d like to ask winediamond what the acronym OTH stands for, as I often see him use it but can only interpret it as “On The other Hand”.

Douglas, I think you’ve hit the nail on the head as concerns “Voices” and their political position. The argument from the left in favour of these campaigns has been that safe Liberal seats will never elect a Labor or Greens member because the voters are too conservative (or “small-l liberal”, but in either case with the meaning that there is an irresolvable difference in policy between these voters and the left-wing parties) but they might elect an Independent. If you actually think through this logic, someone is clearly being taken for a ride; either the lefties who expect a successful Independent to agree with them on everything, or the electorate who by definition would not accept an MP with such policies. I think you’re spot on with the observation that the former is the likely outcome.

There’s also the issue that the premise of the targetted seats being necessarily unwinnable for a left-wing party isn’t always the case. Kooyong is a case in point: 5.7 vs Green and 6.7 vs Labor aren’t the closest margins in the country but nobody would call that unwinnable. There was a good article in the Sydney Morning Herald a few months ago about the qualitative differences between the “Voices” campaigns this election and the Independent victories such as Warringah and Indi that they use as precedent; in addition to the narrower TPP margin Kooyong also has the feature of the incumbent being a moderate Liberal himself, where the track record is even shakier than the already-infrequent independent victories elsewhere.

Climate 200 are really playing ducks and drakes when it comes to ‘independence’ and ‘independent’ candidates. If they were serious about electing ‘independent’ candidates then they would be running candidates in Higgins, Ryan, Brisbane – where they might split the vote because it is very three way. Or they could run in Macnamara, Adelaide or Griffith which basically tick most of the ‘Voices of’ demographic boxes. Or Newcastle and give the people there a real choice. Not that I have any great sympathy for the Liberal Party, I don’t, but I do think it is all a bit disengenuous and a bit ‘cute’. And all of the policy positions bar an ICAC and Climate are very wishy washy so do you know what you are getting when you vote for a ‘voices for ..’ candidate?

douglas, dryhad, redistributed – Those are all fair criticisms. But the way I see it, Voices are basically taking the major parties’ very lazy and cynical game and going pro with it- after all, Labor can’t stop talking about their ingenious ‘small target strategy’ (ie, not talking about or even having policies), and Morrison’s entire premiership has been flown from the seat of his pants. Saying nothing about most everything seems to be working for a lot of Voices candidates (ironically) so that’s what they’ll keep doing.

Dryhad
While it might appear that Kooyong is marginal, the seat has had a 60% 2PP for the Liberals for ages. Now, while the seat hasn’t been this low since before the days of preferential voting, the question is will they be able to close the gap? (they being either the Greens or the Voices). On another matter, I’ve seen this image going around which suggests to these Voices’ electorates’ voters that they should vote for voices as if Labor/green comes third, the preferences will go overwhelmingly to the voices and they will win, whereas if the Voices come thirds their preferences will be split between the Liberals and Labor and the Liberals will win, which I believe is just nonsense as from what I can see, the Labor/greens interest in the voices is stronger than the traditional conservative interest. Propaganda in full swing to bring onside Labor voters to give their first preference.

redistributed
There’s a voices movement in Ryan, but they haven’t selected a candidate yet. Perhaps Higgins doesn’t have one because they believe it is a lost cause for the Libs? It’s never fallen but could this be the time?

Furtive
I agree with you that, as I said in my original post, “a Voices candidate would be far superior to a Liberal being re-elected”. The “Peace, Bread, Land” succinctness of the Voices pitch (Climate action, Integrity, Women’s issues) is a smart one. as Labor learned at the last election, running in with too many policies leaves you open to vulnerability, and the nearly universal approval for the Voices core policies gives them a strong platform. SHAC at the NPC was asked about specific policies of the voices beyond these 3 and said that he had no influence in them and that they would make them up, seeing as they “aren’t a political party”. Holmes a Court makes himself out as the “Restitutor Orbis” of the Australian Political scene, and benevolent to boot. He’s not as obvious as Clive Palmer in terms of self-interest, but I feel that there is something fishy about him, and I’m growing increasingly wary of him.

“but I feel that there is something fishy about him, and I’m growing increasingly wary of him.”

Douglas, I’m with you on that one. See my Mayo post.

I’m getting the vibe Voices for Ryan/Higgins are leaving it to Liz Watson-Brown and Sonya Semmens considering they kind of fit the vibe the movement seems to be going for (professional women working in the somewhat upper end of society)

Agree douglas, on your summary of the propaganda from Voices in regard who to vote for as a first preference. The only sensible response if “well, you would say that, wouldn’t you”?

Although many smart commentators seems to support the sense of it, in a full preferential system, any type of strategic voting is just idiotic in my view – an individual voter has no guarantee that there isn’t another 5,000 voters out there thinking exactly the same things as they are, and if they’d all just voted in the order they most desire the candidates to be elected, the majority would have got their most preferred candidate. Its not upto ALP/GREEN/other left voters to give up on their preferred candidate because sufficient IND voters, having defeated from the Liberal’s, wish to return their votes to them via a 2nd preference.

As it turns out, and Kevin Bonham’s data shows https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2021/12/the-overrated-impact-of-reps.html, there is actually a substantial likelihood that preferences from Voice’s IND candidates will flow to Labor/Green more heavily than to Liberal. So the difference in flow between IND to LIB and ALP/GRN to LIB is probably not nearly as big as the Voices propaganda is making out, but its in their interest for them to make people believe it will be the deciding factor.

The possibility of high preference flow from IND to ALP/GRN, may be because there was a lot of ALP/GRN voters who switched their preference in the first place, but this is very hard to measure as all we see in the results in the nett effect of vote changes at the first preference level that could be going in opposite directions. But the fact that in 2019 there was a 9% TPP swing in Warringah, a 7% swing in Wentworth and a 6% swing in Kooyong, would seem to reveal that may LIB voters, having put an IND first, are ok with giving the ALP a 2nd preference, when they most likely wouldn’t have preferenced ALP over LIB without the IND being present.

In Kooyong in 2019, only 18% of Oliver Yates preferences went to Frydenburg. However, 18% of ALP prefs went to Frydenburg rather than Julian Burnside of the Greens. This seems like a high %. Unless you were a scrutineer on the night, we will never know what paths this second 18% took. In Kooyong, Yates vote basically equalled Frydenburgs loss on primaries. In Kooyong the combined ALP plus Greens vote in 2019 was actually smaller than 2016.
In Flinders, 27% of Julia Banks preferences went to Greg Hunt. In a simplistic analysis, her vote seems to have come from 3.8% Greg Hunt, 7% from Labor and Greens, and 3% from somewhere else. The 27% of prefs to Hunt actually equals the 3.8% he lost. The Greens lost 40% of their vote to Banks, the ALP 10% and Hunt 7.5%.
Even in Wentworth, less than half of Phelps vote came from the Libs with the Greens losing 50% of their vote, the ALP 40%, and the Libs losing 24%. If you extrapolated those Greens and Labor losses to Goldstein say, then Zoe Daniel would be on 18% and second place before picking up a single Liberal vote.
The point is that the Voices candidates actually pick up more votes from the left than they do from the right but it does give them the springboard to possibly win. Also, with more candidates in the mix, more possibility of preference leakage.

Redistributed, bear in mind that the AEC results also have a breakdown of 2CP by primary vote, so you can isolate primary votes from other preferences that flow through a candidate. Amongst Labor primary votes in Kooyong, less than 17% flowed to Liberal over Greens.

I agree with your point about the base of support for these independents, but they need both. They need votes from the left to make it to the top two, and they need votes from the right to win.

I had an earlier comment but the server seems to have eaten in. Regardless, I think the points I was trying to make have been well made by other commenters. I would just like to note in response to Ben’s observation that they need votes from both the left and the right that for this reason I don’t expect Monique Ryan to do all that well in Kooyong. Frydenberg already offers both a Liberal government and a moderate voice in Parliament (and in Cabinet) to voters who want that, the “Voices” pitch to the right doesn’t seem to have much relevance to seats like Kooyong. If the propaganda directed as progressives is successful she may be able to overtake Labor and the Greens but even that I’m dubious of, and I doubt she’ll peel off enough Frydenberg voters to win in any case.

If the L/NP lose the election it would very much suit Dutton for Frydenberg as well as others such as Fiona Martin and Gladys Liu to lose their seats. Note these seats have high Chinese Australian populations. Dutton has been very deliberate to link China to all of the world’s current ills. This creates blowback in the Chinese community who feel victimised. Anyone think that Dutton is planning post-election, clearing the way for himself to have the numbers?

Dryhad, Frydenberg generally isn’t regarded as a moderate, but more aligned with the centre-right (Morrison’s faction).

Al, Gladys Liu is part of Dutton’s hard right faction actually, a sure vote for him in the party room. So it’s probably better for him to keep her around, but she’s very likely gone anyway.

A lot of Frydenburg’s vote pealed off last time so there may not be much more that can be pealed off so Labor, the Greens and Monique Ryan will all be fighting for a share of the same 47% as last time.
There has been a lot of commentary regarding some degree of hostility to the Libs by the Chinese community. With a largish Chinese community in Balwyn and North Balwyn, there may be some loss here which could hurt Frydenburg.

That’s assuming Chinese people who left China are pro the Chinese government…

Heard interview with Ryan recently-maybe bit too left for electorate (but a 2014 Labor candidate now holds Mildura as an independent) but smart with a matter of fact style, has managed multimillion $ budgets, who is enjoying the process and very aware of need to win over lifetime Libs and those who think Frydenberg is one of the ‘good guys’. Definitely doesn’t have that dreamy vibe Greens sometimes have.

Huge Frydenburg adverts everywhere in Kooyong, josh might be scared

Hawthorn is a bit of an odd fit in this seat, belongs better in Melbourne

Drove through Kooyong today. I have never seen so many candidate corflutes in my life. Probably 50/50 Josh to Monique in the east and progressively getting a lot more Monique going into Hawthorn and no Josh west of Glenferrie Road. And the election hasn’t been called yet. No Greens ones sighted.

I also drove through the electorate today. Only from Box Hill/Mont Albert to Camberwell Junction and I concur that for the section I drove it was 50/50 Frydenberg/Ryan. You wouldn’t suspect a 50/50 showing in one of the wealthiest parts of Melbourne/Australia.

From recently driving down Riversdale and Canterbury Roads, one gets the impression that a reasonable percentage of houses have a Monique Ryan sign. This would suggest that Josh Frydenburg has cause to be very worried. Interestingly though, driving through Balwyn and North Balwyn, there are almost no corflutes for any candidate. These might be the areas where the Lib vote might hold up – also the most Asian parts of Kooyong.