bob dylan link said:
[quote author=byso link=topic=184174.msg280381#msg280381 date=1280661108]
Very well put together report then.
I agree with the majority that you wrote.
I only know of a few people outside of this site that would vote labor this time around, some of those would have fell for the Kevin07 BS last time around that will probably vote Lib this time.
I dont know many swinging voters. Out here in country NSW its a bit like the Holden or a Ford debate, you are what you are and thats it.
Living in a safe National seat means it doesnt make much difference anyway.
[/quote]
Thanks Byso, I do my best to make sure I know what I am talking about. I always had a feeling a coalition victory was coming but after more and more research into key seats I am getting more certain. There are just to many close seats that are Labour held and too few that are held by the coalition. Without a central theme like Workchoices causing a stir I don't see Labour picking up any seats at all.
And Bob, swing voters most often don't decide seats, net migration, new voters (Ie. people who turn 18) and boundry changes decide seats much more frequently.
95% of voters don't change their vote, many many many people will vote Labour or Lib or Nat for their whole lives. There are game changers how ever, for instance the fact that Gillard is a woman may cauce some women to change a set vote. Also the mining tax is a huge game changer, and then there is the fear aspect, last time it was Tampa or Workchoices, this time it is pensions and the 'fact' that Gillard doesn't think old people deserve their money...
Also I am a big big big proponent of the yoyo effect, almost always when a game changer is in force, ie workchoices - the next election a large percentage of those who changed their votes revert to their natural voting tendencies, hence why I feel a lot of seats that should be naturally coalition seats albeit marginal ones will revert to that status. Page, Eden-Monaro, Corangamite are good examples.
There are also the groups of voters that are not rusted on to either side, ie. Young people and Migrants. Now young people I see voting for the greens and labour in large numbers, but at the last election they voted for Rudd in droves so no loss there. Migrants however might decide the seat of Benalong for instance where a large Chinese community came out in force for Rudd at the last election despite being largely a small business based community and therefore being much more naturally affiliated with the policies of the coalition. This combined with the yoyo effect and a boundary change in the seat should see this seat swing quite strongly I feel.
Local issues often play much more role then people are willing to admit, that is why Robertson on the central coast is almost certainly a Lib gain, and why I am on a knife edge about the next seat over in Dobell. Another reason that the Central Coast seats are always in play even with large margins (Dobell has a 2.4% swing required) is the huge net migration that is still occurring from Sydney that brings in new voters making local politics unstable. Older people often vote coalition and the CC is one of the older areas demographically in the country.
Where the female vote might bight Labour is the seat of swan, which is odd in that many of the service men overseas use it as a registration point for their votes due to its many army and airforce bases, people in the military might have voted strongly for Rudd (In comparison to normal voting tendencies towards conservative policies.) but might not vote for a woman, especially one with zero foreign affairs experience.
Of course... we well see.
