Tuesday, May 24, 2022

2022 Senate Postcounts: Main Thread

RESULT:  Labor 15, Coalition 15, Green 6, One Nation 1, JLN 1, Pocock 1, UAP 1 

2019 SENATE CONTINUING: Labor 11, Coalition 17, Green 6, One Nation 1, JLN 1 

NEW SENATE: Labor 26, Coalition 32, Green 12, One Nation 2, JLN 2, Pocock 1

Once unapportioned in a state gets to zero, coverage moves to the button press thread. Totals above are updated as confirmed.


Welcome to my main thread for postcounts for the Senate.  This page will include a summary and updates for each state/territory but over time depending on how the races go and how much time I have I may break out the more complex and unclear races (which currently appears to be Victoria and South Australia) into their own threads.  Some states will receive much higher detail level than others on account of the competitiveness of races.  Where races appear uncompetitive I won't be posting frequent updates.

On this page, a quota is c. 14.28% in the states and c. 33.33% in the territories.  A candidate will be elected if they reach quota, but in the case of the last seat or two may not need to get quota to be elected.  Votes are initially counted by party (whether above the line or below) and are then gradually sorted from "unapportioned" into ticket votes and candidate votes (BTLs).  This is a long and messy process.  Initially candidate below-the-lines will be much lower than where they eventually get to so please don't say "oh so-and-so only got 6 votes" until the unroll is finished.  (That said something I enjoy during this process is tracking the least successful candidates and watching to see who is slowest off the mark).  Previous elections have seen some significant below-the-line campaigns but this time the only one of any interest is the presumably forlorn attempt by veteran Liberal Senator Eric Abetz (Tas) to retain after being dumped to third.  

As I start this thread, the Senate races are still very undercounted, and the counts may not be geographically representative.  Small leads (especially those below 0.1 quotas) should not be relied upon to survive, and sometimes will fall over on preferences.  

It appears likely that Labor will have at worst a blocking majority in combination with the Greens, and a passing majority with the Greens plus any one of David Pocock or a Senator from One Nation or JLN.  

New South Wales

(Outgoing 3 Coalition 3 Labor)


As I start this section the NSW race has reached 43.3% of enrolment (the final figure for each race is around the low 90s.) The leaders are:

Liberals and Nationals 2.548Q
Labor 2.107
Green 0.801
One Nation 0.306
United Australia 0.254
(all others combined 0.984)

On current primaries - and I don't expect this to change though I haven't checked the geographic breakdown - the Coalition ticket is much too far ahead for One Nation to have any chance of catching it on preferences.  Ross Cadell (Nat) will replace Concetta Fierravantti-Wells (Lib) who was disendorsed.  (The Liberals only had three because of recount-related fallout from the disqualification of Fiona Nash.) Deborah O'Neill and Jenny McAllister retain for Labor.  Labor were defending three seats as a consequence of an undeserved third long term from the 2016 DD but that created a three-into-two-doesn't-go problem for them too.  Former NSW MLC David Shoebridge (Greens) takes the seat vacated by Kristina Keneally.  

Saturday 11:00 With the Coalition now up to nearly 2.6 quotas, I can't see any doubt about this one.  


(Outgoing 3 Coalition 2 Labor 1 Green)

Undecided seat probably Coalition or UAP, perhaps Labor

In my Senate prospects article I flagged the prospect that in some states if the Coalition vote crashed but Labor's did not rise, we could see no-one with much of a quota and a winner from a relatively low vote share, perhaps a right-wing minor party.  And here we are with a contest that a right-wing minor could plausibly win.  

As I start this section Victoria is 49.5% counted.  The leaders are:

Liberals and Nationals 2.222Q
Labor 2.218
Greens 1.001
United Australia 0.286
Legalise Cannabis 0.217
One Nation 0.199
Liberal Democrats 0.166
Animal Justice 0.104
(others combined 0.587)

Obviously the Coalition and Labor get two each and the Greens get one.  At present this leaves the major parties on the sort of vote that will beat most of the smaller parties, with only UAP, Legalise Cannabis and One Nation even possibly competitive with them.  But for any of the micros to overtake UAP, they would probably need to gain on them at at least 0.07 votes/vote, depending on whether the micro-party got over one or both majors along the way.  One Nation might do this off some parties, but I don't think even they would do it consistently enough.  Legalise Cannabis lack obvious preference sources, unless the name has an unexpected "buzz" factor (pun unintended).  

At this stage it's too soon to say the seat is in the bag for the UAP candidate Ralph Babet.  His lead over the majors is about 0.9%, and even if that is enough to hold off the majors on micro preferences (which it might be), it might cease to be so with further shifts in the primary votes as often happen in post-counting (have not looked yet at how representative the count is).  By normal standards, the preferences of One Nation will slightly help the UAP, but preferences from Legalise Cannabis and Animal Justice will significantly help Labor (if Labor outlasts them) and preferences from the Liberal Democrats will help the Coalition.

On current numbers, it's conceivable UAP, Labor and Coalition are the last three standing.  Then (all else being equal) if the Coalition goes out, UAP wins, if the UAP goes out, Coalition probably wins, and if Labor goes out, Labor preferences would help the Coalition over UAP.  On current numbers I would think that a plausible scenario is one of the Coalition or the UAP being knocked out and electing the other, but I couldn't write off Labor either.   Concerning whether the Coalition could get over the UAP at least in time to avoid being knocked out before Labor, on past numbers it looks plausible, but this election could be different.  There have been some attempts to organise networked preference flows involving right-wing anti-COVID-mandate micro-parties, though this probably hasn't had that much traction since these parties mostly have no votes, and also since UAP have been seen as something of a sellout to that movement.  

Pending detailed modelling (which even then will need some caution) I see every prospect that this seat goes to the button still uncertain, but the further rollout of primary votes may give us useful hints.  

Sarah Henderson and Bridget McKenzie are re-elected for the Coalition.  Lidia Thorpe is re-elected for the Greens.  Linda White gets Kim Carr's former seat for Labor, recently appointed Senator Jana Stewart retains her seat and Casey Nunn (ALP), sitting Senator Greg Mirabella (Liberal), Babet (UAP) and anybody else who fancies their chances gets the long, looooooong wait.

Saturday: I mistakenly overwrote yesterday's update but in yesterday's counting both majors improved, especially the Coalition, making the UAP's position a little more difficult.

Saturday 11 pm: The Coalition has now moved to the notional lead on 2.29 quotas, ahead of the UAP.  So Mirabella's chances appear to be improving but I think too little is known about preference flows to be sure that will hold.

Sunday 5 pm: Poster David J in comments has noted very helpfully that pro-Labor divisions are undercounted, and while experience from Queensland suggests it may well be the more Liberal-ish booths within those divisions (prepolls etc) that are missing from the ordinary count, it's still likely that the Liberals take a hit once all seats are evenly processed.  

Tuesday: L-NP 2.318 UAP 0.276 ALP 2.229.  Given that William Bowe (see link below) projects the majors to gain .08 quotas (more for ALP) on UAP and the Coalition to put .1 Q over ALP it seems that only a pandemic-fuelled preference flow change will produce something other than a Coalition win on anything like current numbers.

Saturday:  I've had not much more to say about this mess as not a lot has changed.  L-NP  2.311 UAP 0.276 ALP 2.217.

15 June: Good news for Babet on two fronts: firstly he's now in front on primaries by 0.017 quotas. Secondly the SA distribution has shown a large flow - much higher than in 2019 - between One Nation and UAP vs the Liberals on each others' preferences.  Babet is close enough if he's good enough - see the Poll Bludger modelling off the SA count here (which finds him winning in two of three combinations and losing narrowly to Mirabella in the third.).


(Outgoing 3 Coalition 2 Labor 1 One Nation)

(Likely One Nation - slightly ahead on primaries with probably better preference flow)

Queensland has inspired some bad reporting and worse social media claiming that Pauline Hanson is going to lose.  This started with some syndicated nonsense from AAP (who are extremely error-prone) claiming that Hanson was going to lose because she was behind the Greens.  These people couldn't count to six.  On Tuesday on Twitter there were several popular tweets falsely claiming Hanson was in a losing position or had already lost.  

Here are the primary votes with 47.4% counted:

LNP 2.333 quotas
ALP 1.737
Green 0.925
One Nation 0.529
Legalise Cannabis 0.413
UAP 0.307
Lib Dems 0.167
AJP 0.088
I-APA 0.083
(others combined 0.418)

The LNP get two off the top with one for Labor, and then exclusions from the bottom up will gradually result in the Greens and Labor crossing.  The race for the final seat is between the third LNP Senator Amanda Stoker, Hanson for One Nation, and Legalise Cannabis.  

However, in comparison to Hanson, a big problem for Legalise Cannabis is they just don't have a lot of friendly preferences, and any that are there for them are splitting initially to the Greens and also to Labor.  So I see no prospect that Legalise Cannabis can win.  However, we should pause for a moment to reflect that a party nobody much in the media talked about in the campaign has outpolled the massively hyped UAP.

As for a possible contest between One Nation and the LNP, 2019 data suggests the LDP preferences should help the LNP slightly more than the UAP helps One Nation, but that would be only worth 0.01 Q, and I'm sceptical that even that gain would occur this time.  

What else?  Well, the count might be unrepresentative by division.  So I looked at this and found that the average LNP vote per division is 0.01 quotas lower than the current total while the average One Nation vote is 0.01 higher.  Or the count might be unrepresentative by vote type.  So I looked at the 2019 shift from ordinary votes to final votes, doubled it, and that still didn't get the LNP within 0.15 quotas of One Nation.

A possibility that's been suggested is that the UAP (Clive Palmer) might outlast the LNP.  If this is so the UAP could close the gap to One Nation by about .08 quotas on LNP preferences, but that is not enough, and if UAP gets over Legalise Cannabis then the latter's preferences would be more likely to assist One Nation. 

Poor as the Queensland One Nation vote is, I see absolutely no evidence that anyone beats Pauline Hanson here.  She will be re-elected, joining James McGrath and Matt Canavan (LNP) and Murray Watt and Anthony Chisholm (ALP), with new Green Penny Allman-Payne replacing Stoker.

Wednesday: LNP are up to 2.38 today and One Nation down to 0.52.  I expect this is an impact of which seats are more heavily weighted in the count plus also the counting of many postals.  I will run another check by division should the LNP vote increase to within, say, 0.1 - as it is possible One Nation's preference share will fall alongside their primary vote.  

Thursday: LNP have continued closing and I will have a closer look tonight to see whether this is anything but the fact that there are a lot of early-received postals in the count at present which is giving them a very high gain rate compared to ordinary votes.  It's possible that very late on Tuesday night I wrote off Stoker beating Hanson prematurely - I think by overlooking the extent to which large prepoll centres were undercounted - but I've left the claim to that effect up unedited above.

Thursday midnight:  Yes, the count on Tuesday night was still quite distorted in the ordinary booths because of weak LNP being more counted than strong ones, although the same was not true for seats.  There is now a mild tendency for seats where the LNP is polling well to be more fully counted on ordinaries and seats where One Nation is polling well to be less fully counted but the projected difference in terms of One Nation's lead is only about .015 quotas, and this could well fall over because of what is left of the same effect in the undercounted seats (the most undercounted are Fairfax, Moreton and Rankin).  At the moment I project One Nation to win the ordinaries count by the equivalent of 0.17 quotas.  Projected through to the end of the count based on 2019 post-counting that would fall to about 0.13, but the increase in postals in 2022 is so large that if the postals do not weaken compared to 2019, the LNP could pick up fully 1% in the Queensland Senate postcount, closing the lead to 0.10 quotas.  Overall this projection says that once all votes are counted, One Nation's lead will be around where it is now or a bit higher.  (The current lead is 0.083 Q).  

Saturday: Annoyingly, I accidentally overwrote my Friday update with a previous version and lost it.  In short, the gap has closed to 0.047 quotas and on checking the cause, I found it was partly increased postal counting, but also partly a rise in the LNP vote by several percent in the undercounted division of Flynn.  The same rise has the potential to also occur in other undercounted divisions.  While Hanson's position is likely to improve on absents, and while the LNP surge is likely to reduce in later postals, it's nonetheless possible at the moment that Hanson's lead over Stoker finishes up quite small, perhaps in the region of 0.03 quotas.  At that point, it comes down to preferences, which are hard to predict given that One Nation's vote has crashed (but also given there may be stronger flows to it from other minor parties as a result of mandate discontents.)  It's notable that the One Nation vote is down by far more in the Senate than the Reps and a reason for this appears to be competition from Legalise Cannabis, votes for which might return to One Nation (or not).  While Hanson is probably still better placed I think it is best to regard the seat as in doubt for now pending further developments.  

Saturday 11:10 Hanson's lead continues to shrink, now at 0.518 plays 2.482.  Legalise Cannabis are dropping back and are 2.2% behind One Nation.

Monday 4:10  The lead has closed still further but most of the postals are gone and there are as yet no absents in the count.  Plus also note the detailed projection from Poll Bludger, which is of One Nation gaining about 0.055 quotas on preferences, which could be argued to move in either direction.  So at the moment One Nation are still reasonably well placed.

Tuesday 10:30 There may be a cheer if the LNP passes One Nation tomorrow but if William Bowe (link above) is correct it will just be a crowd catch, and in any case the postals must be nearly gone with very few absents yet in the count.  One Nation .508 - LNP .501. 

Thursday: It didn't happen on Wednesday but it has now occurred: the LNP are ahead of One Nation on primaries, 2.507-0.506.

Saturday: One Nation back ahead by .01 Q again now.

15 June: Hanson's position continues to improve, now ahead by .05 Q.

Western Australia

(Outgoing 3 Coalition 2 Labor 1 Green)

(Undecided seat likely Labor)

Wednesday: It's taken ages but I finally get back to this piece to do another state!  The leaders with 57.4% in the can are:

Labor 2.469 Q
Liberal 2.188
Green 0.980
One Nation 0.244
Legalise Cannabis 0.236
Aus Christians 0.157
UAP 0.152
Lib Dems 0.137
WA Party 0.113
(combined others 0.324)

In my preview I said Labor needed something like an 8% swing in the Reps to be competitive for three in the Senate.  They've done that; the swing in WA polling was fully real.  This looks like a straightforward 3-2-1, but it's not totally simple, because there are a lot of right-wing micros on this ballot whose voters will strongly preference the Coalition over Labor assuming that the Coalition can get past One Nation.  On 2019 preferences, the Coalition could gain  0.19 quotas back vs Labor's current lead over them of 0.28.  However, given the disrepute the Liberal Party is in in WA, I doubt the gain will be so large this time.  On current numbers it's not that hard for the Liberals to get over One Nation (Australian Christians votes could do it by themselves and the rest is a wash).  

For Labor, Sue Lines and Glenn Sterle appear set to be joined by Fatima Payman.  Dorinda Cox retains for the Greens.  For the Liberals, Michaelia Cash and Dean Smith return.  However, Ben Small, after resigning over Section 44 ineligibility then being appointed to his own casual vacancy, looks like he will lose his seat.  

Saturday 11:10: Very minimal changes since the post above.

Tuesday 7/6:  There's a bit of life in this count with the gap closing up to 0.22 Q, postals in O'Connor undercounted, and the above noted potential for the Liberals to surge on preferences.  As against that I should note that the probably superior Poll Bludger model has the Coalition recovering less (0.13 Q) than the 0.19Q in mine (and the Liberals may well not do that well anyway).  So it might at least be close.  

Wednesday: The lead has come down to 0.206 Q after including the O'Connor postals and there is still quite a lot to count here.

Thursday: See Antony Green's discussion which projects that based on 2019 flows Labor is currently only about 0.03 Q ahead, and outlines various possible reasons why flows might change.

15 June: Labor .20 Q ahead on primaries, which still seems like probably enough.

South Australia

(Outgoing 2 Coalition 2 Labor 1 CA 1 Rex Patrick Team)

Undecided seat probably Coalition (appear best placed) or Labor, less likely One Nation

As I start this section SA is 65% counted.  Leaders are:

Liberal 2.316 Q
Labor 2.302
Green 0.873
One Nation 0.272
United Australia 0.215
Group O (Xenophon) 0.194
Legalise Cannabis 0.163
Lib Dems 0.157
Rex Patrick 0.148
Animal Justice 0.119
(combined others 0.241)

Former SA Senate powerhouse Nick Xenophon hasn't been much of a factor and has not even got his deposit back with his rather disorganised late run.  The Greens have taken one of the vacated ex-Centre Alliance seats, but who will take the other?

In early counting it looked like the answer might be One Nation's Jennifer Game, but One Nation have now dropped back slightly behind the majors.  It is also mostly not a very friendly minor party lineup for One Nation to get preferences from.  As a simplified model I threw preferences from the bottom up to Liberal, One Nation, Labor and Greens and then three-way between Liberal, One Nation and Labor once the Greens crossed quota; this won't mirror exactly which preferences are available to the three contenders but shouldn't be a terrible estimate.  On that basis I got Labor gaining about 0.08 quotas on the Liberals who in turn gained about 0.1 on One Nation, eliminating the latter.  If One Nation are eliminated, on current primaries I estimate the combined One Nation, Lib Dems and UAP prefs would give the Coalition an edge worth about 0.06 quotas by 2019 prefs, but will this hold up for 2022 with the disgust with the majors on the populist right?  If One Nation aren't eliminated, Labor would be expected to beat them.

Overall it's hard to pick between the majors here, with One Nation seemingly not that strong a chance at the moment (I'm sceptical the flows to it will be that much better this time).  Maybe one or the other will get a decisive break in further counting but there could well be enough uncertainty that the final seat goes to the button in doubt.  (Scrutineering sampling could help but is extremely labour-intensive.)

Simon Birmingham and Andrew McLachlan are re-elected for the Coalition.  Penny Wong and Don Farrell are returned for the government (gee it looks weird writing it that way!) Barbara Pocock is the new Greens Senator.  For the final seat, Kerrynne Liddle (Liberals), Trimann Gill (Labor) and Jennifer Game (One Nation) will be dreaming of a happy button press.

Friday 7:50: The Liberals have come up .03 of a quota to 2.346 with Labor also up slightly to 2.316. 

Saturday 11:10: Liberal 2.361 Labor 2.306 One Nation 0.271.  The SA race seems to be trending towards the Liberals. 

Tuesday: Liberal 2.390 Labor 2.298 One Nation 0.272.  Noting that William Bowe's analysis (see link in Queensland section) projects the Liberals to gain 0.084 Q over Labor on preferences it appears the Liberals are in a good position here.

Saturday: Labor have dropped back a bit more to about level with One Nation.  Liberals look very well placed now.

Wednesday 8/6: Liberal 2.387 One Nation 0.279 Labor 2.263.


(Outgoing 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green)

Tyrell (JLN) gain from Abetz (Lib)

Tasmania is at 77.4% counted!  The state has swung to the Coalition in the Reps (for partly candidate based reasons) and in the Senate the most significant movement is a 3% swing away from Labor with 3% going to the Greens.  At least 1% of this is down to the absence of Lisa Singh's BTL campaign, and overall what has happened in the Tasmanian Senate race since 2019 boils down to nothing much.  Leaders are:

Liberal 2.211 Q
Labor 1.933
Greens 1.095
Jacqui Lambie Network 0.592
One Nation 0.270
Legalise Cannabis 0.211
Liberal Democrats 0.134
Shooters 0.128
UAP 0.115
Local 0.105
(others combined 0.206)

There's nothing to see here at party level, it's 2-2-1-1.  Anne Urquhart and Helen Polley are re-elected for Labor, Peter Whish-Wilson wins again for the Greens, and Tammy Tyrell is elected for the Jacqui Lambie Network after an excellent JLN campaign.  The only thing needing to be nailed down is whether the Liberals' Jonathan Duniam is joined as expected by Wendy Askew, or whether Eric Abetz can retain via below-the-line voting.

Tasmanians have a very high level of BTL voting but keeping Abetz would be stretching that to the limit.  The problem for Abetz is he not only needs half the Liberal votes beyond one quota (an already daunting 8.6%) but that he needs to be far enough beyond half that he stays ahead of Askew even though she can get above the line preferences and he can't.  And this needs a truly staggering vote, something like 11%, about double what Lisa Singh got.  The Abetz campaign was relatively low key compared to Singh's.  It will be interesting to see what he does get, but I expect I'll be calling the end of his 28-year career not long after the first BTL votes are rolled out.

Thursday 5:20pm: The first substantial unroll of BTL votes has started and in the Rosny PPVC booth Abetz is on 5.6% which while impressive is still nowhere near enough.

Friday: Abetz has polled 3.9% at Penguin.

Saturday: Late last night, a regression off 10 polling places (8 in Franklin, 2 in Braddon) comparing Abetz's 2022 BTL vote to 2016 when he was top of the ticket projected that Abetz would get about 5% statewide, which is not nearly enough.  The regression was rather messy but nonetheless more predictive than I expected it might be.  Notably Abetz did not break 10% at Kingston PPVC which I would have thought was just about Eric Central.

Saturday 11:10: Abetz is not even above Peter Whish-Wilson on BTLs at the moment.  

Tuesday night: Now on a regression off 40 polling places (mostly Franklin and Braddon) I get Abetz on about 4.8% statewide.  He has not broken 8% in any of them so I am calling now that he has lost his seat.

Australian Capital Territory

(Outgoing 1 Labor 1 Liberal)


The Gorton dream has finally occurred!  ACT Senate is at 75.3% counted and here's the full list:

Labor 1.007 Q
Liberal 0.751
Pocock 0.638
Greens 0.300
Kim Rubenstein 0.130
UAP 0.064
Legalise Cannabis 0.045
Animal Justice 0.018
Sus Aus 0.015
IMOP 0.015
Progressives 0.011
ungrouped 0.007

The Liberal vote has suffered the same meltdown as in inner city Sydney and Brisbane.  Pocock is not far behind, and about 0.01 quotas of Zed Seselja's current lead on primaries is caused by the division of Canberra being undercounted.  The Greens preferences will probably break to Pocock similarly to how they do in Labor vs Seselja contests and will alone erase the gap easily.  If Pocock needs any help beyond that it will come from probably other party on the ballot except for the UAP.  Labor have very helpfully polled almost exactly a quota so that they are neither soaking up preferences nor getting a surplus that might spray.  Pocock will not just beat Seselja, he will beat him by several percent and join Katy Gallagher in the Senate. 

Saturday: Pocock has dropped back to just below .6 but it matters not.

Northern Territory

(Outgoing 1 Labor 1 CLP)


43% counted:

Labor 1.035 Q
CLP 0.923 Q
Green 0.387 Q
Lib Dems 0.259 Q
Legalise Cannabis 0.188 Q
others combined 0.208 Q

Malarndirri McCarthy is re-elected for Labor.  Jacinta Nampijinpa Price is elected for the CLP replacing Sam McMahon, who has polled a significant vote as a Liberal Democrat but without threatening the top two.  


  1. Thanks for this Kevin. In my dream scenario with Labor, UAP and LNP left, Labor has around 0.75, UAP pips LNP for second spot 0.58 vs. 0.57 and then Labor just manages to hold off UAP. I feel like if LNP overtake UAP for second then they will certainly get elected from their redistributed preferences but hoping the flow won't be as strong the other way. Also kinda hoping that the count at the moment includes a lot of postals and that LNP will come down a touch. A man can dream.

  2. I'm struggling to suggest this with a straight face, but the ONP vote could yet be found to contain a large below the line component for George Christensen.

  3. I saw that Phon/Qld article in SBS too. I'm by no means any kind of pseph, and even I was gobsmacked they could get it so obviously wrong...

  4. Hi Kevin, I understand your dislike of early predictions, but it appears that the senate is headed for a passing majority made up of Labor, greens and either David Pocock, or one of the JLN members. Is this assumption the most likely outcome with the current voting trends?

    1. Yes. It is still possible that there is a Labor/Greens passing majority but I have to look closely at SA among others. Getting there very slowly! Very busy post-count generally this election.

  5. If I understand rightly, The 2-3-1 result in WA combined with the expected victory of Pocock over Seselja in ACT pretty much guarantees the left/progressive forces a passing majority in the Senate. Has the left ever had a majority in both Houses before? I don't think it's ever happened in my (52) year lifetime.

    1. Well spotted. It last happened after the Chifley government's 1946 re-election because of the use of the block preferential system which often resulted in one party winning all the seats in a given state. Since the switch to proportional representation it's never happened that both houses had a majority of clearly left MPs (not counting Democrats, Windsor/Oakeshott etc).

    2. I wouldn't necessarily count Pocock as "clearly left". More like a Teal with progressive social values and moderate-to-conservative economic views.

    3. I believe Labor and the Greens had a majority between 2011 and 2014.

    4. But they did not have a majority in the Lower House.

  6. So WA splits 4-2 this time, wasn't it only 8 years ago they split five right one left (with Joe Bullock the sole Labor senator elected who was probably as right wing as the median Liberal)?

    1. That was under GTV, where micro parties were pooling their ATL preferences, reducing the chances of non-micro parties to win the last seat(s) in the Senate. WA may well have had a 3-2-1 (Lib-ALP-Green) result in 2014 or even 2013 under voter decided ATL preferences.

  7. Typo in the expected new senate for Coalition (35 should be 25)

  8. The continuing 2019 senate should be ALP 11, Coalition 17 and Coalition having 31 total senators in 2022

    1. (*sigh*) Any time I try to change the order of things the gremlins come in all over the place. Fixed now, thanks.

  9. Kevin, have you examined the possibility of an Abetz/Askew Ginninderra effect with both outlasting Tammy Tyrell? Eyeballing it, it seems a fine needle to thread, but I wonder if you had more precise numbers of what kind of vote share Abetz would need?

  10. I looked at that in pre-election modelling when Abetz was dumped as there were some scenarios in which it was marginally possible for the Liberals to win three in this way without Abetz staying in front of Askew. But on these primaries it's impossible; if Abetz's primary vote is not high enough to keep him ahead of Askew then Tyrell will also overtake him.

  11. Hello Kevin, would below the line votes have been counted in the Senate as yet?

    1. They are included in the party totals. The sorting of votes into above and below the line has just commenced today.

  12. I wonder how many of the Abetz #1 BTLs have some other party at #2.

    1. It won't matter to the result as the Liberals are easily home for 2 whatever the leak but it would not surprise me to see a leak of, say, 20%.

  13. Any idea on when the Senate "button push" will take place?

  14. Is Xenophon any chance in the hypothetical situation that he gets a 90+% flow rate from Rex Patrick when he is eliminated?

    1. There is absolutely no chance whatsoever that will happen, nor anything like it. If anything he will get poor flows by having a blank ATL box.

    2. Xenophon not running as a party candidate might be a mistake on the scale of Jack Lang running ungrouped (he was 3rd of 4 ungrouped candidates) in the 1951 whole Senate election, instead of at the top of a group.

      It also provides ammunition for the argument that non-party groups should get their ATL boxes labeled.

    3. Well, not that it seems to matter, but Xenophon is gaining on the UAP in the postcount. The gap is down to 0.011Q when it was 0.021Q on the Wednesday after the election.

      Around a quarter or more of Xenophon's votes are coming from BTLs, which is a very high percentage, but expected from the whole blank box thing, I would guess. However, it does mean that the exhaust rate when he is eliminated will be very low. Because there are only 2 candidates in Group O, to cast a formal BTL with 1 Xenophon, you have to number some other group(s) as well.

  15. Friday updates for Qld appear to have been dropped.

    1. It sometimes happens that in the Senate counting process that votes that have previously been counted are withdrawn from the computer display temporarily. Not sure if that happened in this instance.

    2. Sure. But I meant the updates you made to this blog post about Queensland on Friday; they are no longer here.

    3. Thanks, that's annoying, looks like I've accidentally overwritten them with a previous version. Happens sometimes.

    4. Have repaired the damage (or most of it) as fast as I could.

    5. Thanks Kevin. It's shaping up as an intriguing button press.

  16. LNP seem to be zooming up the list in Vic but my rudimentary analysis suggests that there are more votes left to be counted in left-leaning areas? The electorates with under 65% counted:
    Ballarat 51.73% (Labor 62.9% 2PP)
    Wills 52.34% (Labor vs Greens contest)
    Cooper 52.57% (Labor vs Greens contest)
    Macnamara 53.13% (3-way count)
    Calwell 56.47% (Labor 61.8% 2PP)
    Menzies 57.24% (Labor 49.4% 2PP)
    Higgins 57.71% (Labor 52.8% 2PP)
    Melbourne 60.49% (Greens vs Labor contest)
    Chisholm 61.63% (Labor 56.9% 2PP)
    Mallee 62.66% (Labor 30.8% 2PP)

    No idea if there will also be some kind of late-voting lean in all electorates (e.g. counting of declarations/late postals having a left lean).

    1. Well spotted. That should knock them down to some degree though it will probably be counteracted by remaining un-entered ordinary booths being more likely to be prepolls.

    2. I guess it's not looking too good for me. Any day now I'm hoping to see a bit of a downward trend in LNP's position but their prepolls must be pretty good! Still taking some hope from the skew in outstanding votes. Electorates with under 65% counted:
      Wills 52.34% (Labor vs Greens contest)
      Cooper 52.57% (Labor vs Greens contest)
      Macnamara 57.39% (3-way count)
      Calwell 60.09% (Labor 61.98% 2PP)
      Melbourne 61.45% (Greens vs Labor contest)
      Menzies 63.63% (Labor 49.18% 2PP)
      Higgins 64.94% (Labor 51.53% 2PP)

  17. The first batch of Qld Senate Declaration prepols has ONP only getting 2.09% compared to 32.04% for the LNP. That's a bit under LNP's vote so far, but way under the 7+% ONP has on combined ordinary and postals.

  18. "There may be a cheer if the LNP passes One Nation tomorrow" It took a bit longer than expected, but it just happened (~11:30 AEST, Jun 2), then Hanson nudged back in front again, she now leads by a notional 0.0001Q.

  19. Any hope at all for Labor #3 in Vic? William Bowe isn't giving them much, but Antony Green hasn't quite said they're doomed: https://antonygreen.com.au/2022-victorian-senate-election/. LNP did come back a bit in late counting but Labor lost a tiny bit of ground too. I found the 3-way preference throw from 2019 interesting:
    Exhaust 32.7%
    Labor 28%
    LNP 22.8%
    UAP 16.5%

    1. Not sure what's been happening over the last day or two as there don't seem to have been too many new votes added (maybe ruling votes in/out) but both LNP and Labor positions have worsened slightly. Currently UAP have a lead 0.2773 to 0.2658 (LNP). Labor has fallen behind Legalise Cannabis again.