2025 Senate Notes Part One

This is the latest in a string of articles that I write after each Senate election tracking certain themes in the Senate races.  Previous volumes in the series were called Senate Reform Performance Review, referring to the 2016 Senate changes that got rid of Group Ticket Voting.  I think now we've reached the point after four elections where it's very clear that the new system works very well indeed and needs no longer to be considered on probation, hence the shorter title.  For previous instalments see 2016 part one, 2016 part two, 2019 (single article) and 2022 (single article).  On the agenda for this issue are:  proportionality, winning vote shares (with a focus on the One Nation wins from behind), preferencing impacts, and the curse of Inclusive Gregory.  Part two covers Senate 2PP, How to Vote cards, just-voting-1, exhaust, informals, below the lines,  and the fun bit about people who we wonder why they bother.   And yes that includes the ACT Liberals! 

I've decided again to split the article into two because the volume of material this time is a bit much for one go.  At least for my own feeling that I'm spending a lot of time on a single article that I haven't released anything from yet.  

In this article I treat Labor, Greens and Pocock as comprising the left of the Senate (in relative terms, this should not be taken as me declaring Labor to be an outright left-wing party) and Coalition, One Nation and UAP as the right (with Jacqui Lambie treated as neither though these days there is a case for treating her as left if anything).  

Proportionality

The late wins by One Nation were great for proportionality!  As usual, firstly here is the national votes to seats conversion (though this is a silly yardstick because the state-based malapportionment and the territories having only two-seat contests):

There were several joint minor right party tickets involving Libertarians, GRPF, Heart and Great Australians.  I have lumped these by lead party since obviously nobody else was getting a seat.  

Overall on a national basis this one shows Labor, the Greens, Coalition and to a lesser degree One Nation punching above their weight as a result of collecting preferences from parties with too little support to be in the fight anywhere.  Legalise Cannabis is hard done by because its support was too even to manage a win anywhere and there were not the same favourable preference sources available to One Nation.  On a simplified left-right basis the primaries are something like 56-44 depending on how one treats a few debatable cases and the left has done a little better but not much.  Even on this basis this is hardly a disproportionate outcome.

Now, the average of primaries in the six state contests compared to state wins (a better yardstick):

With this thrown in, disregarding the not very classifiable Lambie, there is basically no left-right imbalance; Labor and the Greens combined overperform on average by virtually the same amount as the Coalition and One Nation.  

Obviously the right holding only 15/36 state seats will be a big problem for the Coalition should it somehow win the next election and I expect it would be in an even bigger rush to a double dissolution in its first term than it would have been had it won this one.  

Had this election been a double dissolution I very roughly estimate the seat results at Labor 31 Coalition 24 Green 11 One Nation 6 and one each for Legalise Cannabis, Rennick, Lambie and Pocock.  However Legalise Cannabis were very narrowly behind Labor in NSW and Vic on my projection so might do better. My DD estimates by state are below. (Note that one cannot use ConcreteSTV when available to reliably simulate DD results because the major parties run out of seats.)  

Even in this landslide election, a DD would only give Labor an extra route to passing things that goes through One Nation and others.  For Labor the only plausible point in a DD in this term could be to use the joint sitting mechanism to resolve bills blocked by the Coalition and Greens. I'll be surprised if we see that.  

I don't see a need to again state in much detail the point that if we still had the Group Ticket Voting nightmare, close to a third of the seats at this election could have been won by unaccountable randoms, and the Greens and One Nation with a combined 17.4% of the vote between them would only be guaranteed one seat in a supposedly proportional system!  

Nor do I need to take too long pointing out that under the Senate system that was supposed by Sam Dastyari and co to deliver a permanently blocked Senate, the right (Coalition/One Nation/UAP) now has only 32/76 seats, six short of being able to block things care of Pocock, two JLN wins in Tasmania and left-right 4-2s in WA 2022 and Vic and SA 2025.  In fairness even the hack faction of 2016 federal Labor should not have been expected to think their party would ever have a win like this.  

Winning Vote Shares 

Of the 36 state seats, 22 (down 1) were won on raw quotas.  All seven leading candidates (in the top six after surpluses) with 0.7 quotas or more won easily.  Everyone with below 0.4 quotas lost.  In the range 0.4-0.7 quotas there were ten candidates of whom seven won and three lost.  The breakdown here was:

Labor: two wins and three losses (leading in both wins and two of the losses)

One Nation: three wins (leading in one)

Liberal: one win (leading)

JLN: one win (leading)

The two wins were by One Nation, beating Labor after starting with 0.411 Q vs 0.53 Q in WA and, more incredibly, 0.422 quotas vs 0.630 quotas in NSW.  They were not by any means low vote shares (5.87% and 6.06%), and indeed were similar to Labor's winning excess in Victoria and higher than Ralph Babet's 4% primary in 2022, though Babet was also elected fair and square. Which brings me to...

Preferencing Impacts

The big story of this Senate election was the improved performance of One Nation on preferences, even above their strong performances in previous elections.  Prior to this election based on the Reps polling I thought One Nation were a serious chance to win in all five mainland states.  Labor massively overperformed their Reps polling and One Nation underperformed theirs but One Nation were still able to grab two new seats from behind anyway - in the same two states where they had previously only won off lower vote shares at the 2016 double dissolution.

Four races (NSW, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia) finished as Labor vs One Nation contests with Labor leading in all but holding on only in Victoria and SA.  However these contests varied in structure because the Coalition was short of its second quota in SA (and also in WA though there not if one includes WA Nationals) and because the Greens had further to go to reach quota in NSW.  

Here is a chart that shows how these counts fared, albeit in very wonky quota numbers form:

ALP, ON: ALP and ON start quotas

ALP+, ON+, GRN+,L-NP+: quotas gained by each of these in the count (set to 0 if already over quota)

EXH: exhaust

LW, RW: quotas held by left wing and right wing preference sources (RW includes Coalition in NSW and Victoria)

LG: quotas gained in count by Labor + Greens

RG: quotas gained in count by One Nation + Coalition (Coalition loss of surplus ignored as they are treated as a right preference source.

What happened in these contests overall was:

New South Wales:  There were slightly more right preferences than left and the gain by One Nation on these was only slightly better than Labor and the Greens combined, but Labor and the Greens were splitting votes two ways almost all the way, which made it easier for One Nation to catch up.  On 2022 preference flows One Nation wouldn't have got nearly so much as the Greens and Labor combined but this time the flows from minor right parties to them in this three-way split were much stronger and they did.

One of the factors here is the Libertarian/HEART/GRPF ticket, which replaced the Liberal Democrats.  In 2022 Liberal Democrats preferences split 32.8-16.5-29.6 Labor/Greens/One Nation.  In 2025 the Libertarian/HEART/GRPF ticket headed by Craig Kelly did far better than the Libertarian tickets outside NSW (which crashed and burned losing more than half their 2022 vote) and its preference split was radically different:  6.8-6.6-75.0. Similar flows were seen in other states with GRPF tickets, but Libertarian tickets were generally not quite that strong.  There has been a lot of talk about the weak flow off Legalise Cannabis to Labor at the end (partly a result of weaker Legalise Cannabis preferences in the 3CP split compared to 2022 and more strongly as a result of other votes that reached Legalise Cannabis) but by the time Legalise Cannabis were excluded, even a repeat of 2022 flows off them would not have quite saved Labor.  

In NSW the ALP primary was incredibly high, with a swing to Labor of 7.2% although the Reps primary vote swing was only 1.8% and even the Reps 2PP swing was only 4.3%.  There were Senate primary vote swings to Labor in the low double digits in the teal vs Coalition seats.  However, on a 3CP split with the Greens and One Nation, Labor's performance relative to One Nation weakened off all eleven parties that recontested from 2022. Labor was also underwater on this split off all four new parties added in 2025, whereas in 2022 it had benefited from four of the eight that did not recontest.  It is as if Labor so succeeded in maxing out its primary vote that there was nobody left to get preferences from. (Here I have treated UAP as the same as Trumpet of Patriots, and Liberal Democrats and Libertarians the same).  

Victoria: The difference between right wing and left wing preference sources was enough to beat Labor if the flow to One Nation was strong enough given that the Greens were soaking up votes, but the flow to One Nation was too weak; indeed the combined left parties held their side's votes as preferences much better than One Nation did.

Western Australia: Here the Greens and Liberals were almost equally short of quota and there were a lot more right-wing than left-wing preferences; the question being would the flow be strong enough for One Nation to close the gap.  It was, and enough spare to deal with the Liberals being slightly shorter of quota than the Greens.  A key shift here was the Australian Christians' preferences, which were far more favourable to One Nation than in 2022.  However, there were also shifts in the opposite direction with Trumpet of Patriots and especially Great Australians being less strong for One Nation than last time.  There were also new players like Gerard Rennick People First who were very strong for One Nation, so it's not clear that shifts in preferencing behaviour among recontesting parties alone caused this result.  

South Australia:  Again the Greens and Coalition were about equally short of quota.  The preference sources were more right wing than left wing but not massively.  The right didn't gain that much on preferences and the primary vote gap was too large for One Nation with the Greens close to quota.

The other interesting preferencing contest was in Tasmania, with a three-way race between the Liberals, Jacqui Lambie and Labor for the final seat.  The Liberals started well ahead of the others.  On 2022 preference flows Lambie was expected to overtake the Liberals who would have a relatively narrow win over Labor.  Lambie performed accordingly despite some expectations she might not, but the Liberals won far more easily over Labor than projected (more than 0.2 of a quota) largely because the One Nation preferences benefited the Liberals far more in Lambie/Liberal/Labor split than in 2022.

Inclusive Gregory Must Go!

Australia's Senate voting system is excellent and the counting system is mostly excellent but has a relic defect called unweighted Inclusive Gregory distortion that will someday elect a Senator who is not the voter's choice.  Parliament needs to stop this before it happens and not after!  For more on this problem that has been known for many years see Antony Green here.  

Under the system for distributing surplus votes in Senate elections, each vote that has reached a candidate who goes over quota during the count is given the same value going out, irrespective of the value it had going in.  In NSW votes that flowed through the surpluses of both Andrew Bragg and Jessica Collins had a value going forwards of about 0.022, meaning nearly all their value had been used electing Liberals.  There were 1.45 million of these votes.  About 90,000 of these that reached Mehreen Faruqi (Green) were given the same weight in her surplus as votes that had to that point never reached anyone. This meant that the Coalition surplus votes that had contributed about 0.26% of the value of Faruqi's total suddenly became worth over 10% of her 0.069 quota surplus and actually more than doubled in ongoing value!  These votes would have flowed more weakly to Labor than Faruqi's own votes and help explain why the flow off Faruqi's surplus was as weak as it was - though a better system would not have stopped One Nation winning.  When I'm in a position to quantify the exact impact of this distortion on the NSW and also WA counts I will add a note on it here.  

The Inclusive Gregory system for surplus transfers must be replaced with Weighted Inclusive Gregory before the next election.  It is way past time.  I don't want to ever have to say "we told you so" about this one.  

I expect to post part two in the next few days.  In advance I can say that voters following the Coalition's how to vote cards did not cause One Nation's win in either NSW or WA, although contributing in both cases. 

Goldstein Count History And Partial Recount

GOLDSTEIN (Vic, IND vs Lib est 3.9%)
Tim Wilson (Lib) has provisionally won by 260 votes
AEC has authorised a partial recount

Wilson will win unless large errors are found during partial recount

RESULT: Wilson won by 175 votes.   

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Updates

Updates will be posted here scrolling to the top.

Saturday 1:55: It's finally over, Wilson has won by 175 votes and the seat will be declared.  

Saturday 31st 11:35 am: The end cannot be far away as corrections are now showing to absents, dec prepolls and all booths except Hampton PPVC where only minor changes are expected though I do not know how many postals are to be checked.  Wilson leads by 164 following the expected Brighton corrections which actually cut his lead by 65.

2025 Senate Button Press Thread

Welcome to my 2025 thread to cover the so-called "button presses" (in fact the execution of a computer routine) that distribute preferences for the Senate and determines the Senate results.  

I have not had nearly as much time to work on projecting the Senate counts this election as in the past because it's been impossible to get away from the complexity and number of the in-doubt House of Reps counts for long and because of other work commitments.  In particular I probably would have been able to call Tasmania if I had had the time to do a few days scrutineering (and had been able to find anyone willing to appoint me) but such things were not to be.  

On this thread states/territories will appear once there are no unapportioned votes shown as awaiting data entry.  Normally based on past practice the button press follows a few days after that with the declaration shortly after (in the absence of any recount request that might be caused by a micro-close margin).  Until I have seen a state reach zero unapportioned votes, commentary about it continues on the previous National Senate postcount thread.  

Legislative Council 2025: Montgomery, Nelson and Pembroke Live And Post-Count

Montgomery: Casey Hiscutt (IND) won after preferences as expected
Nelson: CALLED (7:09 pm) Meg Webb (IND) re-elected
Pembroke: CALLED (7:33 pm) Luke Edmunds (ALP) re-elected

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Donations welcome!

If you find my coverage useful please consider donating to support the large amount of time I spend working on this site.  Donations can be made by the Paypal button in the sidebar which also contains PayID instructions or email me via the address in my profile for my account details.  Please only donate if you are sure you can afford to do so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Live comments (scrolls to top)

All updates are unofficial, check the TEC site for official figures

Thursday 29th:  Unsurprisingly Hiscutt has done better than the Liberals on preferences; in fact he has won massively, 61.7-38.3 getting 76.9% of preferences that flowed to the two leaders (these figures are still subject to very minor change).   In Pembroke Ritchie snuck into second late in the primary count and moved 6.9% clear of Allan after preferences but still lost to Edmunds 58.2-41.8.  In all Ritchie got 59.2% of preferences.  In Nelson there will be no preferences; Meg Webb has 51.7%.  

EMRS: Government Trails Placebo Opposition

EMRS LIB 29 (-5) ALP 31 (+1) GRN 14 (+1) JLN 6 (-2) IND 17 (+5) Others 3
Independent is generic option - likely overstates support at actual election
Election "held now" would result in a very hung parliament

When Brad Stansfield tweeted the above spoiler yesterday it was easy to imagine what might have been coming.  At the recent federal election the Liberals were sent packing in northern Tasmania, losing Braddon and Bass with enormous swings and being thrashed in previously ultra-marginal Lyons.  There was a federal primary vote swing across the state of 9.3% to Labor and 8.4% against the Liberal Party.  Perhaps the federal election was a sign that the Liberal brand was more on the nose at state level than might have been expected and that Labor would be surging towards an election-winning position?  Or perhaps just the timing of the latest EMRS poll could see a degree of federal contamination such that state Labor picked up an afterglow from the federal triumph?  Well, no.  The poll is "wow!", unlike Peter van Onselen's infamous "Newspoll wow"s which were habitually followed by meaningless changes in the Newspoll.  But it is not the sort of "wow" that narrative would have expected.  

Instead, it's a tale that's been running for years - the ageing and stumbling Liberal government shedding and shedding more vote share and Labor still picking up little or nothing in this poll series.  Currently the government trails 29-31.  In August 2022 it led 41-31.   Tasmanians separate state and federal politics - strongly - and Labor is still not breaking out of the very low 30s.  The overall picture is that Labor is content to avoid rocking the boat, being as bipartisan as possible on wedge issues like the stadium and salmon farming, and wait for the government to fall over.  Presumably some point is eventually reached where the government is so on the nose that Labor support has to grow at least enough to make Labor the biggest party.  That said if we continue this trend indefinitely the crossbench will govern before they will.

2025 Late Postcount: Calwell

CALWELL (ALP 12.4%)
Basem Abdo (ALP) vs Carly Moore (IND) 
Abdo leading on primary votes during preference distribution

ALP retain 

I should have given Calwell its own page from the start but the unique nature of the count was not so obvious from the early primary figures which I covered on the seats where indies may make the final two page.  On the day after the election it was obvious that the very low major party primaries in a huge field in Calwell created an in-theory chance that independent ex-Labor mayor Carly Moore could get into the top two.  However soon after that, another independent, Joseph Youhana, surged, creating a unique situation where even a three-candidate preferred count was of no use as it could not be known for sure which independent (if either though very likely one of them will) would make the final three.  The AEC now has a distribution of preferences page up.   This is a familiar process to Tasmanian audiences as the TEC routinely does this for Legislative Council elections where stuff like this happens (OK that was an extreme case, only four candidates have won from third in LegCo history), but a new thing for federal elections.

The primaries in Calwell are:

Abdo (ALP) 30.51
Ghani (Lib) 15.7
Moore (IND) 11.94
Youhana (IND) 10.73
Garcha (GRN) 8.29

Moslih (IND) 6.86

Toma (ON) 3.76

Del Rosario-Makridis (LCP) 3.16

Hawu (Aus Citizens) 2.92

Bengtsson (FF) 2.57

Issa (TOP) 2.46

Ragupathy (IND) 0.56

Peach (unendorsed - unregistered Socialist Equality Party) 0.54

2025 Late Postcount And Expected Recount: Bradfield

And it has come to this ..

BRADFIELD (Lib vs IND est 2.5%) 

Gisele Kapterian (Lib) vs Nicolette Boele (IND) 
Boele led by 40 votes at end of indicative 2CP count.

Kapterian led by 8 votes at the end of distribution of preferences

Automatic recount started Monday 26 May

Boele has won by 26 votes after full recount

Boele will be seated, result can be challenged but will be an MP pending any case

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction (Monday 19th 4:30 pm)

Welcome to my thread for the end of the count in the extremely close NSW seat of Bradfield.  This has been a roller-coaster postcount where my assessment as of Sunday 4th was that Nicolette Boele was perhaps very slightly better placed but not much.  The news that a prepoll booth had been only part counted appeared to be the end of the contest via a 440-vote boost resulting in me upgrading it to (at different stages) an expected or very likely Liberal win. Several sites and networks including the ABC called the seat for Kapterian on Monday 12th.  At this point I thought Boele's chance was very low (I would have said about 2%) but stopped short of calling it myself.  The next day Boele got a spectacular batch of out of electorate prepolls and today she did the same thing on the very last batch of postals, overturning Kapterian's lead on the final day of the initial count. At the end of the initial count, the self-styled "Shadow Member for Bradfield" leads by 40 votes.  

This thread will follow the count at least until the result is declared including any moves around possible challenges of the declaration.  Bradfield, the 2022 teal seat that missed, was previously covered on the Coalition vs Teals page but following the precedent I set with my Herbert thread in 2016 I now do a new thread for any seat that gets inside the automatic recount margin (<100 votes) at the end of the indicative count.  (Not you too, Goldstein, I'm busy.  Don't even think about it.)

Cases where the indicative count is extremely close cause a lot of confusion.  Herbert 2016 was more confusing than normal because facing an indicative margin of eight votes, the AEC decided to go to a full recount first, followed by the distribution of preferences.  In the case of Herbert it was mathematically possible for a non-major party candidate to win the seat based on final primaries, but it obviously wouldn't happen.  The normal order is the distribution of preferences first then the recount. For Bradfield, with Boele leading Labor's Louise McCallum for second by 6.7% with 14.67% of votes between the Greens and other minor candidates, the AEC does need to establish for sure that Boele does make the final two.  Of course she will, but just imagine going to a full recount then finding that she didn't ...

But haven't preferences been distributed already in the 2CP standings between Boele and Kapterian?  Yes they have but only provisionally, by finding which of the candidates is ranked highest on each ballot.  The distribution of preferences process formally excludes candidates starting from the candidate in last place, and moving each candidate's ballots to the next candidate in line as they are excluded.  During this process all these moved ballots are checked again.  It's common for the candidate who is more dependent on preferences (in this case Boele) to drop back a little in this process, only to make up for it when the full recount is held.  For instance in Fairfax 2013 Clive Palmer led Liberal Deputy Leader Ted O'Brien by 36 at the end of the indicative count, by 7 at the end of the distribution of preferences, and by 53 at the end of the automatic recount.  We don't have comparable figures for Herbert because the recount was done first with the distribution of preferences changing the margin by only two votes. In McEwen 2007 the margin was 6 for Labor at the end of the distribution, 12 to the Liberals' Fran Bailey at the end of the recount and 31 to Bailey after amendment by the Court of Disputed Returns following Labor's failed challenge.

During the distribution of preferences, from time to time the total of votes will change and I will note these as I see them around other commitments above.

An automatic recount rechecks every vote.  This often favours the candidate who received more preferences as the other candidate has more first preferences that have been less rechecked,  

I expect the distribution plus automatic recount could go into early next week but the time frames can depend on scrutineer behaviour among other things!  (Fairfax 2013 was spectacularly slow because of Clive Palmer scrutineers challenging almost every adverse vote.)

What happens then?

Once the distribution of preferences and the automatic recount (assuming it is correct) are required, the result will be declared, unless it's a tie (see below).   The result will then be open to challenge in the Court of Disputed Returns.  The last CDR challenge to a close Reps finish was in McEwen 2007.  Common grounds for challenge include excluded votes (voters whose votes were unable to be counted through no fault of their own) and complaints about formality interpretations on challenged votes.  The winner is seated while the challenge is heard.  Often losing parties decide not to challenge - see Antony Green's piece for some reasons why.  

The Court of Disputed Returns after examining all evidence can determine that the original winner still wins, that the other candidate wins or that the election for the seat is voided (which means the seat becomes vacant and a by-election is held).  

The AEC can potentially challenge the result itself if it believes the outcome is unsafe.  The main basis for which this might occur is multiple voting.  In the case of Herbert (final margin 37 votes) the AEC conducted urgent investigation of possible multiple votes and was satisfied that there were not enough of them to change the margin.  Many steps taken in recent years, including increased use of automatic markoff and the establishment of a special roll for suspected multiple voters, have reduced the scope for multiple voting to cause a seat to be voided, but the potential is still there.  In general cases of multiple voting are unintentional - voters with mental health or memory issues or confusion about the voting system.

In the event of a tie, the AEC will conduct a further recount. If the result is still a tie then the AEC must return a finding that the election for the seat has failed.  This could then be challenged in court, where either side could try to establish that they had in fact won based on differing interpretations of contested votes - but it is likely some basis would be found for voiding the original election for the seat and holding a by-election anyway.

Past close margins

I am often asked questions about past close margins at this time.  Unfortunately lots of people are asking AI software about past close margins, and the AI sites are frequently getting it wrong or even obfuscating their way out of answering the question.  The closest margin that has stood in raw vote terms is 7 votes, Werriwa, 1914.  The closest in 2CP terms was the 1939 Griffith by-election, 8 votes (50.007 2CP).  The closest in 2CP terms at a general election was Hawker 1990 (14 votes) and there was a 12-voter in Stirling 1974.  Closer margins of 1 vote in Ballaarat (as then spelled) 1919 and 5 votes in Riverina 1903 were voided and rerun because of electoral irregularities.  The famous tied election that Australia has seen was in Nunawading 1985, a Victorian upper house state seat where a winner was drawn out of the proverbial hat.  This too was voided for irregularities.  

How much difference can recounts make?

I've mentioned above the cases of McEwen 2007 (18 votes difference) and Fairfax 2013 (46 votes difference) in terms of the changes recounts can make.  A report from 2008 gives the history of previous recounts that were allowed (p 24).  The 2007 election pre-dated the current 100 vote rule and a recount request for Bowman (64 votes) in that year was denied.  The average difference for the recounts included in that report is 22 votes with one case (Bass 1998) of a 64 vote difference.  

Distribution Of Preferences updates

To be added here when distribution is underway and anything happens.  The AEC states that the distribution is expected to take the rest of the week and that progressive updates won't be published.  In past elections there have been minor changes to the Virtual Tally Room totals during this process so I will note if any of these are seen.

It is also common around this time to see claims concerning votes not admitted to the count; I will note any here that I see, or any other incidents.

Monday 19th 10 pm:  Boele is down two votes and Kapterian one.  Boele leads by 39.  There are changes shown in two booths, Chatswood (Bradfield) and Willoughby PPVC.  Individual booths can have multiple changes during the distribution process.  

Tuesday 20th 5 pm: The margin briefly dipped to 38 but is now back to 40.  In total both candidates are down four to informal since the distribution started.  Eight booths have had changes so far today.  

Tuesday 5:40 pm: Kapterian has dropped another 5 to informal, trails by 45.

Wednesday 21st 11 am: Only one booth is showing corrections so far today - Kapterian is down another vote to informal and trails by 46.  Small sample size but it is interesting that Kapterian, the primary vote leader, is so far losing a lot more preferences to informal than Boele.  

1:40 pm: Lead is 43.

6:00 pm: Five booths have seen corrections today and the lead is 44.  As noted in comments it may be that Boele is gaining on right-wing exclusions that would tend to favour Kapterian and therefore as the distribution continues Kapterian may gain.

Thursday 22nd 10 am:  A further five booths had corrections later last night and one so far today with Boele's lead down to 39.  Commenter Michael notes that Labor has been excluded so the preferences being corrected now will be those from the Labor exclusion, which is most of the distribution, and this may favour Kapterian (we will see).  

11:30: A further six booths have reported changes but the margin is only down by one to 38.

12:00: Margin now down to 33 (I've seen a comment that suggests it got down to 30) without any increase in the number of booths reported, so this may have been formality rulings on earlier votes.  

12:35 And back to where we started, 40.  

2:15: 35

6:53: 32.  I expect the distribution to run through tomorrow.

8:00: 28 ...

Friday 22nd 11:40  Well well well if it isn't our friend St Ives PPVC again.  A surprisingly large correction this morning with 11 votes switching from Boele to Kapterian has Boele's lead down to seven.

1:00 Lead now four - again, it is possible that even if Kapterian leads after the distribution Boele could get the lead back on the recount.  But the chance is rising of a micro-close outcome where the risk of the seat being voided increases.  

2:52 Two!

4:35 LIVE COUNT TIE

Tired: "Shadow Member For Bradfield"

Wired: "Schrodinger's Cat Member For Bradfield"

4:53 Kapterian in front for the first time in the distribution, by one vote.  

5:10 Kapterian by six!  I saw an incorrect suggestion that this has something to do with Boele's open how to vote card (1 Boele votes aren't being checked at the moment) but this did make me think that Boele could have issues on the recount if she had more subtly informal votes as a result.  (The obvious ones where a voter just votes 1 for her and stops were already caught).  (5:20: Back to 4)  I expect the distribution to finish very soon (not sure how we will know that it is finished).

6:40: Back to six.  No updates for half an hour, not sure if that is all for the distribution yet or not. 

7:15 Kapterian by 8.  10:00: The AEC has confirmed details for the recount, which could take up to two weeks.

Recount Updates

Monday 26th 2:45: And they're off!  So far Kapterian has lost two to informal and Boele has lost one so Kapterian leads by 7.  Three booths have changes showing.

5 pm: Boele has lost another vote so the margin is back to 8.  

10:30: Not a good start for Boele, she's lost one vote net to Kapterian who now leads by 10.  Eight booths have been updated.  

Tuesday 27th 7:00 Today has not gone well for Boele either, fifteen booths are updated and she has a net loss of 8 to informal while Kapterian has a net loss of 2. 

Wednesday 28th 11:30 Margin is back from 14 to 10.

3:45 And now margin is 5, so for the first time Boele has a net gain on the recount; will it continue?

5:30 Well it will to the tune of one vote anyway .. margin is 4 with a gain of 10 for Boele from today.  And only five booths with change today so still scope for someone to get a meaningful break.  Meanwhile some sideshow colour with Sky reporting Paul Karp was signed in as a Greens scrutineer!

7:00 The margin is 2.  Another crossover point soon?  Ben Raue's article about the recount process is excellent reading.

Thursday 29th 4:30 Very slight movements today so far, at one point down to 1, now up to 3.  Only three booths showing changes.  

6:30 Seven booths with changes now and the lead is 4.  So no continuation of the trend in yesterday's counting as a micro-close result is getting harder to avoid.

Friday 30th 1:33  Oh hai we are here again.  Boele has made a net gain of eight on the recount margin so far in the recount which still has a long way to run with many booths still unrevised, so it could be things are trending her way as expected, but if it continues will she be able to get out of the margin of litigation?   

2:00 Or not - Kapterian back to three in front.  

5:50 Lead change - Boele ahead by one!  The booth that put Boele ahead was St Ives PPVC making its presence felt in the postcount for the third time, but for a large booth that was friendly on primaries to Kapterian Boele could have done with a bigger gain here.  

6:41 That didn't last long, Kapterian back ahead by one.  

Saturday 31at 2:30:  Kapterian now ahead by three, gain of two at Roseville.  Whoever wins this even by one vote, assuming someone does win it, gets seated and gets to be an MP for several months even if the seat does end up being voided and rerun.  So there is that. 

4:00: Kapterian lead out to five, gains another two at Roseville West.  Now starting to look a lot less like a trend to Boele and a lot more like a random drunken walk that is likely to end up by crashing into the doors of the Court of Disputed Returns.  But still time for someone to avoid that.  The best hope for Boele could be the Turramurra PPVC with over 6000 votes, the other big booths are all gone and I believe most of the postals are too.  There will be a fresh distribution of preferences at the end but that's unlikely to move even a few votes. 

5:00 And back to three. 

7:00 BIG SHIFT! Well in the context of this nailbiter anyway. Boele's last big chance was the Turramurra PPVC but it has delivered for her with Kapterian losing 16 (in general primaries to informal).  Boele now leads by 12 and her chances of being declared the winner whatever happens next are much better now.  

10:40 Someone asked so for what it's worth, I calculate there are 23777 booth votes awaiting checking.

Monday June 2 11:30: An interesting sideshow in Bradfield is the 2PP realignment as there has been some speculation Labor could win the 2PP in this seat.  Not looking at all likely at this early stage as Labor are trailing Boele's 2CP on dec prepolls by a few points and postals by 12 points, though they are probably early postals which will be worse than later ones.  

1:30: Three booths processed today so far and Boele's lead is now 15.  

2:15: 18 now,up another three in one booth (St Ives North).  Three of the booths checked today have had relatively high Kapterian primary votes, for what that's worth.    

2:25 20!  Boele must now have a serious chance of winning by enough for multiple votes to not void the seat - in which case the onus would be on the Liberals to decide whether to challenge and by how much.

4:40 21.  No new booths added, so I suspect that was a formality referral.

5:00 Even now 25, what a great day for Boele so far.  14 booths to go before the distribution starts but five of them are tiny,  It's expected the recount will take the rest of the week to finish.

Ben Raue has another great podcast episode talking about the recount with scrutineers. It sounds like the distributions of preferences are going on booth by booth as votes are checked so there may not be a long distribution phase once the recounts are done.  

Tuesday June 3 11 am:  Boele is now ahead by 34 with 11 booths remaining, three of them tiny.  She did especially well in the St Ives and Turramurra area booths.  It is very likely that Boele will now go on to be seated and there is now a good chance that the margin will be outside the margin of a potential AEC challenge over multiple voting.  This means Kapterian would have to challenge and would need to have grounds to do so, none of which have yet been suggested.  

12:50: Per the AEC briefing today I have the following details:

* the recount is likely to end late tomorrow or possibly Thursday, though the level of scrutineer challenges is always unpredictable in time terms

* the Turramurra PPVC swing was not a data issue but simply a large number of formality changes, similar to what we have seen in smaller numbers in many of the day booths in Turramurra and St Ives

* the number of multiple votes is low, possibly single digits - suggesting to me strongly that at the current margin the AEC would not be lodging a challenge 

1:05 Teh Narrowing! Kapterian has recovered one vote, nine booths to go.

2:10 The gap is now 30, it came down another three at Warrawee, however that was likely on paper to be Boele's worst booth in terms of its size and her having more primaries than Kapterian.  

3:30 The Willougby booths are now gone with Boele leading by 27 25 27, there are only three Wahroonga booths to go (two are small and none seem likely to help Kapterian) plus two tiny booths.  Unsure if there are any non-ordinary counts remaining.  (There was a late change from 27 to 25, possibly on referrals).  

5:30 The margin is still 27 and only three booths remain, two of them tiny.  

Wednesday 11:00 Only one tiny booth remaining now - not sure if there is anything else to come after that or if we could be getting a statement that the recount has finished soon.

11:20 I've seen that the final announcement on the seat is likely this afternoon after the NSW Electoral Officer rules on remaining referred challenged votes.  

3:15 IT IS OVER! Boele wins by 26 votes and will be seated, it is up to Kapterian or any Bradfield elector to decide whether to lodge a challenge.  

Not-A-Poll Reset 1 of 2025: Dutton Loses Seat

This morning Sussan Ley became the first female federal leader of the Liberal Party, elected 29-25 over Angus Taylor.  Taylor was running on a ticket that included the insane proposition that Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, a member of the Liberal partyroom for five earth minutes, should become deputy leader.  This was especially crazy because Price was such a totemic candidate for the toxic idea that the Coalition should be more Trumpy (making her a shadow minister for government efficiency when they already had one was one of the Coalition's many mistakes).  

All this is not to say I would have been remotely keen to vote for Ley if I was a Liberal party room member either, in fact, given this choice, I could not have possibly voted for either.  While Taylor generally seemed to be making very little effort in the previous term, Ley on the other side struck me as trying too hard and serially out of her depth.  Most notably so when she criticised the AEC over voting interpretation rules for the Voice Referendum during the ticks and crosses beatup, when the Coalition had not made any attempt to change the legislation, but there were many other examples.  

The good news for the Liberals is it probably doesn't matter.  If Ley is a success well and good, and if she fails they can tick and flick the box of having had a female leader and use it as an excuse to not do that again in a hurry.  Their two-term strategy for winning in 2028 is a crash scene (in part because they tried to turn it into a one-term strategy and wasted seats like Menzies in the process) and realistically this term is about rebuilding, trying to finish off the teals with help from the new donations regime (if it survives the High Court) and seeing how they go thereafter.  

Anyway, the Not-A-Poll has been restarted because Peter Dutton became the first Opposition Leader in federal history to lose his seat!  And not narrowly either; he currently has a 7.9% swing against him, the largest in all of Queensland.  The view that Dutton could lose was for much of the term a fringe one with its adherents derided on social media as "Dickson truthers" but as the Coalition's polling collapsed it became more realistic.  Still, it was not generally expected.

Dutton as Opposition Leader had a good run for a while and in late 2024 was less unpopular than Anthony Albanese.  However he was never popular in his own right and became the second Opposition Leader after Bill Shorten (2016-19 term) to go a full term without polling a single positive Newspoll net rating.  He also never beat Albanese on the incumbent-favouring Better Prime Minister metric in Newspoll (he did achieve 

However, Dutton being the next to cease to be leader was strongly expected by voters in the Not-A-Poll!

Albanese actually led this round until April 14.  From this point Dutton received 281 out of 366 votes to Albanese's 15.  Dutton's last 40 votes came without any votes for Albanese though there were a scattering of votes for others.  With this success, Not-A-Poll improves its hit rate to 6 of the last 13 departures correctly predicted including 4 of the last 5.  With Dutton gone and Albanese likely to want to stay on for at least a full second term, who will be next to go?

Of the current candidates Allan faces an election next November and has been polling poorly (though suspected brand damage failed to show up in the federal election where the Coalition couldn't even win back Aston).  There has also been low-level leadership speculation there.  Rockliff's government is in a somewhat unstable minority and perennially under the weather though Labor's disinterest in trying to form government has protected it from being brought down so far.  Barr might retire someday though this has been being said for many years.  Malinauskas is the next to go to an election but is generally not remotely expected to lose.  As for how long Ley will be leader who knows?  

Voting is open in the sidebar,  If viewing on mobile, scroll down and click "View web version"

2025 Senate Postcounts: National Thread

Discussion of counts that have finished or reached zero unapportioned votes now appears on the button press thread.  

FINAL WINS ALP 16 L-NP 13 GREEN 6 ON 3 POCOCK 1 JLN 1

CARRIED OVER ALP 12 L-NP 14 GRN 5 ON 1 UAP 1 defectors 3

IF PROJECTED LEADS HOLD ALP 28 L-NP 27 Grn 11 ON 4 Pocock 1 UAP 1 Lambie 1 defectors 3 (Payman, Tyrrell, Thorpe)

ALP/GRN will have combined outright majority.

ALP + non-Green others will have a blocking majority (38).  

2025: House of Reps Postcount: Ryan

RYAN (Grn vs LNP 2.65, Grn vs ALP 3CP 4.75)

Whichever of Elizabeth Watson-Brown (GRN) and Rebecca Hack (ALP) makes final two wins seat.

Watson-Brown makes final two - Green retain

Click here for link to Reps postcount hub and tallyboard page 

--------------------------------------

I've been slow getting onto the count for Ryan firstly because there are so many weird seats at this election and secondly because on election night it seemed to be a reasonably easy hold for the Greens.  But Greens and teals have been copping a savage wrath from postal voters in the Melbourne inner city seats so it's time to check in on Ryan - it is interesting even if it turns out not to be close.  Through much of the term Elizabeth Watson-Brown was seen as the most endangered of the four Greens MHRs, now with Adam Bandt in a dodgy situation in Melbourne it's possible if she wins she'll be the last one standing.  The Greens have clearly lost Brisbane where they have fallen to third and have clearly lost Griffith where the LNP appears to be third at the three-candidate point (or failing that, they are).  They also appear not to be gaining Wills though I am still to check that in detail, and won't get there in Richmond where Justine Elliot is making the final two which guarantees her victory.  

The count for Ryan has much in common with Brisbane 2022.

As I start this article the primary votes with 78.0% counted are:

Maggie Forrest (LNP) 34.84
Elizabeth Watson-Brown (Grn) 29.11
Rebecca Hack (ALP) 28.20

N De Lapp (GRPF) 2.31

Robbie Elsom (ON) 2.14

Donna Gallehawk (FF) 1.25

Ryan Hunt (TOP) 1.24

Gina Masterton (FUSION) 0.92

Currently Watson-Brown leads Hack on primary votes by 655.

2025 House of Reps Postcounts: Labor/IND Realignment Seats (Bean, Fremantle, Franklin)

On this page

Bean - Expected ALP retain (very close)

Fremantle - Expected ALP retain

Franklin - Called by me as easy ALP win on election night but included because some people are being silly

Click here for link to Reps postcount hub and tallyboard page 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This page covers seats where Labor is leading the primary count, the AEC initially counted votes as ALP vs Liberal, but an independent has either clearly or probably made the final two and the count is now being realigned by the AEC.  The main two seats of interest here, Bean and Fremantle, have common ingredients in that an independent seemed to be very competitive on the night and still looks close in the realignment, but past experience suggests the independents may struggle as the postcount continues.

2025 Tasmania Senate Postcount

2025 TASMANIA SENATE

CALLED ELECTED Carol Brown (ALP #1), Richard Dowling (ALP #2), Claire Chandler (LIB #1), Nick McKim (Green #1)

CONTEST Richard Colbeck (Liberal #2, incumbent) vs Bailey Falls (ALP #3) vs Jacqui Lambie (JLN #1) for two seats.

Lee Hanson (One Nation) has polled well but does not appear to be in contention.

Projection of current live count after preferences has Lambie ahead of Colbeck ahead of Falls - however margins in projection are fairly close and this assumes preferences flow the same way as in 2022 (they may not!)

One Nation preference flow is likely to be crucial to result

WARNING: Projecting the Tasmanian Senate count is very complex.  This article is rated Wonk Factor 4/5

2025 House of Reps Postcount: Monash

MONASH (Vic, Lib 2.9%, occupied by deselected ex-Lib IND)

Issue was whether Deb Leonard (IND) could make final two and whether she could win if so.  Leonard will not make final two.  Liberal retain.

Click here for link to Reps postcount hub and tallyboard page.  

---------------------------

I like to do posts about postcount seats that are not necessarily the most competitve but the weirdest, and in this respect Monash well deserves a thread of its own, though Calwell is giving it a run for its money.  

In Monash the Liberals disendorsed 25-year veteran Russell Broadbent, who immediately moved to the crossbench and eventually ran as an independent.  Broadbent had attracted attention particularly as a prominent member of the anti-COVID-vaccines/mandates movement but another factor was simply the desire for renewal.  The campaign saw some tension over One Nation how to vote cards - I haven't got to the bottom of the story but have heard claims that the Liberals printed a card on One Nation's behalf that turned out not to reflect One Nation's preferencing decisions (because they continued to recommend preferences to Broadbent in this seat).  

2025 House Of Reps Postcount: Coalition vs Teals (Goldstein, Bradfield, Kooyong etc)

On this page:

Bradfield (IND ahead, extremely close, headed for recount) - coverage on new thread

Goldstein (Liberal gain from IND)

Kooyong (IND retain)

Click here for link to Reps postcount hub and tallyboard page.  

-------------------------------------

This is another grouped seat thread to cover those seats where there is a competitive straight 2CP contest (realignment not required) between the Coalition and any teal (or teal-adjacent if I add more) independent.  There are currently three of these I am watching: Bradfield, Goldstein and Kooyong.  On election night it appeared Monique Ryan had retained Kooyong, Zoe Daniel was ahead and likely winning in Goldstein and Nicolette Boele was projecting ahead in Bradfield, but the early postal counts have had some savage commentary on that.  Updates will follow as the count unfolds over coming days.  It's also worth noting that while I refer below to teals doing well on absents compared to other indies, this tends to be by default because the Labor and Green primaries are high (the teal primary tends to be low).  This may mean that performances on absents are less strong this time around (see comments).

2025 House of Reps Postcount: Melbourne

MELBOURNE (Green 6.9% vs ALP)

Adam Bandt (Green) vs Sarah Witty (ALP)

Labor win after 2CP realignment

WARNING: Explaining what is going on with the Melbourne count is complex.  This page is rated Wonk Factor 4/5

Click here for link to Reps postcount hub and tallyboard page.  

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am doing postcount threads in a capricious order as something provokes me to jump to a different seat next and en route to the fine mess that is Monash, the ambulance has been rerouted to Melbourne.  This follows the ABC projecting the seat as 52-48 to Labor after projecting it as 51.5 to the Greens last night.

Why are we even here?  For some reason the AEC preset the Melbourne count 2CP as Greens vs Liberal, a baffling decision when Labor beat the Liberals at the 3CP point by 8.6% in 2022 and when a Greens vs Liberal 2CP is about as informative concerning who will actually win the seat (even post-redistribution) as the 2CP between One Nation and Tim Smith.   This is the single worst 2CP preset decision by the AEC that I have ever seen - generally I am a great fan of all the work done by the AEC but this one's an exception; this has let election watchers down and needs to not happen again.  

As a result we had no useful election night preference estimate between the Greens and Labor in the Greens Leader's seat. We now do have a preference count for 3926 postals and 150 hospital votes, which shows a massive Labor lead, but the postals are unrepresentative.

2025 Reps Postcount: Seats Where Indies May Make The Final Two (Calwell, Flinders, Forrest, Grey, etc)

Seats covered on this page

CALWELL ALP potentially vs IND, not even sure which IND yet, probably ALP but messy. New thread

FLINDERS LIB win (IND made final two but preference flow not enough to win)

FORREST LIB win as IND will not make the final two

GREY LIB win as IND will not make the final two

FISHER LNP win as IND will not make the final two

Click here for link to main Reps hub and summary page

MONASH has its own page - LIB win as IND will not make final two

This page covers seats which have the following property:

* An independent is in third or dicing for second/third on primaries (seats where an independent appears clearly second will be covered elsewhere)

* The independent may or may not make the final two after preferences

* If the independent makes the final two, it is not clear whether they win

2025 House Of Reps Postcount Summary, Links Hub And Classic 2PP Seats Page

FINAL SEAT TOTAL ALP 94 L-NP 43 IND 10 GRN 1 CA 1 KAP 1

SEATS APPARENTLY CHANGING (defections disregarded) 

L-NP to LABOR: Banks, Bass, Bonner, Braddon, Deakin, Dickson, Hughes, Leichhardt, Moore, Sturt, Forde, Petrie, Menzies (see below)

GREENS to LABOR: Brisbane, Griffith, Melbourne

L-NP to IND: Calare, Bradfield

IND to L-NP: Goldstein

SEATS IN SIGNIFICANT DOUBT - seats shown in bold have now been discusssed in detail either here or on one of the linked pages:

None anymore

Seats I am not currently considering in doubt that were in the lists above

Flinders, Monash, Forrest, Grey, Fisher, Longman: Liberal/LNP retains 

Wills, Fremantle, Bendigo, Bullwinkel, Bean, Calwell: Labor retains

Goldstein: expected Liberal gain

Melbourne: ALP gain

Ryan: Green retain

Kooyong:  IND retain

Bradfield: IND gain

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Because of the complexity of the House of Reps postcount and my limited time to cover it, for starters I am putting up a hub page for links to postcount threads with a summary of the state of play and of seats I am keeping my eye on.

There are some seats where the AEC chose the wrong two-candidate pair on the night and is now already in the process of realigning the count to the correct two-candidate pair.  During this process the 2CP figure on the AEC and probably also ABC site will jump about considerably - wait for it to settle down or for a projection to be posted here or elsewhere.  Examples that might be competitive include Bean. Fremantle, Bendigo and Melbourne.  Franklin is among several others being realigned but Julie Collins will win Franklin easily.

There are many seats where it is clear who has won the two-party preferred count but an independent is in third and might in theory make the top two, then might in theory win.  Probably most of these will fall over - the independent may fall back on primaries, may fail to get into second after preferences, or may make the final two but lose anyway.  

A seat tally estimate will be posted when I have had time to assess some of these seats in more detail.  

List of links to non-classic postcount pages:

Calwell, Fisher, Flinders, Forrest, Grey

Bradfield, Goldstein, Kooyong

Bean, Fremantle, Franklin 

Melbourne

Monash

For Senate counts see my Senate count page.  A Tasmanian Senate thread has been posted separately.

Classic major-party seats will be covered on this page.  The following will be unrolled at the bottom of this page as time permits (others may be added).  It's a sign of the times that these are a minority of the sites I am watching.

Bendigo (ALP 11.2%)

Monday: A bizarre outcome in an election that Labor has won very easily is that a seat well into its safe zone is at risk of flipping to the Nationals.  The AEC pre-set this seat as ALP vs Liberal based on its past form and the count is now being reset to ALP vs Nationals.

The booths that have been reset so far are Bendigo and Junortoun prepolls, four small special hospital booths and a mobile booth, and part of the postal count.  All these booths are strong for the Coalition parties compared to the overall count so the Nationals' current 53-47 lead is unreliable and will decrease. The preference flow to Labor in the substantial booths is varying wildly from 31% to 49% (and even more so if including the smaller booths).  

In this case the most compelling relationship is between the preference flow to Labor and how much of the available preference pool is Liberal.  In booths where a lot of the preferences come from the Liberals, Labor has a worse preference share.  

Based off the booths so far I project the preference share for Labor to be 45.5% in the current live count, though I expect this to fall and should caution that these booths are unreliable in various different ways.

In the current live primaries Lisa Chesters (ALP) has 33.89, Andrew Lethlean (Nats) 30.57 Greens 11.15 Liberals 10.08 ON 4.66 LCP 3.21 FF 2.85 VS 1.7 a minor IND 0.98 Libertarian 0.91.  The total preference pool is 35.54% at the moment and on my projection above the Nationals gain at 0.09 votes per preference.  Therefore I project that the Nationals are currently gaining 3.20% of a current 3.23% lead, which puts Labor only precariously in front by 0.03%.  There could be 5000 postals to go but in 2022 postals were overall not that harmful to Labor compared to ordinary votes in this seat and I expect that to be the case again.  While my current projection is impossibly close (even closer than the ABC's 50.3 to Labor), it has a large error margin because of the nature of booths in the count and what will most advance the projection is seeing more booths realigned in the seat.  It may also be that the flow is affected by the relative Labor to National primaries as well as the flow from that.  

Monday 10 pm: More postals caused the ABC's projection of the live count to flip to Lethlean but caused my projection of the Labor preference flow to increase so that I now have Labor on live 50.33%(because I treat postals as a single dot point rather than let them drown the sample, though that has its limits when some of the competing booths are tiny!) 

Tuesday 5:40:  More realignment booths have come in and my model has put Lethlean ahead now with a wafer thin 50.02 2CP (that is after I remove tiny booths; with them in Chesters still leads).  

Wednesday 2:00: Some more realignment booths that have come in are mostly better for Chesters.  I am now running two projections, one off Labor's primary vote and one off the Liberal share of the preference pool.  The former is on 51.7 for Chesters, the latter 50.4.  They're both equally explanatory so perhaps the truth is in the middle.  Lethlean is leading the live count on 50.55 but it is very prepoll/postal heavy compared to booth votes.  

Thursday night: Watching the realignments I am now satisfied that Chesters wins. I base this on the following.  The live realignment has Chesters 1391 ahead but is missing many booths still.  However all of these are now day booths.  In the day booths realigned so far Chesters has 32.8% Lethlean 26.0% Liberals 8.0%, and Chesters has 53.6% of preferences and 54.9% 2CP.  In the day booths still to be realigned Chesters has 34.0% primary Lethlean 27.9% Liberals 9.5%.  This gives Chesters a further 1054 votes in gains just off the primaries in these booths that Lethlean would have to pull back on preferences together with Chesters' existing 1391 lead - but there's no reason to think he can pull back more than a very small amount (because of their higher Liberal primary) based on the general similarity of these votes with the other votes where Chesters is gaining on preferences.  To get even within 500 and have some sort of hail mary shot on remaining votes Lethlean would have to pull back 2000 votes which would require this large set of booths to have a preference flow around 20 points different from the other day booths despite having only slightly more favourable primary votes.  What's more, even though these day booths are not yet rechecked, all of them are small, so random errors of 50 or 100 votes here cannot dislodge the projection in a way that a 500 vote bundle in the wrong pile in an urban prepoll can.  I am satisfied it is appropriate therefore to call this seat.  

Bullwinkel (ALP notional 3.4%)

Tuesday 80.0% counted: I finally get around to a first look at Bullwinkel, the new notionally Labor seat on Perth's eastern fringe, by population in large part ex-Hasluck but including conservative hinterland.  This is a three-cornered contest where former WA state Nationals leader Mia Davies has polled solidly but won't reach the final two.  Presently Labor's Trish Cook leads the Liberals' Matt Moran by 50 votes.  It's hard to project anything reliably with this seat because it is a hybrid of other seats but it is notable that the mail is mostly in in Bullwinkel; only 2865 postals were sent out and not yet counted, and the bulk of those will probably never return.  The postals are pretty toothless anyway, currently running only one point better for Labor than ordinaries.  Unless Labor does badly on out of electorate prepolls I would expect Labor's usual strong performance on absents to give them the advantage here, especially in a seat with a decent Green vote.  So I think Labor are slightly better placed here pending rechecks.  

Thursday night: Especially well placed after corrections worth about 200 votes in their favour in rechecking - one that added 112 votes to Labor's lead in the Toodyay booth and a raft of little corrections across many booths.  Labor also gained on the first absents and leads by 333.

Friday: Cook now leads by 386.  I am waiting for the recheck of the large Midland PPVC (around 9000 votes) and if Cook gets through that one unscathed then I think it will be appropriate to call this seat. 

Friday 7:30: Not only has Labor got through that but they've moved to a 634 vote lead after more strong absents.  More than enough to take this one off the watch list.  

Longman (LNP 3.1%)

Tuesday 79.5% counted:  Longman popped up for a few mentions as an LNP Queensland seat that might fall if things went well for Labor.  At the moment the LNP are in the mix to save it while having seemingly lost four seats further up the tree.  This is a straightforward two-party race where Terry Young (LNP) leads Rhiannyn Douglas (Labor), currently 50.20-49.80 (439 vote lead).  Checking for booth issues I did notice something odd with a 17.6% vote for Trumpet of Patriots candidate Benjamin Wood in the Wamuran booth and a large swing away from Labor in that booth - the UAP polled only 6.6% there previously, it might be a home booth effect or maybe an error of some kind (any information welcome).  The 2PP swing in this booth is normal but the preference flow to ALP is surprisingly high if the primaries really are correct (228 votes TOP 189 votes ALP).  

Postals have so far broken only a few points better than ordinary votes to Young, which also happened in 2022 there may be 4000 or so left.  In 2022 there were 2655 absents which broke 5.5 points better for Labor than ordinaries, 226 provisionals which broke 16.5 points better and 4187 out of division prepolls which broke 2.0 points better.   Based on the numbers of envelopes issued it is looking like the absent and prepoll votes could increase.  Accounting for some possible weakening of the already weak postal flow in late postals, it seems to me that there could be enough juice in the other categories to overturn Young's current lead and then a little bit more.  The primary votes will also all need to be rechecked before we can be too confident about the exact status of the 2PP here; several including the above sleighted Wamuran have seen no action since Saturday night.  

Thursday 5:30 Young now leads by 320 after absents broke 383-280 for Douglas.  It's unreliable to project off absents to other absents without knowing where they're from but a start for Labor pretty much in line with the past.  

Friday 2:40 Young leads by 290.  The first out of division prepolls broke 361-320 to Douglas and the first provisionals (most of them in fact) broke 127-87.  Young must have gained a few dozen from somewhere too.  There are still 16 booths awaiting rechecks.  If the patterns in the current vote types continue Douglas will win by about 350, but it is unreliable to project off absents or out of div prepolls without knowing what boundary of the electorate they were from.  

Friday 7:15 A second lot of absents were slightly weaker breaking 268-214 to Labor.  Young leads by 231 but I still have Douglas by 340 on projection (and that's ignoring Waruman, correction of which may benefit them.)

Saturday 3:10 A big shift in outlook for now as Young does well 509-459 on out of division prepolls. These may be from somewhere not representative but he is now ahead on this category!   If he can neutralise out of division prepolls he should at least be very close to holding on though past form suggests this won't be easy.   Young leads by 249.  Seven booths are awaiting rechecking including two very large prepolls.  Note that the Waruman issue was fixed (50 TOP primaries were actually Labor and 100 didn't exist) but it didn't help Labor's 2CP.  

Saturday 5:30 Young lead down to 219, I believe on rechecks.  Still five PPVC centres to be rechecked.  

Monday 2:20 Four now, and Young leads by 221.  

Monday 4:45 Two more booths rechecked, Young leads by 236.

Monday 5:15 Young's fighting hard on these rechecks, or his scrutiners are fighting hard, or something.  He's now 256 ahead.  One recheck to go.  

Tuesday 12:30  The rechecks are finished and now Young leads by 193.  At the rate of votes so far I project Young to hold on by about 100.  However the main issue now is what happens with the remaining out of division prepolls.  They have been slightly good for Young so far compared to ordinary votes, but that might be because of where they're from.  If they finish up the same relative to ordinary votes at the end of the count then Young would lose by about 30 votes.  

Tuesday 5:10 Young now leads by 162.  Potential votes remaining: absents 1387 (expect 1297 formal), provisionals 270 (expect 129 formal), dec prepolls 2675 (expect 2457 formal), known postals 538 (expect 512 formal), unknown postals a few hundred.  Not sure where the 31 vote shift came from yet.  Projection now has Young by only 23 ignoring remaining postals which can at this stage do anything, so there is a high chance of a recount and Douglas still has real chances to win here.  

Wednesday: Young lead down to 121 and still maybe 2500 to go, very much a live contest 

Wednesday 3:35:  Young lead now 128 after more postals.  The bulk of what is left now (maybe c. 2100 formal) is out of electorate prepolls.  It is expected 900 of these will be counted today.  

Wednesday 4:20: And suddenly Terry Young has stepped up to the plate and SMASHED IT OUT OF THE PARK on today's out of electorate prepolls.  He is 335 ahead and won't be caught on the remaining 755 votes worth of scraps and whatever postals are to come.  Sorry Longman not even a recount for you.  

Saturday: Longman is the first seat in Australia to have "gone to zero" as I call it, meaning there are no votes left to count in the initial count, with Young leading by 311.  The formal distribution of preferences is the next stage in which only very minor changes will occur.  

Monday 19th: I spoke too soon, another 17 were found on the last plane from Nairobi or wherever (and also it seems Bullwinkel was first), so those have still to be counted.

Menzies (Lib -0.4%, notional ALP)

Sunday 76.1% counted:  Adding this one first because of the interest in the fate of an MP touted (including by me if anyone asks) as a potential future leader and because the ABC has moved it back to ALP Likely.  In Menzies in 2022, Keith Wolahan's final 2PP was 1.00 points higher than his 2PP in ordinary votes (which includes booth votes and within-division prepolls).  This time he needs to double that gap as Labor's Gabriel Ng starts with an ordinary vote of 51.98% 2PP.  Is there any hope at all?

Firstly, better postals.  In 2022 Wolahan's postal 2PP was 6 points higher than ordinary votes.  In the postals counted so far it is 10 points higher.  But that's probably just the normal conservative behaviour of early-counted postals.  So that probably won't do it.  Secondly, more postals.  In 2022 Menzies took 19734 postals.  In 2025 it has issued a staggering 30340 postals; maybe 25000 or so could get returned and admitted, so that does look like a substantial increase in postals.  Thirdly there are a couple of small outstanding PPVCs, Heidelberg and Ringwood, and the latter was slightly better than average for Wolahan in 2022, so the ordinary vote count might come down a little.  Fourth, given the increase in prepoll and decline in day voting, there may well be slightly more out of division prepolls and slightly fewer absents.  

Counteracting that, there is what looks like a 194 vote error that when corrected favours Ng in the booth Wattle Park.  Here the Liberals have been credited with a gain of 176 preferences and Labor with 79; it appears those numbers should be the other way around (a common error in early counting, generally fixed in checking).  

All this taken into account I find it hard to get the final margin below about 1000 in Ng's favour and expect that Labor has indeed gained Menzies.

Wednesday 78.3% counted: Ng leads by 1145 with the Wattle Park booth unchanged so I think in reality more.  More postals have come in reducing the lead but the overall flow of postals to Wolahan has slowed such that they now only have a 9.3 point break to him in total (current postal count is 8900-6699) compared with ordinaries.  This confirms that Ng is on course to win the seat.  

Thursday: The Wattle Park booth error has been corrected, adding 166 votes to Ng's lead, clearly Labor has gained Menzies.  There has been some nonsense about an 1800 vote correction early in the count in the Doncaster prepoll - this was simply a misrecording, the votes never existed as confirmed by the size of the Senate count for the same booth.  

2025 Late Night Live

STARTING POSITION ALP 78 L-NP 56 IND 10 GRN 4 others 2

(starting position includes notional new seat and 2022 winners for defections)

SEATS APPARENTLY CHANGING (some not totally confirmed):

L-NP to LABOR: Banks, Bass, Bonner, Braddon, Deakin, Dickson, Hughes, Leichhardt, Moore, Sturt, Menzies

GREENS to LABOR: Brisbane, Griffith

L-NP to IND: Calare

SEATS IN DOUBT (others may be added)

ALP Occupied vs IND: Bean, Calwell, Fremantle

ALP Occupied vs GRN: Wills

ALP Occupied vs L-NP: Bendigo (probable Labor win)

ALP Notional vs L-NP: Bullwinkel

L-NP Occupied vs ALP: Longman (maybe Forde and Petrie also though those look lost)

L-NP Occupied vs IND: Flinders, Monash, Forrest, Bradfield, Grey

IND Occupied vs L-NP: Goldstein

GRN Occupied vs ALP: Melbourne (Ryan not yet absolutely certain either)

2025 Election Night Arrangements And Election Watching Tips

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Donations welcome!

If you find my coverage useful please consider donating to support the large amount of time I spend working on this site.  Donations can be made by the Paypal button in the sidebar or by PayID (details in sidebar) or email me via the address in my profile for my account details.  Please only donate if you are sure you can afford to do so.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My coverage tonight and to come

I will be doing live blogging for the Guardian from c. 6:30 pm.  Live coverage has started here. Comments will be occasional when I have something substantial to note.  I will also be contributing to this map here

 I expect to be working on that until at least midnight.  I may or may not pop up on Twitter or Bluesky during quiet moments (such as the mid-evening lull before prepolls start bucketing in around 9:30) or to formally call Tasmanian seats.  The format of the blogging is not known to me yet but it will be open to the public.  I will also be helping the Guardian out with seat calls which I must stress I expect to be of a provisional and not so definitive nature!

I will probably not be checking emails, tweets or for comments on this site regularly during this time, and I ask journalists not from the Guardian not to call me until the live blog has finished.  However if you have interesting scrutineering samples from Tasmania or anything else wildly interesting you're extremely welcome to SMS them to me (0421428775) or email them to me (k_bonham@iinet.net.au).  I probably won't be able to reply immediately.  

2025 Election Day: Newspoll Says Comfortable Re-Election

2PP Aggregate 52.39 to ALP (Ipsos added)
With One Nation adjustment 51.76 to ALP
Rolling most recent released 2PP poll by each firm average 52.31 to ALP

If polls are perfectly accurate Labor is slightly more likely than not to win a majority (est 80 seats)

Final federal polls on average tend to slightly overestimate Labor, but sometimes underestimate them

A large polling error would be needed for Labor to lose

The above is what 331 polls looks like condensed into one graph (see rolling roundup for how I dealt with the most recent arrivals).   We're here again, Election Day, and I am at most 17 hours from being dragged screaming into the infernal pit of having to find someone to vote 1 for on the Tasmanian Senate ballot paper. 

Once again there is so much more I wish I could have done in advance coverage, especially in terms of doing more work on trying to project individual seats (especially those of the non-classic and three-cornered variety) but there is only one of me, and I think my post-election work is more important.  

The final Newspoll came out with a 52.5-47.5 2PP in Labor's favour, among a pack of final polls with Freshwater at 51.5 and everyone else between 52 and 53.  Although the polls in the campaign were quite diverse (particularly when Labor's lead started picking up) the late polls have been very convergent on the 2PP front despite having a fair range of primary vote estimates.  Because of the still mostly poor level of transparency in the industry it is hard to exclude the possibility that some polls are herding, which increases the chance that the average could be out.