Caulfield – Victoria 2022

I totally agree

Looking at the ACE booth results in Macnamara the TPP increase for Labor in the Caulfield booths but it was the Greens vote that went significantly up through these booths with even Labor’s primary vote slightly decreasing.

There’s been some sizeable development especially in the Eastern part of the Caulfield district near the racecourse and in Elsternwick with some large high-rise developments. It’s an electorate that is completely different to what it was a decade ago, and even 3-4 years ago.

Less single-block family homes and more younger couples moving into apartments is not a good combination for the conservative vote. I suspect that would have something to do with why the Labor vote stagnated in May but the Greens did quite well. The Liberal vote also crashed in this area in May too.

Southwick has no chance, I don’t agree this is on a knives edge, He should have lost last time but the late postals on late counting put him ahead.

If the federal is anything to go by (And Labor usually does better at state level than federal level) then this is lost.

The Liberals suffered -10% swings across Caulfield booths in May, and no swing at all in November will be lineball, so I agree that Southwick is as good as gone here.

What magnitude swing do you expect to see Trent?

I do think Labor is now favoured to gain Caulfield, but only narrowly and I predict a swing under 5% (likely to be around 2-3%), below that recorded Federally given Labor is not as popular state-wide.

The interaction of so called ‘Teal’ candidate Nomi could also affect how well Labor polls.

I’d say in inner southeastern Melbourne, state Labor is pretty popular, a lot more than federal Labor. Of course that’s definitely not the case in the outer suburban growth corridors.

I agree with Dan M. Federal Labor are actually not that popular in inner Melbourne – that’s why the teals and Greens did so well – but state Labor are.

I’m expecting roughly between a 6-8% swing against Southwick’s primary vote, but not all to Labor and some will come back in preferences, so maybe between a 3-5% 2PP swing to Labor.

To add Trent’s point. if we look at the state seat of Melbourne Labor actually got a swing to them in 2018. Normally, when a Greens win a seat they entrench themselves elsewhere.

What’s the latest news regarding the “on the ground campaign”? What’s the independent candidate (Nomi Kaltmann) like?

I just had a quick look at Sportsbet and TAB and both have given the independent slightly better odds than the LIB.

I’ve only been able to find 2 teal corflutes, Liberal and Labor corflutes massively outnumber the Teal one. I can’t see anything to suggest that she’ll even make the 2CP or even poll above 10%.

Sportsbet odds are so strange – lazy bookmaking I reckon.

Have a look at this site. It has Caulfield as one of the most contested seats. The site explains the methodology of how the forecast is generated. I am interested to know what you all think of the methodology behind it. Personally, I think the Libs will come first in terms of primary vote maybe 39%, Labor-Clear Second around 26%, Teal around 18% only. Teal will take from both Liberal and Labot.

https://www.aeforecasts.com/seat/2022vic/regular/caulfield

@Ham, I agree. I don’t live in the electorate but am very close to it and spend a lot of time in Balaclava. That’s my closest shopping strip. I haven’t really seen any sign that there’s even an election on around Balaclava to be honest, other than the occasional Southwick poster in a phone booth.

I think those predictions are pretty accurate, and Sportsbet is way off.

My prediction is the teal will take pretty evenly from both Labor & Liberal but only maybe 6-7% from each, there will also be a small LIB to ALP swing, and really not impact the Greens vote, but the Greens will increase their vote mostly at Labor’s expense.

So I’m imagining a result something like the following:
– Liberals: Around 36-38%
– Labor: Around 24-25%
– Greens: Around 20%
– Independent: 10-15%

The teal will come 4th in my opinion, and the Liberals won’t win with a primary vote below 40%. I think Labor are a good 80-85% chance to win. It should be noted too that on these numbers, the Greens can’t entirely be ruled out of a surprise win…

That result seems most likely especially considering the rise in the vote for the Greens, hard to see how the Liberal primary can recover from the slaughtering it received in this part of Melbourne in the mid to high 20s to above 45 to elect a Liberal MP.

It’s been pointed out here before but we won’t know the result in Caulfield until well after election day – huge amount of postal votes in this electorate.

@Nimalan, I think that website is fairly on point a LIB v ALP contest is the most likely outcome.

Even if you look at social media, both the Liberal and Labor candidates have way more online traction than the independent candidate.

And especially considering the postal vote will predominantly be the more orthodox Jewish population (and therefore by far the weakest for the Greens); the polling day results could show a MUCH closer race between ALP & GRN for second place until postal votes knock a few % off the Greens result.

For example.. It could looking something more like LIB 35%, ALP 24%, GRN 23% before the postals are counted but then shift to LIB 38%, ALP 24%, GRN 20% after postals.

The only teal-leaning independent preference flows to Labor/Greens I could find were:
Angela Egan (Herbert): 33.3% Green, 20.5% KAP, 17.5% ALP etc.
Clare Ferres Miles (Casey): 53.6% Green, 23.8% ALP, 22.6% LP.
If the Caulfield independent is serious about electing a pro-climate, pro-integrity MP, she ought to preference the Greens second like Ferres Miles did so her votes will have a greater impact.

The complication there is that the Caulfield independent is a Jewish woman who would probably get a lot of her support from Jewish voters disillusioned with the majors. Many of these are voters who put the Greens last.

Michael Danby, as the former Melbourne Ports MP, famously felt the need to even hand out alternate HTV cards to Jewish voters that put the Liberals above the Greens because he felt that showing any sigh of support or cooperation with the Greens would cost him votes.

I think the Greens will probably wind up doing the worst from the distribution of the teal’s preferences at the 3CP stage. If Labor go into the 3CP count with maybe a 2-3% lead over the Greens (after AJP preferences generally favour the Greens), their 3CP lead over the Greens will probably increase to about 5-6% after the teal preferences.

I can picture a 3CP result of roughly 43% LIB, 31% ALP, 26% GRN (which would probably translate to a 53-47 ALP win).

@Trent is right, a lot of Labor > Liberal > Greens voters here because of the Greens’ position on Israel (perhaps among other issues). So it’d be a hard ask for Kaltmann to recommend preferences to the Greens ahead of the majors.

Ham/Trent
I agree with Trent about primary votes estimate for both Labor and the Libs. The only difference is that i maybe overestimating the Teal and underestimating the Greens. i think both Teal and the Greens will get in the Teens and not break the 20% mark. Even the left-wing Western Fringe of the seat has a large Jewish community so i dont think the Greens will grow that significantly. The ordering of the Greens and Teal is important to see who wins the seat. I think the Website that i had has the correct Primary vote estimate for Hawthorn which means greater possibility Teals wins by leapfrogging Labor either on primary or or on preference.

Ryan Spencer, Also maybe look at Boothby where the Teal came fourth to see preference flows. I am keen for you to state as a Greens member do you see the Greens preferencing the Teals over Labor or vice versa. We had a good discussion on the Hawthorn thread in the event you come fourth. I think in Hawthorn the Teals could win if Greens preference them over Labor

As someone who is a Greens voter but not member, I don’t know what their intentions are but I would much prefer for them to preference Labor over teals.

I understood why they preferenced teals in May:
a) Higher climate target;
b) Seats were unwinnable for Labor so it was important to get the teal into second place
c) Federal Labor had a very small target, moderate platform

None of these are relevant in the state election. You have the country’s most progressive Labor government, the teals running in seats with margins of less than 0.6% either way, and climate (other than scrapping Labor’s EV tax) is not much of an issue.

Some of the teals, particularly in Brighton, are Liberal aligned so I would be appalled to see the Greens preference a failed Liberal candidate over Labor in that seat.

@Nicholas, i think the Greens position of Israel etc is why Higgins went Red rather than Green unlike say Ryan. Its also one reason why Macnamara does not have Labor coming third unlike say Griffith where moderate Liberal votes in the absence of a Teal voted Greens.

Trent regarding the first point, There is a significant difference in the State Labor’s policies and the Teals as i pointed out in the Hawthorn thread: Emissions (60% versus 50%) and Renewable energy target (90% versus 50%) and ban on all new fossil fuel projects etc such as gas exploration near the Twelve Apostles etc. The Teals also run on integrity as well. State Labor to be fair has had quite a lot of scandals

I think one of the differences though is that there is less consistency between the ‘teals’ this time. They don’t necessarily share the same platform from seat to seat, like they did federally.

For example, I don’t even think Climate 200 have any involvement with the Brighton “teal”. She is just a Liberal member who lost preselection against Newbury then decided to fly solo, but the media have portrayed her as a “teal”. She is probably quite different to Nomi Kaltmann who was a Labor member until earlier this year, or the Hawthorn teal who also has a Labor background and a more left-leaning agenda.

Would the Federal governments decision to reverse the decision to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel hurt state Labor here and in some neighbouring seats. I note this is a federal issue but would state liberals campaign on this.

I don’t think it would to be honest. If you look at Michael Danby’s success in the area for example, his views were often at odds with Labor’s broader policy so I get the feeling that the Jewish population here perhaps like the idea of having a voice representing their views within the Labor Party.

So the candidate’s own views are probably more important than the party policy, if Michael Danby is anything to go by.

I also think they would see value in having a voice within the elected government. In an election where it seems a foregone conclusion that the Liberal Party have zero chance of winning, the prospect of having a strong local Jewish MP reflecting their views in the elected government as opposed to a local Jewish MP sitting on the thoroughly depleted opposition benches is probably going to work in Labor’s favour.

Yeah I think it’ll definitely hurt Labor. There also seems to be a much more visible campaign for southwick on the ground than any other candidate (yard signs especially). Same for Pesutto in Hawthorn. Usually that’s a reasonably good sign of how things are going to go.

I think ironically State Labor is more pro-Israel than their federal counterparts based on their policy for trade and their attendance at Jewish community events. Plus I heard Josh Burns has been critical to the federal policy moving away from recognition on Jerusalem.

@Trent, I agree with your views on the independent candidate, Nomi. She could stir things up and win over voters who want an alternative to the major parties but find the Greens too left-wing or anti-Israel. It appears that she has strong Jewish community ties.

I wonder if Southwick’s social conservatism would hurt him in the long run in a seat that’s affluent and socially progressive. A generation ago, it would be ok to be socially conservative in a blue-ribbon seat.

I don’t really see Caulfield as remaining blue-ribbon anymore.

* The western third of the seat (St Kilda East, Balaclava, Ripponlea) has always been the more progressive side but is even moreso now than ever, it’s also a lot less Jewish than it once was. It still has significant communities and institutions, but it’s a lot more secular than it is Jewish. This is an area where the Liberals will now struggle to crack 30% of the 2CP (compared to maybe 40% a decade ago) and this is unlikely to reverse as it’s due to demographics and increased Greens support, not just a backlash.

* The southeastern edge of the seat around Ormond & Glenhuntly is more marginal territory but I’d say typically Labor-leaning, especially these days. It’s also less Jewish so Southwick’s strong community ties will have less impact.

* Both Caulfield East and Elsternwick have had a lot of development and new apartments. Caulfield East has a lot of students and Elsternwick is increasingly cosmopolitan and very socially progressive. I’d classify both as marginal but very friendly to both Labor & Greens.

* That really leaves Caulfield North and Caulfield proper as the more blue-ribbon Liberal heartland, but it’s also considered the “heart” of the seat and the demographic in these two suburbs are generally what all the commentary about this seat focuses on. However, while it’s by far the most Liberal part of the seat, it does have a history of showing it can swing behind the right Labor candidate, as it has behind Josh Burns federally.

Overall, the winds are blowing against the Liberals in this seat. If in 4 years time other “heartland” seats like Hawthorn, Brighton & Sandringham start swinging back to the Libs, I believe Caulfield is a seat where the Labor vote will hold up well because the Caulfield & Caulfield North area swinging back could very well be cancelled out by further leftward movement elsewhere.

Really interesting how Greens were polling in the low teens in 2018, to winning booths across the section of this electorate in Macnamara in May. Ripponlea and the Caulfield North booth are an interesting example of this. If the Greens vote increases here like it has over the last few years it could push Labor over the line to winning here. Over time I think this electorate will become more electorally similar to how Albert Park has been over the past decade or so.

I agree it’ll be difficult for Southwick to hold here, but who knows could buck the trend. Also important to note there is a huge postal vote % in this electorate, so likely we won’t know who’s won here for a while similarly to Macnamara in 2022, and Caulfield in 2018.

Only 46 % libs rest left of centre ie 54% prefernce flow looks weaker than I would expect. The boundary change brings in strong non liberal booths which weakens their vote by 0.5%. Assuming the opinion polls are right and labor either maintains their 2019 vote or improves slightly. This seat now favours Labor more. What do Federal figures show.. they indicate some demographic change

Does anybody remember how far ahead on the 2PP Labor were in Caulfield on the night in 2018, before postal votes ended up narrowly putting Southwick back in front during the following week?

I have just looked at the vote types for 2018 and they were as follows:

Ordinary: 56-44 to Labor (38% of votes)
Early: 55-45 to Liberal (32% of votes)
Postal: 70-30 to Liberal (14% of votes)
Absent + Provisional: 60-40 to Labor (16% of votes)

Assuming Ordinary + Early were counted on the night, and the remainder were counted later, that would have had Labor leading with a 50.9% 2PP on election night, which sounds about right (I vaguely remember it being about 51-49).

So I assume anything over a 51% Labor 2PP on election night, after both ordinary + early votes have all been counted, will point to a likely Labor win but it would probably need to be close to 52-48 for the seat to actually be called.

It’s traditionally blue-ribbon as it has had Liberal MPs for close to a century. Caulfield South, Caulfield and Caulfield North will hold up the Lib vote here. The Liberals won’t “diminish” like they have north of the Yarra River where there’s a Green vs Labor contest (e.g. Melbourne, Brunswick, Northcote).

The Greens in Macnamara had a really good run. It’s partly because the Liberal vote crashed. The Macnamara results came in really late because of the postal and prepoll votes and the added complexity of distributing preferences. I think overall, more votes were cast before election day than on election in person at the federal election.

I agree, I wasn’t questioning your classification of the seat as “traditionally” blue-ribbon, just pointing out that due to demographic changes and the makeup of the seat, it’s probably more permanently moving towards Labor compared to other “blue-ribbon” seats which seem to have more of a temporary backlash, or at best a move towards teals rather than Labor.

I think in Caulfield the leftward shift is more permanent than in those other seats, and that a lot less of the seat is “Liberal heartland” than seats like Brighton & Sandringham too. I think its current profile is that of a more naturally marginal seat nowadays.

So part 2 of my analysis after dipping my toes in Nepean – a division I deem to be strong target for a “Noosa-style” independent. I decided to use my manual look-a-like audience clustering to discern the best teal target seats based on the 2022 Federal Election and 2021 Census.

Without many surprises, this particular division comes up in close accordance with Malvern, Kew, Brighton. One of the indicators I find the teal-like (based on Federal election) divisions most closely cluster together on is high rates of Judaism – although this affect seems to be more strongly aligned with secular Jewish communities, rather than the religion. It is harder to identify the amount of secular Jews across the country because on the Census, Judaism is mostly only captured as a religion. I imagine only few secular Jews would self-identify as this in their Religion question.

On other metrics like education and income “teal-like” divisions appear frequently clustered near Greens divisions but skew older (higher rate of 30-54 year olds), have higher rates of home-ownership and higher household income – mostly because of a greater number of these older people living in established family dwellings, rather than apartment living.

Sandrigham might also be a potential teal prospect. I also expect Richmond and Albert Park to be in the mix, but more likely Greens prospects. I also expect reasonable teal results in Northcote and Hawthorn that might lead to interesting 4CP/3CP races.

Interesting analysis SEQ Observer!

A couple of comments as a semi-local (in the neighbouring state division, and overlapping federal division) are:

* In contrast to areas like Wentworth (NSW), Higgins (VIC) and Goldstein (VIC), the Jewish community around Caulfield is definitely not a secular one. It has the largest and most visible Orthodox community in the country, which is something the Census results don’t reflect when comparing Macnamara to Wentworth (which actually has a higher Jewish population) for example. In addition to the large Orthodox community which is really the defining characteristic of Caulfield North in particular, Ripponlea has an Adass Israel Hasidic community that is extremely segregated even from the nearby Orthodox community.

* It’s interesting that you say the teal-like seats are close to Greens areas but with an older population. That’s definitely true here, Caulfield definitely has more home owners and families than neighbouring seats to its west. However, what’s interesting here is that the northwestern quarter of this seat (Balaclava and St Kilda East) which is younger with far more renters and flats is actually like having part of a Greens seat within what would otherwise be a teal-like seat elsewhere.

Brighton is similar actually with Elwood being the section of Greens demographic that sticks out in an otherwise teal-like seat.

Possible alp win

I’d go further and say likely ALP win.

Can’t see the Libs getting a positive swing here which is what they’d require after the redistribution put it in the ALP column, and especially after the federal election had an overlapping pro-Labor swing of around 8% compared to the 2018 state results, which was also reflected in Redbridge’s seat poll here which had roughly a -10% swing against Southwick.

And I can’t see the teal making the 2CP count.

I think it will narrow but a 54-46 ALP win wouldn’t be unexpected.

Just to be clear Trent, my observations was not that teal-like divisions are physically or geographically close to Greens areas. It was that on many demographic metrics, teal-like divisions cluster very closely to the Greens. And to give credit, most often, divisions share many demographic similarities because of their proximity to one another, often sharing a community of interest. This is especially true for state divisions which are smaller in size.

In the case of Melbourne, it so happens that the Greens seats, do border on teal-like divisions and it makes complete contextual sense because of the organised, centralisation of Melbourne. Young educated professional bachelors and bachelorettes living in high-density apartments close to the CBD, and then their older, higher-income yet still progressive counter-parts who have settled into a larger family home in the surrounding ring where there is more ample space to raise a family.

Thanks for the clarification! I read it as geographically close but it makes more sense that they are close on demographic metrics. And yes particularly in Melbourne both tend to apply anyway due to the geography of the city.

Trent and SEQ observer, I think the inner Brisbane districts (both state and Federal) may be like the inner Melbourne districts in that their demographics are fairly similar and could support either a Green or a Teal.

I think Sydney is different because the ‘teal’ seats on North Shore and eastern suburbs are all affluent in nature whilst the seats where Greens are strong are all in the Inner West which doesn’t have the same demographics (although places like Balmain are quite gentrified and becoming more affluent).

Premier has campaigned in this electorate twice this week.

A state politics journo mentioned today internal polling has Labor ahead, coalition primary down and the Teal finishing a distant third.

Huge loss for the Libs to lose their deputy leader if this electorate falls.

It will be interesting to see what primary breakdown would be and what the Teal preference flow to major parties would be

@Ham

Interesting. Who was the reporter who reported it?

Just found it. Tweet by Paul Sakkal from The Age. Says nothing about internal polling. Just implies that because Dan visited twice, that means they’re confident.

Dan has visited multiple other electorates that they’re at risk of losing, and they’re not putting any effort into hawthorn.

Caulfield is going to be close, but I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if Southwick wins by a larger margin based on signs and vox pops performed in the area.

I wouldn’t be surprised at a Labor or teal win either, but if Hawthorn is looking like going back to the liberals, I highly doubt that Caufield will flip.

Additionally, Daniel Andrews was just heckled at the park he visited in Caufield.

His proposal is spruking $15m for dog parks. Doesn’t appear to be too popular with dog owners in Caufield despite that announcement.