Mayo – Australia 2025

Very interesting as Labor wins the TPP in this electorate.

@Bob only last election. Historically it’s been a Liberal seat and even after Rebekha Sharkie won the seat for the Centre Alliance in 2016 (then known as the Nick Xenophon Team), the Liberals still often finished first on primaries and ahead of Labor in the TPP contest, but the TCP contest has always been since Sharkie won the seat a CA v Liberal contest. In 2022 it was still CA v Liberal but CA finished first on primaries and Labor finished ahead of the Liberals in the TPP count by a small margin.

In 2019, the Libs threw a lot of resources into the seat when Georgina Downer was the candidate. People on the ground would know but I suspect that the Libs decided it was better to try and save the furniture in Boothby and Sturt.

looks like Sharkie is in trouble for riding her staff too hard. though i doubt it will be enough to unseat her

@John

I agree with you – this seat is Sharkie’s until she retires or commits a serious crime.

Sharkie retain.

This will be an interesting seat when Sharkie retires. Labor is now competitive here so will have incentive to pour resources in. However, the area is fairly independent-minded as it often votes in high numbers for third parties, so a credible independent, or even daresay the Greens, would have good chance to win it too, as would the Liberal party obviously.

For the Greens to increase their chances, they’d need to win or come close in the state seat of Heysen, which would help give them a foothold in the area. The federal Richmond campaign outcome will give people a sense of how good the Greens are at campaigning at more rural areas. In Heysen, they’re not too far off overtaking Labor but I’d definitely favour the Liberal party to hold that seat at this point.

This is the least English-speaking seat in Australia. The most is Blaxland.

Seats where under 51% of the population speaks English at home:
1. Blaxland (NSW) (Labor): 24.3% — lowest in Australia
2. Fowler (NSW) (DLFCN): 24.9% — lowest for a non-Labor seat
3. Watson (NSW) (Labor): 30.0%
4. Parramatta (NSW) (Labor): 31.9%
5. Calwell (VIC) (Labor): 35.2% — lowest in Victoria
6. Barton (NSW) (Labor): 37.1%
7. Werriwa (NSW) (Labor): 37.6%
8. Hotham (VIC) (Labor): 38.6%
9. McMahon (NSW) (Labor): 39.2%
10. Fraser (VIC) (Labor): 40.1%
11. Reid (NSW) (Labor): 40.5%
12. Bennelong (NSW) (Labor): 43.6%
13. Gorton (VIC) (Labor): 44.0%
14. Scullin (VIC) (Labor): 44.2%
15. Chisholm (VIC) (Labor): 45.2%
16. Chifley (NSW) (Labor): 46.0%
17. Lalor (VIC) (Labor): 46.9%
18. Bruce (VIC) (Labor): 47.2%
19. Greenway (NSW) (Labor): 47.5%
20. Banks (NSW) (Liberal): 49.1% — lowest for a Coalition seat
21. Lingiari (NT) (Labor): 50.8% — lowest for a non-urban seat, lowest in the NT

Seats where over 88% of the population speaks English at home:
129. Dickson (QLD) (LNP): 88.0%
130. Dobell (NSW) (Labor): 88.1%
131. Casey (VIC) (Liberal): 88.4%
132. Indi (VIC) (Independent): 88.4% — lowest for an independent seat
133. Ballarat (VIC) (Labor): 88.5%
134. Corangamite (VIC) (Liberal): 88.6%
135. Fairfax (QLD) (LNP): 88.7%
136. Fisher (QLD) (LNP): 88.8%
137. Gilmore (NSW) (Labor): 88.8%
138. Monash (VIC) (Liberal): 88.8%
139. Bowman (QLD) (LNP): 88.9%
140. Wannon (VIC) (Liberal): 88.9%
141. Flinders (VIC) (Liberal): 89.0% — highest in Victoria
142. Hinkler (QLD) (LNP): 89.0%
143. Macquarie (NSW) (Labor): 89.3%
144. Wide Bay (QLD) (LNP): 89.4% — highest in Queensland
145. Hunter (NSW) (Labor): 89.9%
146. Braddon (TAS) (Liberal): 90.5% — highest for a Liberal seat
147. Paterson (NSW) (Labor): 90.7%
148. Lyons (TAS) (Labor): 90.7% — highest in Tasmania
149. Shortland (NSW) (Labor): 91.2% — highest for an urban seat, highest for a Labor seat
150. Lyne (NSW) (Nationals): 91.3% — highest for a NSW seat, highest for a Coalition seat, also my old seat
151. Mayo (SA) (CA): 91.5% — highest in Australia

Full table: https://jmp.sh/N8YkR4Yq

There is some numbers there I didn’t expect, thanks NP. Only thing is that you’ve mixed yourself up in your first line.

Lowest by state and territory (overall + Labor):
* ACT: Fenner (Labor): 64.8%
* NSW: Blaxland (Labor): 24.3%
* NT: Lingiari (Labor): 50.8%
* Queensland: Moreton (Labor): 59.6%
* SA: Adelaide (Labor): 60.0%
* Tasmania: Clark (Independent): 76.2%, Franklin (Labor): 86.9%
* Victoria: Calwell (Labor): 35.2%
* WA: Cowan (Labor): 60.9%

Lowest by state or territory (Coalition seats):
* NSW: Banks (Liberal): 49.1%
* Queensland: Leichhardt (LNP): 71.7%
* SA: Sturt (Liberal): 66.3%
* Tasmania: Bass (Liberal): 86.3%
* Victoria: Menzies (Liberal): 52.3%
* WA: Durack (Liberal): 75.0%

Lowest in each non-capital city with multiple seats:
* Central Coast: Robertson (Labor): 86.5%
* Geelong: Corio (Labor): 80.1%
* Gold Coast: Moncrieff (LNP): 74.7%
* Newcastle: Newcastle (Labor): 84.7%
* Sunshine Coast: Fairfax (LNP): 88.7%
* Wollongong: Cunningham (Labor): 78.9%

@Darcy whoops my bad. Blaxland is the least, Mayo is the most.

Lowest by state or territory (Greens seats):
* Queensland: Griffith (75.4%)
* Victoria: Melbourne (57.1%)

Lowest by state or territory (independent seats):
* NSW: North Sydney: 65.9%
* Victoria: Kooyong: 67.4%

Highest by state and territory (overall + Coalition seats):
* ACT: Bean (Labor): 76.3%
* NSW: Lyne (Nationals): 91.3%
* NT: Solomon (Labor): 64.2%
* Queensland: Wide Bay (LNP): 89.4%
* SA: Mayo (CA): 91.5%, Barker (Liberal): 87.3%
* Tasmania: Lyons (Labor): 90.7%, Braddon (Liberal): 90.5%
* Victoria: Flinders (Liberal): 89.0%
* WA: Canning (Liberal): 86.9%

Highest by state (Labor seats):
* NSW: Shortland: 91.2%
* Queensland: Lilley: 80.3%
* SA: Kingston: 87.9%
* Tasmania: Lyons: 90.7%
* Victoria: Corangamite: 88.6%
* WA: Brand: 82.2%

Highest by state or territory (Greens seats):
* Queensland: Ryan (79.4%)

Highest by state or territory (independent seats):
* NSW: Mackellar: 81.7%
* Victoria: Goldstein: 76.1%

Highest by city:
* Adelaide: Kingston (Labor): 87.9%
* Brisbane: Bowman (LNP): 88.9%
* Canberra: Bean (Labor): 76.3%
* Central Coast: Dobell (Labor): 88.1%
* Melbourne: Dunkley (Labor): 84.4%
* Newcastle: Shortland (Labor): 91.2%
* Perth: Moore (Liberal): 86.3%
* Sunshine Coast: Fisher (LNP): 88.8%
* Sydney: Mackellar (Independent): 81.7%
* Wollongong: Whitlam (Labor): 84.9%

Forgot to add for the highest in each city:

* Geelong: Corangamite (Labor): 88.6%
* Gold Coast: McPherson (LNP) (83.8%)

@ Nether Portal
I think you missed McEwen in your table.
I think Mayo may also be the most White seat has it the lowest CALD % and is very low in terms of % indigenous only 1.1% methinks the peri-urban seats such as Flinders, Mayo, Wright, Macquarie maybe the most racially homogenous as the % Indigenous is low while seats like Braddon, Lyons, Paterson have high % of indigenous

@Nimalan if I missed McEwen then whoops but just in case I did 79.8% of McEwen speaks English at home.

You’re right that seats up the North Coast of NSW are actually very Indigenous. I knew lots of Aboriginal kids at school, in fact at one of my schools there was a big Aboriginal family where lots of the students were cousins. Aboriginal people tend to be younger on average so I don’t think there’s anything to say that the Aboriginal population is in decline. I will note most of them are also white, so they might be Aboriginal but also have British or German or Italian heritage.

The Indian community in Port Macquarie which is in Cowper but could be moved back into Lyne eventually is growing so I would expect the white % to drop a bit next census, same as in Coffs Harbour which is in Cowper and will remain in Cowper unless it’s abolished.

@ Nether Portal
Thanks so much for the table much appreciated. I always enjoy your maps/tables as i always like looking at demographics and voting patterns. Interestingly, i never knew anyone who was Aboriginal in school even though i grew up in a diverse area. The indigenous population is only 0.3% in my seat so that makes sense. While @Tommo9 mentioned that places like Mount Barker are growing i dont think it will be easy for first home buyers (from immigrant backgrounds) to purchase in Mayo compared to other parts of Adelaide and with less public transport i think it will be like Wollondilly which is a growth area but very White.

@Nimalan I think it’s similar with coastal areas. Port Macquarie is middle-class, with the average income being higher than that of Lakemba and close to that of Bankstown according to the census. And the census data for Port Macquarie is from the entire city and its inner suburbs (so most of it) so the CBD would be even more than that. The houses there have always been expensive since it is a beachside regional city.

In Thrumster, a suburb of Port Macquarie, the average income is $1,988 as of the 2021 census which is more than Blacktown and Hornsby and is almost equal with Cronulla. Thrumster is a housing estate away from the coast and has semi-rural parts.

Sa is really a building disaster area for the liberals.. this election Sturt is completive. In the next 1 to 2 elections the alp may be in with a show.
Think this largely overlaps the state seat of Mawson

The implosion of the Centre Alliance in SA is wild. They went from being a real third party across SA (something unseen in Australia but widely seen in Europe) back in 2016 federally and in 2018 on the state level but after Nick Xenophon left things went downhill very quickly, basically becoming irrelevant outside of Mayo in 2019 and even more so in 2022.

NXT primary vote across SA in 2016:

* Statewide: 21.3% — third
* Adelaide (Labor): 12.9% — third
* Barker (Liberal): 29.1% (45.3% TCP) — second
* Boothby (Liberal): 20.7% — third
* Grey (Liberal): 27.7% (48.0% TCP) — second
* Hindmarsh (Labor): 15.1% — third
* Kingston (Labor): 17.2% — third
* Makin (Labor): 16.6% — third
* Mayo (NXT): 34.9% (55.0% TCP) — second (won on preferences)
* Port Adelaide (Labor): 18.7% (35.1% TCP) — second
* Sturt (Liberal): 21.2% — third
* Wakefield (Labor): 20.4% — third

CA primary vote across SA in 2019:
* Statewide: 4.4% (–16.9%) — fourth
* Barker (Liberal): 2.9% (–25.7%) — fifth
* Grey (Liberal): 5.2% (–21.6%) — fourth
* Mayo: 34.2% (+1.3%) (55.1% (–2.2%) TCP) — second (won on preferences)

CA primary vote across SA in 2022:
* Statewide: 3.3% (–1.1%) — sixth
* Mayo (CA): 31.4% (–2.8%) (62.3% (+7.1%) TCP) — first

Does anyone know why CA flopped so badly? A swing of –16.9% against a minor party is diabolical.

And is Australia too accustomed to the two-party system for a third party to be a real force with appeal across the country or across a state or territory? Besides the Greens in the ACT there really are no third parties because while the Greens poll well in the inner-city they don’t in rural areas, and while One Nation poll well in rural areas they barely get any votes in the inner-city.

Labor has won the ttp, if Rebekha Sharkie were to retire who would pickup the seat.

It might be competitive between the two majors if Sharkie weren’t running.

The SA state electoral map shows Mawson (McLaren Vale to Kangaroo Island) as safe Labor whilst all the other state seats are Liberal. The Adelaide Hills and Mount Lofty Ranges are teal or moderate liberal.

@Spacefish @Votante I’d say it’d go back to the Liberals.

Mawson is usually a marginal seat by the way, it just has a popular Labor incumbent. The SA Liberals still should target it.

@NP – Centre Alliance had a massive drop in vote in 2019 for a few reasons.

1. The party had a bit of a disappointing state election in 2018. They were expected to win a few seats (including Hartley where Nick Xenophon was running), yet ended up with 0 in the Legislative Assembly, though did win seats in the Legislative Council.
2. The Nick Xenophon Team was renamed to Centre Alliance before 2019 elections. Nick Xenophon was a very recognisable figure, but his name being gone maybe made some voters switch party due to thinking the NXT had dissolved.
3. Those factors meant a big withdrawal in resources to SA seats. I believe they didn’t run in any Adelaide seats, and I believe only contested the rural seats and Mayo. Their vote dropped 25% in Barker, 21% in Grey. Mayo had a sitting MP in Rebekha Sharkie who was relatively popular, and alongside the demographic change in the Adelaide Hills meant Sharkie was always expected to hold, even despite her part collapsing overall.

@James thanks for the info. I agree that while in 2018 they got lots of votes they didn’t win any seats and that was a major loss for their cause.

What’s interesting is they did best in a mix of two areas: rural seats and affluent/moderate seats (with the exception of Adelaide where they did poorly despite it having small-l-liberal areas). Maybe the state Liberals being clearly moderate helped this whereas the federal Liberals while moderating at the time still had some other influences.

Surprised to see no Greens candidate running in Mayo. They seem to poll similarly to other seats where they are running. Dearth of decent candidates, or have they agreed not to run against Sharkie and split the anti-major party vote?

sharkie has indicated she will talk to dutton first in the even of a hung parliament
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fnation%2Fpolitics%2Fill-call-peter-dutton-first-sa-crossbencher-rebekha-sharkie-boosts-coalitions-minority-hopes%2Fnews-story%2Ffff22bb54a3df9c9f0872e786179f83c&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium

Labor won the 2pp.in.2022

@mick yes we know wyou dont need to keep reminding us. also thats a notional 2pp. checkup the definition of the word notional

@John ok? doesnt mean its not kind of an odd move to say you’ll negotiate with Dutton first when your electorate voted Labor over Liberal last time

Am now, given the swing against Labor that is likely to occur this time I wouldn’t be surprised if the notional 2PP margin becomes Coalition leaning.

Did anyone do the sums for Mayo based on the last sa state election?
This is the only seat where Labor won the 2pp and an independent or teal won in 202w

I’m not sure what point is being made in saying that the 2PP is “notional”. The voters of Mayo in 2022 indicated that they preferred Labor over the Liberals. This is no less real than that they indicated they preferred Sharkhie over the Liberals.

@Yoh An I think most people generally agree that SA will be one of the best states for Labor this time around – and there could also be a swing towards Labor in SA. Even if statewide there is a swing against Labor, it’s very hard to see Mayo turning Liberal in the 2PP when the seat is consistently trending left.

My suspicion is that the traditional 2pp is not worth much in Teal/Independent seats after the first time they win. People will vote for Sharkhie or Steggall knowing they will win and after that they don’t care how their papers are marked. In a traditional contest – if you have voted Liberal or Labor how concerned are you after that? In my case very little beyond a symbolic last place on the ballot paper.

I do think that sometimes the Labor 2PP is boosted in a seat when someone else goes in and campaigns, clearly it’s not being driven by Labor popularity, but I don’t think these things are random. They’re quite similar across this range of seats.

They are also consistent with the history of these seats – they don’t look like the independent seats from 2010.

And I don’t interpret a Labor 2PP as a resounding endorsement of the ALP, but I do think it is meaningful when it comes to relative preference of one of the major parties.

I agree the presence of a minor party or independent candidate can affect the 2PP. But this not inherent to the 2PP being merely “notional” in that the 2PP is not the 2CP. Even if the major parties are in the final pairing, this phenomenon can still occur.

If Labor narrowly won a seat against the Liberals on the preferences of a candidate who narrowly missed out on the 2CP, we wouldn’t be questioning the legitimacy of Labor’s win.

@Nicholas Google the definition of “notional” Sharkie has obviously sought input from her constituents regarding who to back in the event of minority government. If oakshott and Windsor had of done the same history would have been different and labor would have been a one term govt in 2010. Hence while realistically has been 93 years since there was a one term govt labor was a one term govt in 2007-2010. Abbott just got cheated at the finish line. If you look at the wa election the Nat would have likely won Pilbara and Kalgoorlie in a matchup vs Labor even though the Liberals only just lost. But would they have supported a Labor minority govt? Notional means nothing it’s just a guess.

My point….. this was the only seat where Labor won the the 2pp and a teal or independent won.
Notional is like beauty in the eye of the beholder. Where a seat was notionally changed from one party to the other eg
Bennelong… this is indeed of importance.
Most here ( not me) consider this s certain liberal gain.

@Darth Vader

I know what “notional” means, and you completely missed my point. I am not suggesting that Labor would have won in 2022 had Sharkhie not run. Let me explain the fallacy that John made, and which you have made again.

As I said, the 2PP can be distorted in the same way by the presence of minor parties and independents who perform well even when the major parties are the final pairing. A seat is more likely to have a merely notional 2PP where there are strong third-party candidates, but that it is merely notional cannot in itself be said to decrease the significance of the 2PP in measuring preference for a major party over the other – it is only a symptom and a sufficient but not necessary piece of evidence that there was a strong third-party vote, which is what gives rise to the distortion of the 2PP that we are talking about. The idea that as soon as the 2PP becomes merely notional, it “means nothing” and “is just a guess” is a complete fallacy. There can be a one vote difference between a scenario where the 2PP is merely notional and where it is not. (This vote switches from the third-party candidate to a major party, dropping the third-party candidate to third-place on the 3CP.) If we admit the fallacy, then we are left to conclude that this one vote makes all the difference in how we ought to interpret the 2PP as a measure of preference for a major party over the other. That is absurd.

So, there is no point to be made in relation to measuring the preference for one major party over the other by posing that the 2PP is merely notional. How then, am I supposed to interpret John’s comment? Perhaps then, it is not a point about validity in measuring public opinion but a point about some vague notion of legitimacy in election results, the specifics of which is what I was seeking to clarify. Under this interpretation, it is reasonable to point out that voters are ultimately responsible for allocating their preferences, and that however they allocate them is what determines the result. I jumped to this interpretation because the other (making a point about the validity of the 2PP in measuring public opinion), as I have explained in the paragraph above, has no substance.

Your examples of Pilbara and Kalgoorlie precisely confirm what I am saying. Are you going to tell me that Labor winning in Pilbara and Kalgoorlie “means nothing” and “is just a guess“? Because that is what your logic implies.