LIVE Federal Election Coverage 2016

[Demonic Ascent]

Don't understand why anyone would watch 7 or 9 during elections.

It's always amusing watching the losers (or in this case potential winners) start going at each other no holds barred as the night wears on. Hours of unscripted TV with type A personalities everywhere, you never whats gonna pop out of someone's mouth. Great viewing

In summary ABC for info, 7/9/Sky for schadenfreude.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

I think they probably lose credibility as a centrist, pragmatic party if they support a Coalition that is tearing itself apart. How could they themselves talk about this notion of "stability"?

I'm only guessing what NXT will do like everyone else though, they haven't really given us an indication one way or the other.

It's worth noting though that Windsor and Oakeshott both originally entered politics as Nationals, so history doesn't necessarily mean a lot.

But ideologically he's closers to LNP than ALP? Just trying to figure out where he falls on the spectrum.

 

[nobbyiscool]

But ideologically he's closers to LNP than ALP? Just trying to figure out where he falls on the spectrum.

I guess that's the difficulty - economically, he's probably conservative, but socially he's probably closer to the ALP.

On top of that, he's trying to frame himself as the sensible alternative that isn't beholden to either ideology.

 

[Footy Smarts]

I'd be betting strongly on an early election. I just can't see how a stable government can be formed. Gillard only got the thinnest majority but she at least had rock solid support in the party room (bar a small clique of Ruddites) and the cross-benchers supporting her were pretty determined to make it work. Turnbull is hated in his party room and none of the crossbenchers will fear an election like Oakeshott and Windsor.

 

[nobbyiscool]

I'd be betting strongly on an early election. I just can't see how a stable government can be formed. Gillard only got the thinnest majority but she at least had rock solid support in the party room (bar a small clique of Ruddites) and the cross-benchers supporting her were pretty determined to make it work. Turnbull is hated in his party room and none of the crossbenchers will fear an election like Oakeshott and Windsor.

I wouldn't even rule out another DD within 12 months. Such is the way the Senate is looking, even if LNP can form a Government, the only way they'll be able to pass legislation through the Senate is 1) with agreement from the ALP, 2) with agreement from the Greens, or 3) with agreement from NXT and probably 4-5 crazies (and Lambie in particular has form in telling Libs to **** off).

Even if the GG calls another election because no one can form Government, it's only a lower house election - the only way to get rid of the Senate is to form a government, get another DD trigger, and then go again.

When you consider the worst case scenario, it could be 12 months of treading water. While it's not likely, there remains a possibility that:
- neither side can form a Government, so we have another election in September, and
- after that election, the Senate is still such that no one can pass legislation, and we have a 3rd election - a 2nd DD - mid next year.

Again, this is not likely - but it's a pretty ugly worst case scenario.

 

[Badesumofu]

Does it have to be more than a hand shake ?

It doesn't even have to be that. When one lot or the other try to form a government they need to first get a Speaker elected. Then they need to be able to survive a potential no confidence motion. The they need to be able to get supply bills through.

Wilkie, for example, has ruled out a deal to give either side ongoing confidence and supply. Labor have ruled out a deal with Bandt. That doesn't mean Labor couldn't govern with 74 members. It would mean that absent a deal, they could potentially be brought down by the LNP and 4 crossbenchers at any time.

 

[telsor]

Wilke has ruled himself out after his last experience with Labor.

That makes things very tough then.

It's looking like LNP 73, ALP 72.

If Wilkie wont got ALP(and he sure as hell wouldn't go LNP), that leaves 4 available. That said, if push comes to shove, I think he'd blink and do a deal.

The Green/ALP deal last time broke up as well (although that was, in part, setting up for the next election), but for all the rhetoric before the election about them being separate, you can't really see the Greens going anywhere else. It'd also give the ALP cover to enact their 'ideologically sound, but politically unpalatable' policies (carbon tax, open borders).

Xenophon would be vital for either party, the 1 seat in the house is 'nice' and doubtless important, but the Senate seats would be massive...If the ALP signed him and the greens up, they'd probably come close to a majority in both houses. I think he's more likely to go ALP both because he's closer to them ideologically, so less of a issue to make a 'comfortable' deal.

Katter would tend LNP, but he left them due to some fairly substantial differences, so it's not the sure thing some seem to think. He's an experienced politician, so a deal could certainly be made either way.

McGowan would be the opposite of Katter in many ways...You'd tend to think she's go ALP, but probably has enough flexibility to be swayed for the right deal.


I think the ALP is more likely to patch together a government out of all this, although non existent deity help them trying to keep it all together. This is a bigger and noticably more disparate group than last time.

LNP have trouble with Turnbull having cracked the sads over the past few days, and his inability to listen to other opinions making him not nearly as good at 'let's make a deal', and that many of the deals required would probably have his own right wing walk out on him.

 

[Maggie5]

That makes things very tough then.

It's looking like LNP 73, ALP 72.

If Wilkie wont got ALP(and he sure as hell wouldn't go LNP), that leaves 4 available. That said, if push comes to shove, I think he'd blink and do a deal.

The Green/ALP deal last time broke up as well (although that was, in part, setting up for the next election), but for all the rhetoric before the election about them being separate, you can't really see the Greens going anywhere else. It'd also give the ALP cover to enact their 'ideologically sound, but politically unpalatable' policies (carbon tax, open borders).

Xenophon would be vital for either party, the 1 seat in the house is 'nice' and doubtless important, but the Senate seats would be massive...If the ALP signed him and the greens up, they'd probably come close to a majority in both houses. I think he's more likely to go ALP both because he's closer to them ideologically, so less of a issue to make a 'comfortable' deal.

Katter would tend LNP, but he left them due to some fairly substantial differences, so it's not the sure thing some seem to think. He's an experienced politician, so a deal could certainly be made either way.

McGowan would be the opposite of Katter in many ways...You'd tend to think she's go ALP, but probably has enough flexibility to be swayed for the right deal.


I think the ALP is more likely to patch together a government out of all this, although non existent deity help them trying to keep it all together. This is a bigger and noticably more disparate group than last time.

LNP have trouble with Turnbull having cracked the sads over the past few days, and his inability to listen to other opinions making him not nearly as good at 'let's make a deal', and that many of the deals required would probably have his own right wing walk out on him.

Interesting situation coming up especially when you also have to have a speaker.
I tend to believe Wilkie as he sounded pretty firm.
Xenophon is another question and I really don't know.
Don't know that either party would be confident but one thing is for sure, no dodgy policies will get through.

 

[Chameleon75]

Interesting situation coming up especially when you also have to have a speaker.
I tend to believe Wilkie as he sounded pretty firm.
Xenophon is another question and I really don't know.
Don't know that either party would be confident but one thing is for sure, no dodgy policies will get through.

With the exception of katter who has a solid personal brand, cross benchers are never safe. I think who is more likely to go a full term will figure highly in their decisions, last thing they would want is an early election to break a deadlock.

 

[telsor]

Interesting situation coming up especially when you also have to have a speaker.
I tend to believe Wilkie as he sounded pretty firm.
Xenophon is another question and I really don't know.
Don't know that either party would be confident but one thing is for sure, no dodgy policies will get through.

I don't think the speaker is a major concern. It'll be 76-74, so take a speaker out and it's still a majority at 75-74.

I suspect there will be a lot of dodgy policies, it's just that most will either be to satisfy the minors or fairly blatant vote grabs to try and setup for next time. What there wont be is a lot of unpopular legislation enacted 'for the good of the country' (tough budgets for example).

 

[Pessimistic]

Why is it a given that the ALP wont support the libs?

 

[telsor]

With the exception of katter who has a solid personal brand, cross benchers are never safe. I think who is more likely to go a full term will figure highly in their decisions, last thing they would want is an early election to break a deadlock.

Wilkie has a pretty bug majority, Brandt seems to be getting fairly safe (and as a party might like another election for a crack at Batman if the political winds are blowing right), McGowan seems to be developing a pretty solid base and NXT seems to be 'on the rise'.

If they can spin their decision to not support something as being for their electorate, they'd probably gain from it.

 

[Maggie5]

I don't think the speaker is a major concern. It'll be 76-74, so take a speaker out and it's still a majority at 75-74.

I suspect there will be a lot of dodgy policies, it's just that most will either be to satisfy the minors or fairly blatant vote grabs to try and setup for next time. What there wont be is a lot of unpopular legislation enacted 'for the good of the country' (tough budgets for example).

well at least (according to Bishop) Malcolm is talking to all cross bench members. Picture should be clearer tomorrow.
Meanwhile I am really enjoying W Roy's lamenting that the One Nation votes cost him his seat.
Nah Wyatt your born to rule attitude cost you your seat.
Now go and get a real job.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Why is it a given that the ALP wont support the libs?

because of politics. neither major party would endorse the other, they'd sooner burn the entire country to the ground. see 2010 election for example, both bickering over who has "the right" to form government. as if they were lining up to pull Excalibur itself out of the ground.

 

[telsor]

Why is it a given that the ALP wont support the libs?

Ideologically, they're probably closer than a lot of the other options, but given they've spend their entire political life fighting each other, it's unlikely they'll get past the emotional baggage involved.

 

[mighty tiges]

Why is it a given that the ALP wont support the libs?

Not in Labor's interests to do so.

In fact, it could be argued that forming a minority government (even if they could) is not in Labor's interests (re: next election). Bowen said on Q&A it was an error last time under Gillard in hindsight.

Better for the ALP to play a patient game and the old school Australian political card of promoting a stable united single party that can govern in its own right versus a messy, divided and unstable (greater) coalition of non-Labor parties. Economic uncertainties and deficits aren't going away between now and the next election, and neither is more years of a Turnbull (small l)/Abbott (conservative) divide within the LNP, and nor is this even more difficult and eclectic Senate.

More of what we've seen from this LNP government will have the electorate bringing their baseball bats to the next election and the ALP will only need to pick up a further handful of seats to gain majority government.

 

[Freomaniac]

well this will last a while...

 

[telsor]

Not in Labor's interests to do so.

In fact, it could be argued that forming a minority government (even if they could) is not in Labor's interests (re: next election). Bowen said on Q&A it was an error last time under Gillard in hindsight.

Better for the ALP to play a patient game and the old school Australian political card of promoting a stable united single party that can govern in its own right versus a messy, divided and unstable (greater) coalition of non-Labor parties. Economic uncertainties and deficits aren't going away between now and the next election, and neither is more years of a Turnbull (small l)/Abbott (conservative) divide within the LNP, and nor is this even more difficult and eclectic Senate.

More of what we've seen from this LNP government will have the electorate bringing their baseball bats to the next election and the ALP will only need to pick up a further handful of seats to gain majority government.

Works both ways, as evidenced by last time.

I suspect it could be the other way around this time due to a combination of the impetus to hold onto power (so the incumbent is more desperate) and Turnbull's ego.

 

[Fire]

You would think that another election would wipe the liberals out wouldn't you?

 

[BIRDBRAIN]

You would think that another election would wipe the liberals out wouldn't you?

It definitely would. The political tide has turned, this isn't like Brexit where voters are saying 'what have I done?'.

 

[pazza]

Actual current figures

Coalition 70
Labor 71
Greens 1
Others 5
4 yet to be determined

Senate:

Coalition 29
Labor 26
Greens 9
NXT 3
Hanson 5
Hinch 1
Lambie 1
Christian Democrats 1
Liberal Democrats 1

 

[romeohwho]

It definitely would. The political tide has turned, this isn't like Brexit where voters are saying 'what have I done?'.

And campaign leaders!

 

[pazza]

Very amusing result so far.

Say the Coalition gets 74-76 seats, what are people's thoughts on the probable strategy for the Speaker?

Can't see it.

At best Coalition wins the seats it narrowely leads..taking it to 73 to Labor 74.

Possible speakers:

Tony Smith (current speaker - and did a decent job in the last Parliament)
Joanne Ryan (Labor member of speakers panel and former teacher - hardly likely to take any bullshit from anyone)

 

[Demonic Ascent]

This campaign has been a disgrace, especially from Labor - but the Liberals have been just as bad previously.

Surely it's about time for some genuine, strong legislation around electioneering, and the standards of behavior and ethics that are acceptable.

The Medicare thing was an absolute disgrace, then reports of tele-callers ringing Wyatt Roy's electorate slandering him.

The Medicare thing was the backbone of their entire campaign - and it was a complete and blatant fabrication; that type of shit should not be acceptable.

It was probably non-core campaigning.

 

[Gough]

During the last Labor government there was a small smear campaign regarding the PM, and her actions as a lawyer, I believe this board touched briefly on it. But the Medicare campaign was an absolute scandal, and it's perpetrators should be jailed. Brilliant.