LIVE Federal Election Coverage 2016

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
May 20, 2012
Posts
6,972
Likes
9,452
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Green Bay Packers
By my count, there were three seats called at some point in the night, which have ended up going the other way. Far too generous.



Typo highlighted
Yep, I completely overlooked that! That's what post-night shift with no sleep does to me, haha - thanks for picking it up!

That makes it even more interesting!
 

Sydney Bloods

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Posts
18,214
Likes
13,845
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Coney Island, GWS, The Exers!

funk44

Skookum Choocher
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Posts
7,238
Likes
8,166
AFL Club
Geelong
care to share a link, because this is the link i have for the ABC http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/results/
it does not match the AEC raw count, it is most certainly a prediction.
If you're really keen and you know your way around XML you can get the raw data from ftp://mediafeed.aec.gov.au/20499/
Differences in standard/detailed and verbosity are explained on page 11 here

fyi, if you use the detailed data you will also need the preload for the polling districts and candidates and have the know how to bring it all together

 
Last edited:

Sydney Bloods

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Posts
18,214
Likes
13,845
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Coney Island, GWS, The Exers!
If you're really keen and you know your way around XML you can get the raw data from here
Differences in standard/detailed and verbosity are explained on page 11 here

fyi, if you use the detailed data you will also need the preload for the polling districts and candidates and have the know how to bring it all together

that's too nerdy even for me...
 

Donakebab

Premium Platinum
Joined
May 18, 2009
Posts
27,599
Likes
32,865
Location
Canberra
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Detroit Red Wings
If you're really keen and you know your way around XML you can get the raw data from here
Differences in standard/detailed and verbosity are explained on page 11 here

fyi, if you use the detailed data you will also need the preload for the polling districts and candidates and have the know how to bring it all together

If you're gonna be a nerd at least get the link right: ftp://mediafeed.aec.gov.au/20499/
 
Joined
May 20, 2012
Posts
6,972
Likes
9,452
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Green Bay Packers
Due to the DD, half the senate needs to serve 3 year terms, while the other half serves 6, but there's no official or legal requirement outlined in the constitution for how this occurs. This means half + 1 could potentially bully the other half into serving a half term.

Given the likely senate numbers, it's highly possible that Labor, Greens, and Xenophon (plus Hinch, depending on total Greens numbers) will form an alliance and force the remaining senators (Libs, Nats, Lambie, Nile, Hanson) to serve 3 year terms.

lol
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Demosthenes

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 9, 2015
Posts
3,363
Likes
3,037
AFL Club
Melbourne
I tend to feel that it's not real trust unless there's something at stake.

Antony Green is quite professionally respected, but it's not like anybody's going to die if he gets a prediction wrong.
 

telsor

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 29, 2004
Posts
30,069
Likes
26,500
Location
Here
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Habs
Due to the DD, half the senate needs to serve 3 year terms, while the other half serves 6, but there's no official or legal requirement outlined in the constitution for how this occurs. This means half + 1 could potentially bully the other half into serving a half term.

Given the likely senate numbers, it's highly possible that Labor, Greens, and Xenophon (plus Hinch, depending on total Greens numbers) will form an alliance and force the remaining senators (Libs, Nats, Lambie, Nile, Hanson) to serve 3 year terms.

lol
There most certainly is a method for who gets 3 and 6 year terms, and I'd be pretty surprised if it wasn't set out in legislation.
 
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Posts
2,743
Likes
4,707
Location
Melbourne, via SA
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Sheffield Wednesday
what seats did he call that went the other way?
- The computer called Freo for the Libs with about 10% counted
- At one point two seats had been called for the Greens (Batman I assume)
- Flynn had been called for the LNP halfway through the night, with it then being called for the ALP just as the ABC's TV coverage was finishing

Of the seats still in serious doubt:
- Hindmarsh had been called for the ALP
- Capricornia had been called for the Libs
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Posts
27,872
Likes
20,214
Location
Australia
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Fremantle, WA, Associates
Due to the DD, half the senate needs to serve 3 year terms, while the other half serves 6, but there's no official or legal requirement outlined in the constitution for how this occurs. This means half + 1 could potentially bully the other half into serving a half term.

Given the likely senate numbers, it's highly possible that Labor, Greens, and Xenophon (plus Hinch, depending on total Greens numbers) will form an alliance and force the remaining senators (Libs, Nats, Lambie, Nile, Hanson) to serve 3 year terms.

lol
That's not going to happen. While it is the case that the Senate is given the power to decide which method will be used there is absolutely no chance they'll do something like that. They have previously used the order-elected method, but the Commonwealth Electoral Act recommends that they use a recount method involving a second count in which only the elected Senators are included in the count.
 

GreyCrow

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Posts
44,411
Likes
63,660
Location
Down South Corvus Tristis
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt, Redskins , White Sox
There most certainly is a method for who gets 3 and 6 year terms, and I'd be pretty surprised if it wasn't set out in legislation.
Antony Green blogs about this

Its based on order of election

Order-Of-Election
There have been six previous double dissolution elections in 1914, 1951, 1974, 1975, 1983 and 1987.

After each of these elections the new Senate has used the Order-Of-Election method to choose which senators serve a full six-year term. This means the first six senators elected in any state get six years, numbers seven through 12 get three years.

But as Green points out in his blog, Order-Of-Election can create some strange and potentially unfair outcomes.

To get around this problem, Section 282 was inserted into the Commonwealth Electoral Act in 1984.

The Recount method
It provides for a different method, one we'll call the Recount method.

In this model, the votes are counted as if the double dissolution were a normal half-Senate election for six seats instead of 12. The senators elected in this method would get a full six years, and the rest would get three-year terms.

Interestingly, the Recount was used for the 1987 double dissolution election, but the Senate chose to ignore it and instead allocated terms using the Order-Of-Election method.

The Senate has since moved resolutions under both Coalition and Labor governments stating its intention to use the Recount method. But there's nothing to bind a future Senate to it, and a majority of senators would be free to act in their own political interests.

Green says the choice of method could have significant implications for the left of politics.

"This is most likely to have an impact on the Greens in New South Wales and Queensland where the two methods are likely to produce different results on whether Labor or the Greens are allocated long term seats," he wrote in his blog.

He says under the Order-of-Election method, it is also possible the Greens could win two long-term senators in Tasmania, Western Australia and Victoria. He says the method would be certain to deliver the Nick Xenophon Team two long-term senators in South Australia.
 

Tents

Draftee
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Posts
11
Likes
36
care to share a link, because this is the link i have for the ABC http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/results/
it does not match the AEC raw count, it is most certainly a prediction.
We are looking at the same figures.

The reason the ABC seat count doesn't match the AEC seat count is that the ABC has figures for 4 seats that the AEC is categorising as 'not yet determined'. I don't know why the discrepancy on these 4 seats.

Three of these 'not yet determined' seats will go to L/NP and one to the ALP. The AEC not including these is the difference in the two counts.

- ABC has L/NP 70, plus ahead in 3 in doubt (so overall ahead in 73) with ALP 67 plus ahead in 5 in doubt (so overall ahead in 72).
- AEC has L/NP ahead in 70, ALP ahead in 71 - but add in the 4 not yet determined and the totals are the same (L/NP ahead in 73, ALP ahead in 72).
 

Demosthenes

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 9, 2015
Posts
3,363
Likes
3,037
AFL Club
Melbourne
We really need a constitutional amendment to fix the recount method as the way of determining DD Senate distributions. It's quite clearly the fairest method to split the seats under IRV, which is why it was introduced into the electoral act.

The problem is that while the system will always advantage one major party and disadvantage the other - it will always disadvantage minor parties. So as long as the Greens and/or other minor parties control the balance of power, the recount method will never get up.
 
Top Bottom