Skip to comments.Shades of Paul Keating landslide for Labor (Australian election tomorrow)
Posted on 09/05/2013 1:50:31 PM PDT by naturalman1975
LABOR is only a handful of seats away from a repeat of the 1996 wipe-out of Paul Keating's government, as strategists on both sides predict Kevin Rudd could lose about 20 seats to be left with just 50.
Labor MPs and key figures from the ALP and Liberal Party have told The Australian that Labor faces big losses in Queensland, NSW, Victoria and Tasmania.
NSW in particular is described by senior party officials as a "black hole" as Labor confronts the possibility of losing eight seats, most from its western Sydney heartland.
Early hopes of Labor picking up seats in Queensland have been dashed, with former Labor premier Peter Beattie expected to fail to win the LNP-held seat of Forde and Teresa Gambaro expected to hold her marginal seat of Brisbane.
The only seat the Coalition seems likely to lose is the Victorian regional seat of Indi, held by Liberal frontbencher Sophie Mirabella, to a Nationals-backed independent.
The latest Galaxy polling, conducted exclusively for Sydney's The Daily Telegraph, shows Labor's primary vote on election eve at 35 per cent, to the Coalition's 45 per cent, giving a two-party-preferred outcome of Labor on 47 per cent and the Coalition on 53 per cent.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.com.au ...
If Rudd can ring up enough phony endorsements, he could pull it out.
When I was in Aus back in ‘97, locals in Queensland said Aus seemed to want a Gov. the size of the USA with population 1/10 the size.
Sad since I love Australia!!!
I wish I could say the same for the USA.
Fingers crossed for you all! We have friends who emigrated to Perth from York,UK 10 years ago. They seem very conservative, but they like Rudd?!
My thoughts are with your great country with wonderful people.
If Abbott wins that would represent irrefutable proof that Oz has fewer “Obama Phone” owners,percentage-wise,than does the US.It would also prove that Abbott,unlike Romney,has paid his taxes for the last 10 years.
First, Canada elected conservatives, then the UK [well, sort of], and, perhaps, now Australia. Would that we follow.
Perhaps they admire his command of Mandarin,a very useful skill for freedom-loving Westerners.
If only the Republicans would nominate someone who paid his taxes,didn't want to shoot Mexicans on sight,and didn't have such a hatred for Blacks,Hispanics,women,gays,lesbians,"transgendereds",Jews,moslems,"the most vulnerable among us"...
Looks like the good guy’s are heading for a win.
A shame it probably won’t be the cosmic beatdown it would have been if Guillard was still in charge!
How about the Senate? Only half the seats are up. Do you need to have a majority there?
Oh,I get it.Just took a quick peek at your profile and learned that you're one of those "Romney's a Commie pinko who's no different than Obama so I'll stay home on election day" types.So...never mind,it's over your head.
While a Senate majority would be nice, it’s not all that important. An opposition-controlled Senate does generally pass policies a government was actually elected on, on the grounds that a mandate from the people should be respected - and generally the major parties respect that principle. A Senate majority tends to be used to ask for amendments to address a few special areas of concern, rather than to block legislation altogether.
There’s an outside chance, Labor and the Greens together, could try and block the repeal of the Carbon tax - but I don’t think Labor would be willing to run the risks involved in that - it would create a constitutional trigger for a ‘double dissolution’ election (where both the House of Representatives and the Senate go up for reelection in their entirety) where the carbon tax would be the only major election issue - and Labor knows it would be likely to be wiped out for a decade in such an election. They want a chance to come back in three or six years - they still remember their 23 consecutive years in opposition (1949-1972).
Romney is a liberal, I don’t vote for liberals.
Never said he was no different than Obama.
That’s what I thought, I’d imagine it would be quite an annoyance though. Australia is rather different than the UK and Canada because your upper house is elected and actually has some legitimacy and meaningful role. The Lords and the Canadian Senate may as well be abolished.
Do you think the coalition will get the majority there?
I need a left-right continuum graph for Australia...who is left-wing, moderate, right-wing?
Too bad you can’t have a double dissolution if LABOUR is in that much trouble..!
Well the UK now has UKIP and we in the USA have the “Tea Party” wing so we’ll continue to resist..!
OK - put simply, there are three major parties - two of which normally operate in coalition because they share most policies and beliefs.
The Labor Party is currently in office under Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. Labor are socialists - ranging from relative moderates to hard left near communists. They represent one ‘side’ of Australian politics.
On the other, we have the Liberal Party under Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott, who are the major conservative party, mostly focused on the major cities and the suburbs of those cities. They range from centrists to clear, genuine conservatives (Abbott is from this latter grouping). If the election goes our way tomorrow, Tony Abbott will become Prime Minister.
They nearly always operate in coalition (in Australia it is referred to as ‘The Coalition’) with the National Party. The Nationals are a mostly rural based conservative party, with its power base in the bush and country towns. They share most policies with the Liberals and in one state and territory the two parties have actually merged into the Liberal Nationals and the Country Liberals respectively.The Nationals are slightly more conservative overall than the Liberals, because they don’t have as much of a centrist wing. Their leader is Warren Truss (actually he’s a Liberal National because he’s from one of the states where they have merged, but he’s from the National side of that party), and if the conservatives do win the election, he will become Deputy Prime Minister.
Besides the above, we also have the Greens who are hard left with an environmental focus - they have no hope of forming government in their own right, but their support for Labor was key to Labor holding minority government for the last three years, Katter’s Australia Party, who are basically conservatives - they are a brand new party (Bob Katter, their leader, was previously an independent Member of Parliament and he’s now started his own party - remains to be seen if they actually win any seats tomorrow (besides the one he has already held as an independent), and Family First who are a generally conservative Christian based party with a few ‘progressive’ areas in terms of welfare for families, etc. These three have some hope of having a presence in Parliament, but cannot realistically form government. There’s also literally dozens of really minor parties that haven’t got any real hope of influence at all.
Unless the conservatives are willing to reverse a lot of the leftist policies, what value does it serve? Far too often, when conservatives around the world get into power, they want to “deal with new stuff”, accepting the leftist status quo, instead of overturning it and wiping it out.
In the US, for example, when the Republicans control both houses of congress and the presidency next, they should erase every last trace of Obamacare, as if it had never been.
I’m sure there are many other things in Australia that also need to be scrubbed, such as gun control.
Interesting. I’m wondering if voting patterns run in Oz the way they are trending in the USA, with voting becoming more and more ethnic/tribal. Do aborigines and immigrants vote in high percentages for Labour?
A majority in the Senate is not impossible, but is unlikely. But there is a reasonable possibility of something almost as good.
Currently the Senate has 34 Coalition Senators, 31 Labor Senators, 9 Greens, 1 Democratic Labour Party, and 1 Independent.
76 Senators, so a majority is 39. At the moment, Labor and the Greens together control the Senate.
We look like we could have 36 coalition Senators out of this election. The independent currently in the Senate (Senator Nick Xenophon) and the Democratic Labour Party’s Senator John Madigan, would probably be willing to support the Coalition if doing so would get the Coalition to a majority - so that would get us to 38. And there is a reasonable chance that a new party (Palmer’s United Australia Party) could pick up the last Senate seat in Queensland - and we would expect him to support the coalition as well.
So while a majority in our own right is unlikely, there’s a reasonable prospect of a Senate where the Coalition could command a majority with the support of an independent and two minor party candidates (for that matter, we’d probably bring the DLP into the coalition if they wanted it - despite the Labour in their name, we’ve got a fair amount of common ground with them)
Good, I hope that works out. Thanks for the info.
Funny that the electoral system allows those small parties to win seats in the Senate. Single transferable vote, pretty rare. Ireland uses that for it’s lower House. That’s about it, as far as I know.
I rather wish we had instant runoff voting for all our Republican primaries.
Indigenous Australians are a small group, so are electorally speaking, rather insignificant. Traditionally, they’ve been more likely to vote Labor, but that’s probably changed a bit in recent years, and there’s significant indigenous support for the conservative parties, and the Labor Party is losing support partly because Labor has never had an indigenous member of federal Parliament, while the coalition has had three. Labor has traditionally had support from a sizeable chunk of Australians of foreign background, but again, I think that’s now eroding - especially among those who have worked very hard to build a new life in Australia, and don’t like Labor’s attitudes towards those who have actually managed to raise themselves up into the middle classes by sheer hard work and effort.
"Landslide"? FOR Labor? What the heck kind of misleading headline is that?! It makes it sound like Australia's Labor Party is winning big. Shouldn't the headline read "Shades of Keating-sized DEFEAT for Labor" ?
>> How about the Senate? Only half the seats are up. Do you need to have a majority there? <<
Since Australia is a parliamentary-based system like the UK, my guess is no...whoever is the party leader of the lower house will run the government. Would be nice to have both houses though. Probably the Liberal/National Party will at least make gains in the Senate due to coattails from the House election. Their upper house seems much more like the US system than the UK or Canada though, since the Senate is elected by the people and seems to have significant power. I guess the "abolish the 17th amendment" crowd would tell us that Australia "lost their Republic" then, even though they never had one in the first place. ;-)
(Of course, Aussies probably realize that "becoming a Republic" involves abolishing the monarchy and has nothing to do with how Senators are elected, no matter how much the anti-17thers scream otherwise and make up their own definition for the word)
Yeah that’s a strange headline alright.
Check out posts 14 and 23 for Naturalman’s take on the Senate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.