Forde – Australia 2016

van Manen had been the Family First candidate for Rankin in 2007

Yes, he kind of did an opposite of Bob Day who was first the Liberal candidate (for Makin) then became an FF Senator.

I know this area well and Des Hardman is everywhere and has an army of volunteers. Bert’s name recognition is high, but so is his un-favourability. I think this is in the too close to call category. Peter Beattie’s candidacy in 2013 hurt Labor big time in Forde. On the ground, people didn’t take well to him being parachuted. One to watch for sure.

PRP
Is Forde like Greenway & La Trobe ?? Lots of voters with big mortgages ??. See my quotes in my post on La Trobe.

This seems the most volatile of all the QLD seats.
A history of huge swings.
A very large PUP vote in 2013.
The Greens vote halved in 2013.
A very polarising MP to say the least.
Like most of the QLD seats we need to see where the PUP vote goes this time.
I think a lot will depend on who the QLDers dislike least out of BS, & MT.

Ben Raue
i tried to post on Hindmarsh. No luck

I think Labor have a good chance here, the way in which Beattie wa drafted in late probably hurt them last time around.

Agree completely Bert is an MP from the 20s, no character at all, I’d say this would be included in most estimates for labor pick ups in QLD

I’m not so sure here. I for one do not think Labor are a shoo-in here. As others have pointed out, we need to discover where the PUP voters will go. The 2013 result was skewed by Palmer and the margin is deceptively narrow as a result. I’d still say this is a tossup at the moment, maybe with Labor ever slightly in front.

PRP – as someone who is actually a Forde voter, I feel it’s worth noting that this is almost certainly the reason why Labor lost Forde – because Hardman had spent 3 years building his support in the electorate, only for Beattie to be parachuted in at the last minute. Just about everyone figured that Beattie’s overall popularity would be stronger than the negative of the sudden change… turned out that was wrong.

Saw van Manen at Beenleigh train station early on Monday morning, with a woman, handing out pamphlets or something – I didn’t pay close attention to what they were handing out, because even if I were inclined to vote for Turnbull’s Coalition, I wouldn’t be willing to vote for van Manen. But it seemed like most people didn’t pay him that much attention.

Wreathy of Sydney – At the 2013 election, most of the PUP vote came from Greens and Labor. The van Manen primary vote actually dropped in 2013, but on 2PP, he had a net gain in vote. This suggests that much of van Manen’s votes were protest votes. Also note that a similar thing happened in 2010 – in this case, Brett Raguse’s vote was lost mostly to the Greens (and van Manen’s primary vote was no better than the Liberals’ primary vote in 2007).

There’s no reason to protest vote against Labor this time, so I’d expect Labor to see a big boost in primary vote, especially considering there seems to be far fewer candidates this time.

Incidentally, both Greens and Family First have candidates for Forde, according to ABC. The Greens candidate is Sally Spain, who ran for Forde in 2013. The Greens website lists her.

According to ABC, the Family First candidate is Amanda Lynch. This might be in error, though, because the FF website says Amanda Best, who ran last year (but I found this when searching for “Amanda Lynch Forde” in Google, and the Google preview says Amanda Lynch for Forde, so maybe they’ve changed it in the last day or so).

Perhaps she married recently?

What Glen said about the LNP primary dropping in 2013, but Palmer picking up Greens and Labor voting was true in several Queensland seats. The two party preferred is very unreliable. The LNP primary is weaker than you would think after only seeing two party preferred.

Family First apparently can’t settle on a candidate.

It was Amanda Lynch, then Amanda Best, now it’s Annelise Hellberg.

Apparently there’s an Independent running here, too. I’ve been seeing a few corflutes for him.

His name is David Wilks. Took a remarkable amount of effort to find a website for him (had to go via his candidacy facebook page, then find a link in one of his posts to a “bit.ly” address that led to his website. http://david.wilks.online/

Looks like his “policies” aren’t completely absurd as so many “independents” running on the “I’m not a party guy” platform usually are. But he doesn’t even mention Forde on his main page of his website, and the only way I knew of his existence was having seen a couple of corflutes in a place that won’t be seen by a huge number of people. Maybe he doesn’t know enough of politics…

Also, ABC has Shaun Spain running for ALA.

I wonder if the two Spains – running for diametrically opposed parties – are related.

Hi David,

I am working with Shaun Spain in the ALA. I can assure you that the greens candidate and our shaun are in no way related.

Keep an eye out for Shauns ALA corflutes to, they are currently going up around your electorate 😉

Henry – that is a seriously disturbing thing to say. You can “assure” David that they’re not related? Are you honestly suggesting that there is some problem with the idea of Shaun being related to someone who has a different ideology to him?

Incidentally, I’m the one who lives in Forde, not David (to my knowledge), and I’ve not yet seen a single corflute for your candidate. I’ve seen a heap of van Manen ones, almost as many Hardman ones, and a few select David Wilks ones.

This doesn’t surprise me, as I don’t see your party getting more than maybe 1% of the vote in Forde, not unlike Rise Up did in 2013. And, in my view, rightfully so.

I’m going to go through and provide Sportsbet values for electorates that are “close” according to their predictions. Forde is a borderline case – if the second party’s value is 2.5 or lower, I’ll post it.

Sportsbet has Labor at 2.50 to LNP’s 1.50.

“Henry – that is a seriously disturbing thing to say. You can “assure” David that they’re not related? Are you honestly suggesting that there is some problem with the idea of Shaun being related to someone who has a different ideology to him?”

Not a problem at all. We all have relatives in our families that disagree with our own political ideologies. No it’s not a problem at all, but I can see how it may cause confusion on the ballet paper.

“Incidentally, I’m the one who lives in Forde, not David (to my knowledge), and I’ve not yet seen a single corflute for your candidate. I’ve seen a heap of van Manen ones, almost as many Hardman ones, and a few select David Wilks ones.”

We only started putting our first lot of corflutes up not long after I posted my original message. I can assure you there are now hundreds up around Forde in prime viewing locations. Keep your eyes open for them in your travels.

” I don’t see your party getting more than maybe 1% of the vote in Forde, not unlike Rise Up did in 2013. And, in my view, rightfully so.”

Thats disappointing to hear 🙁 behind the scenes we are confident that we will do alot better then then 1% We are expecting to get the alternative conservative vote that was split in 2013 between Rise up, Katter and Palmer. (All of whom have decided not to run in Forde this year.) As well as all the disenfranchised LNP voters who have abandoned the party due to the leadership swap last year. We expect to share this vote with the family first candidate but it will hopefully give us enough to get Shaun over the line.

VOTE #1 ALA SHAUN 4 FORDE! IF YOU’RE LOOKING FOR A NEW CONSERVATIVE ALTERNATIVE! 😉

Well, finally managed to spot *one* ALA corflute, poorly-positioned.

Can someone explain to me why everyone seems to think the ALP have such a good chance here? This was a seat that the Libs held all throughout the Howard years and probably would have held in 2007 if not for the ridiculous size of the QLD swing.

Well I think it wouldn’t fall before Longman or even Dickson. I am not aware of much focus.

Wreathy – it’s a strange electorate, here. We have some of the Logan area, and some of the Gold Coast area. You can see the weird behaviour by looking at the map. All of the Gold Coast booths were strongly LNP except two (which were still leaning LNP), while most of the Logan booths were fairly strong for Labor… but with sections that were strong for LNP.

The “East” booths are in Beenleigh and Eagleby. It’s the key location of the seat (where MPs invariably have their office), and leans moderately towards Labor.

The strongest Labor booths, within “Central” Forde, are up in Waterford, which are practically in Rankin, and more generally in the true “Logan” area, which is always strong for Labor.

North Forde has Loganholme and its surrounds, which could be thought of as “upper class Logan”, along with “Farming Logan” to the east. Unsurprisingly, it tends to be more LNP-leaning. The bits in West Forde aren’t very notable, really. South Forde is, of course, Gold Coast.

Before Beattie was parachuted in 2013, Hardman was polling not far behind Van Manen, and it was thought that Beattie would ensure a win (the reverse happened, as Labor’s move was seen cynically). This, in an election that was seeing big swings against Labor.

Hardman is running, again. It’s also worth noting that, in an election that Labor saw a swing against it in Queensland of about 2%, the swing against Labor here was just 2.8%… which would seem like an unimportant fact, until you realise that Van Manen *should* have gotten a sophomore surge, with 2013 being his first time running for re-election.

It’s also worth noting that Van Manen ran as a Family First candidate in Rankin before he ran for the Liberals in Forde. This should give you a sense of his politics. This is not a strong match for the seat, as Forde isn’t especially religious.

The reason that Liberals held it throughout the Howard years is that Kay Elson was a strong local member. This is why, when she retired, there was a huge 14.4% swing to Labor. Remember, in that election, there was a 5.5% swing to Labor nationally and an 8% swing to Labor in Queensland. So 14.4% is still huge.

For comparison, going into the 1996 election, when Kay Elson got the seat, the seat had just been redistributed, and was considered to be a marginal seat due to the redistribution (it was notionally 0.3% to Liberals). Elson got a swing to her of 10% on top of all of that. This was twice the swing seen nationally.

That’s why it’s seen as a plausible pickup.

Incidentally, I just noticed that the Des Hardman for Forde facebook page has their HTV – they’ve got Greens in 2, followed by David Wilks, the independent, in 3. Interestingly, they’ve got Family First ahead of Liberals, but ALA in last at 6.

@Glen outstanding post! I gather from your language that you are a resident of these parts and this simply reinforces the primacy of a local perspective in election campaigns. Thanks very much!

Wreathy – I am indeed a Forde voter.

My prediction: Held by the government of the day since 1987 (2010 aside), Forde has a tendency to swing big, had a massive PUP vote in 2013, plus former Premier Peter Beattie was the Labor candidate in 2013. A true nailbiter, narrowly LNP at this stage.

So, we received a mailout from “Malcolm Turnbull” (in other words, from the LNP), informing us that “You live in one of 14 seats where just a few hundred votes could change the result of this election”. It specifically refers to our local member, Bert van Manen, with photo, etc, so this isn’t a generic one being sent to every seat.

So apparently, Forde is considered a close race by the LNP. I hope so.

@Glen is there any reference to what the other 13 seats are? Would be a good indication of how competitive the Libs think some of the results are.

Prediction: This one is close, van Manen seems to have his nose in front

Wreathy – nope, no indication whatsoever. I can duplicate the entire message, if you’d like.

It’s worth noting that it continues the flawed argument of “if you vote for Greens or Independents, they’ll dictate policy to Shorten”… not sure if Turnbull and the Liberals realise this, but people WANT their representative to have a lot of say in government. The fact that voting for Greens or Independents, if you agree with their policies, will result in their policies being more likely to be implemented… is actually an argument in favour of voting for them, and getting a hung parliament.

Incidentally, as much as it pains me to say so, Sportsbet now has Forde outside of my “tracked” range…

Coalition 1.25, Labor 3.75

I do hope the punters are wrong.

If Labor don’t win this, its going to be a very long night for them! This would be exactly the sort of outer suburban, lower income seat, that should be most receptive to their message of budget unfairness and underwhelmed by Mr Harbourside Mansions.

This is my no.1 pick for an ALP gain in Qld as Petrie and Capricornia are more likely to retard (but not deny) electoral gravity due to sophomore effects.

The polls are showing a nearly 5% swing in Qld and it has to be coming from somewhere! I’m expecting this to fall, along with Petrie and Longman (in Brisbane). Brisbane itself will be close but I tip an LNP hold.

Funny how this seat gained minor attention this campaign. I know Shorten was there today but it hasn’t received as much love as Petrie, Brisbane or Bonner. I think a swing to Labor here but not enough to claim it.

Peterjk – it’s a bit more complicated than that. Forde isn’t exactly a “typical” seat.

I live here, and Petrie and Capricornia will go more easily than Forde will. Forde is pretty close to being a bellwether, and has some funny voting patterns. The inclusion of northern Gold Coast in the electorate skews the result relative to what you’re expecting, and overall it has a curious mix of “outer suburban” and “rural” patterns to it.

I like to describe the Beenleigh area as “Upper Class Logan”. It’s not quite right, but I tend to put it this way – in Logan footwear is optional. In Beenleigh, generally thongs are a minimum. So unlike Rankin, which is true Logan, and is pretty much guaranteed to be a Labor hold, and won’t likely change hands any time soon, Forde is a lot more fickle.

Forde also contains actual upper class Logan – the Loganholme area. Do you see the 67 and 68 in the north-east of the electorate map? That’s the Loganholme area.

So overall, expecting Forde to be a relatively easy seat for Labor to pick up is misguided. It’s not implausible that it’ll fall, but it’s not going to go before Petrie and Capricornia. And Brisbane will probably go before Forde, too.

That analysis is excellent Glen. It really does explain the different areas of the seat. I am a regular in the seat due to relatives living on the boundary with Rankin.

@Glen. I agree the better-off suburban areas wont swing as much this time as their more down at heel neighbours. However they should still swing more than areas closer to the city I would have thought. There’s a swing of 4-5% being shown in Qld and I believe that it will be higher in outer suburban and provincial areas and lower on the Gold/Sunshine Coasts and the inner city. Even if Forde swings the same as the state average, it should be enough to fall, and that’s before taking into account the issue of whether Peter Beattie had a negative effect on the ALP vote last time.
If the ALP don’t win Forde, they’ll have no chance in Longman and will be lucky to get more than a couple of gains in Qld.

Peterjk – I agree that Forde would fall before Longman… but I can think of about 6 seats that would generally go before Forde. Definitely Petrie, Capricornia, and Brisbane. Probably Dawson, Bonner, and Flynn or Herbert.

Which isn’t to say we won’t see Forde go. I really do hope that Hardman beats Van Manen, and feel that it is a possibility. And if Shorten was in the area today (I didn’t leave the house until late evening, today), then clearly Labor considers it to be in play.

One other thing worth noting. Van Manen isn’t much of a local member, from what I can tell. Kay Elson, back when she was the Forde MP, was really active in the region. I’ve never seen Van Manen, nor heard of any event he was attending in the area, until the election campaign (where I saw him standing at the entrance to Beenleigh train station).

TBH I actually like Des Hardman – that’s a difficult thing for me to admit! Of course, this seat is in play but as others have stated, the peculiar demography of the electorate makes it hard to predict.

If as polls have indicated, the LNP are holding their own in the capital, then the swing is obviously coming from somewhere. Question is, will it be enough in the right areas?

Peter Beattie……… being imposed cost Labor votes. This not the case with a swing to Labor close

“Glen is there any reference to what the other 13 seats are? Would be a good indication of how competitive the Libs think some of the results are.”

Someone from Banks posted the same letter.

I got one of those in Perth, so it’s not just marginal Lib seats. (Any Lib who thinks they’re about to take one of Labor’s three remaining WA seats is dreaming, especially with the tide going back out for them.)

BTW: the difference between 41,256 and 34,604 is a fair bit more than “a few hundred”. Their hyperbole is out by an order of magnitude.

Looks like Chisholm and Werriwa are on that list too:

http://www.watoday.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-confident-malcolm-turnbull-pitches-for-labor-seats-20160630-gpvbnv.html

Bird – pretty sure they’re referring to how close it is *now*, not how close it was in 2013.

I have to be honest, I’m shocked and delighted that Forde swung so much, we’re now at the point where it’s going to come down to the postals, absents, etc. At this point in the count, it’s the second-closest seat, after Chisholm.

While it would be unusual for the non-ordinary votes to favour Labor in Forde, it has varied widely over the last few elections – in 2013, there was a strong net bias in favour of the LNP. In 2004, it was pretty much identical to the ordinary vote proportions. In 2010, it favoured the LNP by only an extra 0.5% (51.5% in ordinary, 52% in non-ordinary), and in 2007, it favoured the LNP by about 2% extra (46.7% in ordinary, 48.6% in non-ordinary).

When you factor in that Labor appeared to have been negatively impacted by the Brexit, it’s possible that this will be like 2004, and Labor will maintain their slim lead. Or it could be that the high number of postal votes will mean that it strongly favours the LNP, and it’ll shift back by the end of counting. Either way, Forde is going to be a marginal seat.

I dismissed this seat has gone to the Liberals, after Labor had only a small lead which would be overtaken from the postals. But Crikey hasn’t put Forde in the Liberals likely column calling it lineball:

“One undecided electorate where late counting made little difference in 2013 was Forde at the southern edge of Brisbane, since Labor’s weakness on postals was cancelled out by strength on absent votes.

The reason for this is that Labor is stronger at the electorate’s urban northern end in Logan City, and weaker in the semi-rural outskirts to the south. Consequently, many voters at the Labor-voting end stray into neighbouring suburbs and cast absent votes in the seats next door.

Labor currently holds a tiny lead of 149 votes in Forde, and it’s anyone’s guess if this will remain after late counting.”

Pnw – I had a look back at previous elections, and how much the vote changed by when you add in non-ordinary votes. It was 0.14% in both 2010 and 2013. And in 2004, there was literally no change. With the current margin being 0.11%, that means it really could go either way.

So at present, Forde has a difference of 783 votes in favour of the LNP.

If the current postal vote 2PP proportions hold, the LNP will gain another 1035 votes, while Labor will gain another 830 votes, pushing the total difference out to 988 in LNP’s favour…

… and if current absent vote 2PP proportions hold, the LNP will gain another 964 votes, while Labor will gain another 1344 votes, bringing the total difference to 608 votes in LNP’s favour.

Then there’s another 1153 declaration prepoll votes and another 1104 provisional votes. In 2013, there were 1298 provisional votes and 294 permitted, of which 265 were formal. That means about 225 provisional votes plus 1153 declaration prepoll votes.

In 2013, declaration prepolls were pretty much identical to ordinary votes, while provisionals favoured Labor by 12% compared with ordinary. That would suggest about 1 extra vote for Labor on declaration prepolls, and 54 on provisional votes. This would suggest the final total would be 553 in LNP’s favour.

… but then, there’s the fact that they haven’t “received” all of their absents, declaration prepolls, and postals, yet. Indeed, only about 41% of absent votes have been “received” nationwide – all absent (and dec prepoll) votes will be “received” eventually (postals are less certain, and harder to predict – about 88.4% of prepolls issued were “received” in 2013; if the same applies this time, and it’s evenly spread, then another 1009 postals would be expected in Forde).

Assuming the final ratio between Forde issued and received absent votes remains the same as 2013, then there’s another 1887 absent votes not yet received.

So what would it take for Labor to gain Forde? Well, if we assume the absent and postal proportions remain the same, and the predicted 1009 postals and 1887 absents come in, LNP will gain another 111 net votes from postals, while Labor will gain anothesr 311 net votes from absents (note: I’m neglecting informals, for speed of calculations). So the difference becomes 353 to LNP.

Across all of this, there are 4329 absents, at least 1152 dec prepolls, and 2913 postals, plus lets say 300 provisionals. That’s 8694 votes. Labor would have to do a little over 4% better across the remaining non-ordinary votes than I’ve predicted above, to achieve this. If the final turnout is the same as 2013 (92.6%), then there’s 11047 votes remaining – if this is right, then Labor would need to do a little over 3.2% better than I’ve just predicted.

It’s unlikely, but it’s not completely implausible. We don’t know how the different vote types will actually split.

One thing I’m willing to predict with a fair bit of confidence: it will be close enough that a recount is requested.