Macnamara – Australia 2025

@ Marh
The Indian community is Canada is divided and there are tensions between Hindus and Sikhs over the Khalistan movement. Justin Trudeau has beeen accused of being soft by the Indian government on the Khalistan movement so it maybe the case that Hindus are swinging to the right. In Australia i think it is less of an issue as there are more Hindu Indians around 50% compared to Sikh 25% in Canada there are slighly more Sikhs Indians than Hindus. Also i think Indian community in Australia is more recent so while they are high income there is a less wealth in suburbs such as Point Cook, Clyde etc it is one reason why i think it may take a decade for the Libs to make strong inroads into South Asians we need to see increased population ageing

**Today Canadian Election (that will most likely lead to a minority Mark Carney’s Liberal Government) has saw Jewish Heavy Seats swinging heavily towards the Conservatives …**
That doesn’t mean jewish voters switched allegiance, but it could mean that “non diverse” Canadians rejected the premise that Trump and America are the enemy.
Actual results are quite different to predicted by polling results, which touted a Liberal landslide led by ex Bank of England honcho.

The Age did a vox pop the other day in Macnamara and there were several Jewish people interviewed who indicated that they had been Labor voters but were voting Liberal this time and their friends and family were doing the same. Not just Macnamara where this could be an issue but also Kooyong – in 2021 10% of the population of Toorak were Jewish, 7% in Armadale, 5% in Malvern – if some Labor voters go to the Libs or preference the Libs it could be significant. Same in Bentleigh and Bentleigh East in Goldstein and St Ives in Bradfield – Jewish populations in the 8 – 10% range. This could be significant but might have to wait for the postals.

Seems to be big swings to the Conservatives in seats with large Indian and Chinese Canadian communities, accounting for much of their gains. Don’t think Poilievre has the same level of disdain that Dutton has especially among migrants so I’m not expecting that to be the case in Australia.

@Dan M for Chinese Canadian seats in Toronto, I assume it might had been due to the scandal from the Markham – Unionville Liberal MP Paul Chiang where he made a joke to have the Hong Kong Police arrest his potential political rival (it was a Hong Kong man who later ran in a different seat and lost) and he resigned afterwards which led to a last minute change of Liberal Candidate for Markham Unionville. Markham-Unionville is in fact Canada’s most Chinese electorate but it is more friendlier to Conservatives because it is upper-middle class more like Bennelong and Menzies.

@ Marh

The other area of large Chinese communities are Scarborough, Ontario and Richmond, British COlumbia

I think there’s absolutely going to be a pro-Liberal swing among the Jewish community – like redistributed says, not just in Macnamara but also in Goldstein & Kooyong – despite Josh Burns’ best efforts to pitch a “you need to vote Labor to keep the Greens out” tactical vote and even issue an open ticket.

The problem in Macnamara anyway is just, how much even is there available to swing as a proportion of the overall result, given the Jewish community is around 10% and is already, most likely, very Liberal-leaning as a baseline.

It’s reasonable to assume that in a Jewish community as strictly orthodox and conservative as Macnamara’s, the Liberal vote is probably already close to 50% within that community.

To put it in perspective, even a whopping 20% ALP to LIB swing within the Jewish community would only give the Libs a +2 swing towards the overall result; while the -2 against Labor would probably be partially cancelled out by a modest swing from GRN to ALP (maybe 5%, or 0.5% of the total vote) among Jewish voters.

So, even huge swings within the Jewish community = small movement overall.

That said, that small swing would be enough to swap Labor & Greens’ 3CP position (before factoring in the swings among the remaining 90% of the electorate of course).

Redistributed Burns could be cooked if that shows across the electorate.

@Marh about the swing to the Conservatives in Canada, similarly the Conservative Party in the UK while it did lose ground there actually lost less ground than Labour in Leicester which is a very Indian part of the UK. Due to the UK’s system of voting and vote splitting Leicester East actually elected a Conservative MP.

Similarly in Australia the NSW state level campaign focuses heavily on seats with large Indian populations like Parramatta and Riverstone, both of which were Liberal from 2011 until 2023 when Labor won them. But federally while they have been key seats the seats of Greenway and Parramatta haven’t been won by the Liberals even in 2010 or 2013 when Labor was at its lowest point in history in NSW.

I do love the overt racial profiling in the comments section of this site. It is like people think every ethnic group vote the same way – except white people of course

To be fair, and I say this as a person of colour, many ethnic groups in Australia largely vote the same way.

If the collective wisdom on this board (excluding Ben) was even 50% right half the time, there’d be no need for elections.

– but I agree that it’s not as rigid as many on this site state, and people from one ethnic group don’t all vote in a bloc depending on certain issues. Things like social class and age are often far greater implications on peoples’ voting intentions.

@Real Talk we’d need elections between John and Mick over who’s wisdom is wiser.

I’d say somewhere in the middle

Wow, that’s shocking. Somewhere between a 90 seat LNP majority and a 90 seat Labor majority. Who’d have guessed it?

I reckon Labor gets around 71 seats. Libs probly 67.

I’m with Bazza. Some of the stuff mentioned here is just racist. 6.5% of Palestinians are Christian, but 100% are treated as if they’re a cultural block following Juche Thought Of Dear Leader Arafat!

It’s getting a bit much, especially when people talk of Broady and such as ‘the Muslim vote will do x’. It’s lazy stereotyping at best, and racist profiling at worst. If commentators can knock it off it would be appreciated. It’s quite offensive. Cultural background is just one of the factors that determine vote. Just because your parents are Catholic doesn’t mean you’re going to vote DLP. People who think they can make wide sweeping predictions on what a community will do because part of that community has some loose racial homogeneity are not far from making the step that racial groups can be stereotyped. From there it’s just a short stroll to making communities collectively accountable for the behaviour of a fractional minority. I don’t think I need to spell out where this leads, especially with liberal democracy already being fragile.

So, yeah, ixnay on the cultural stereotyping please. For everyone’s sake.

I’ve been saying for ages I think it’s ridiculous that people are treating the Jewish community as a singular, single-issue voting bloc. It’s the main reason I’ve maintained the position that the focus on the Jewish vote is way overblown. There isn’t “a” Jewish vote.

I understand what you mean, and I know all too well the impacts of stereotyping. And I agree that saying “the muslim vote will do x” or “the Chinese vote will do x” can be offensive and patronising. There’s usually other factors, such as social class and age, that more heavily influence peoples’ votes.

However, often, voters from a certain ethnic and/or religious group will vote a certain way or shift according to an issue. For example, areas in Australia with large Chinese populations shifted strongly away from the Liberals in 2022, and it’s widely accepted that this is because of Morrison’s frosty relations with China. Areas with large muslim populations shifted away from Labour in the UK, and towards pro-Palestine independents, and this is widely accepted as being due to the war in Gaza. Therefore, I don’t think it’s racist to say that a many Chinese voters shifted towards Labor in 2022, or that many Muslim voters abandoned Labour in the UK.

I do totally agree that you can’t stereotype all voters of a certain ethnicity or religious background as a bloc that votes a certain way, especially if you’re just making assumptions or predictions. But I do think that you can point out voting patterns and trends amongst certain ethnic or religious communities – IF it’s justified with statistics and evidence.

To clarify, I don’t think we should be saying that an entire community will vote a certain way, but I think that if there’s evidence behind it, it’s alright to point out a trend in voting with people of a certain community.

As an example, it’s lazy stereotyping to say something like “the Chinese community voted for Labor in 2022”, but I think that because there’s evidence to show a trend, it’s okay to say that “areas with large Chinese-Australian communities had a swing towards Labor in 2022”. Just my two cents anyways.

Most Jewish ridings in Canada

Thornhill (31%): 15.6 conservative margin -> 35.2 margin
Mount Royal (25%): 33.3 lib margin -> 10.2 margin
Eglinton-Lawrence (22%): 12.1 lib -> 0.9 margin
Toronto St Paul (15%): 23% lib -> 28.9 margin
York Centre (14%): 9.5% lib -> 12.1 conservative margin (FLIPPED)
Outremont (11%): 30.4 % lib -> 42.4 margin

Do we have data on left-handed voters?

Those with red hair?

Those with younger siblings?

Those who voluntarily downloaded a U2 album in the last ten years?

Will all prematurely balding voters swing behind the coalition?

South Sydney Rabbitoh fans must be voting as a bloc as well.

See how ridiculous most of this sounds?

I agree 100% with Lachlan. The amount of armchair analysis that gets lazily tossed into the great void and slides past as quesi-factual and accepted as gospel is ridiculous.

OT really see because Labor ahs let down the Jewish community.
Last I ch d cked they didn’t alienate red haired voters or balusters or rabbitohs fans

AA is correct that ethnic voters can switch. In 1970’s when “Friends of Free China” and the CHICOM front the Communist Party ( Marxist Leninist) were active Chinese ethnic voters strongly supportive of the DLP, post 1974 they moved to supporting the Liberals now with a greater percentage of them having stronger family ties to Red China they know that their actions here can have consequences for family in China and that CHICOM agencies keep their eye on their political activity in Australia it is apparent that they are supportive of ALP.

@ Andrew Jackson
What is the DLP position on the Israel Palestine conflict

One of the problems I think is that things like CRT are encouraging people to think of themselves as their ‘race’ first and individuals second. I think it is racist, but that is the zeitgeist of the times we live in. A lot of political scientists love it because it makes their job a lot easier, and a lot of party insiders love it because it is a lot easier to build relationships with ‘community leaders’ who can then ‘tell everyone’ how to vote rather than build large broad class based appeal.

In the specific case of Israel/Hamas, I don’t think, even where it is a priority for voters, it will play out at all the way a lot are thinking.

I agree with Mostly Labor Voter.

And I have to say that as one of the 90% of Macnamara electors who is not Jewish, and for whom Gaza/Israel wouldn’t even rank in my top 50 most important issues, the constant focus on “the Jewish vote” and the “Gaza effect” as the defining issue of Macnamara is getting really tiresome.

Ok, so Macnamara is 10% Jewish.

I’m pretty sure it would also be close to 10% LGBTQI, and the opposition leader is waging a “war on woke”.

It is over 50% renters, and there is a rental crisis.

But according to most of the commentariat, the only important issue is that a conflict 14,000km away is going to make the 10% Jewish community swing as a singular bloc. It’s ridiculous.

Guess what? There are LGBTQI Jewish people. There are non-Zionist Jewish people. There is a Jewish Greens senate candidate who lives in Macnamara. There are Jewish Greens groups. There are Jewish renters who care more about housing than Gaza. There is no one “Jewish vote”. The 10% of the electorate who identify as Jewish are a diverse community with diverse views and different priorities.

Yes, there will be a sub-section of a sub-section of that 10% whose vote might swing to the Liberals over Israel/Gaza. How big will that cohort be? Probably not huge when you consider the only people who could swing to the Liberals in the first place are people who didn’t already vote for them, and the postal + Caulfield vote is where the Liberal vote is already highest.

Putting the overhyped issue to the side, here is my final prediction for the seat now that we have some new state breakdowns from Resolve and probably a more accurate state polling average on PB, that’s based on actual polling and historical results, as well as how the campaign on the ground will likely impact them.

First, I’ll start with the Liberal primary vote. In every election between 2007-19 (except 2016), the Liberal primary vote was between 1.2% and 1.8% lower than the overall VIC Coalition primary, averaging a -1.5% variance.

2016 the Liberals overperformed with a +0.1% variance (popularity of Turnbull / unpopular Danby); then in 2022 they underperformed with a -4.1% variance which I put down to a terrible candidate, running dead, and also quite a big right-wing minor party vote.

With the combination of a decent candidate/campaign this time but unpopular leader again, I think the Liberal primary vote will revert to their average of around -1.5% compared to the VIC Coalition primary.

The PB polling average shows the Coalition primary vote currently at 35.3% in Victoria (down from around 38-39% earlier this year).

For that reason, I will start with predicting a Liberal primary vote of around 34% (+5 from 2022) which factors in roughly a 2.5% statewide swing + a 2.5% swing based on candidate/local issues, and this would be in line with historical trends as well as the 2019 result where their Macnamara primary was -1.2% compared to the statewide result.

This leads to the ‘Other’ vote. There is no AJP (at least half of their vote will probably just be added to the Greens’ primary) and no UAP. Also, J B Myers doesn’t have the donkey vote so will go backwards too. I think the 9.5% “Other” vote will reduce to under 6% given there are only 3 candidates.

So that means we have:
LIB 34
Other 6

This leaves 60% between Labor & Greens which is where the real battle is, because I don’t believe the Liberals can win with a 34% primary vote (36% would be the minimum to get close to a 50/50 GRN v LIB contest in my view, more likely 37% to be genuinely competitive).

I think Labor & Greens will be VERY close on primary votes. I think the Greens vote will pretty much just hold up around 30% (they got 29.7%) and Labor will cop maybe a -2 swing back to around 30%.

So I’m going to call that a 30-30 tie, with each around +/- 0.2%.

Primary votes:
LIB 34
ALP 30
GRN 30
Other 6

2 of the 3 others are right-wing and I think their preferences will favour the Libs pretty heavily. JB Myers is a rogue cooker with zero campaign or profile, and no longer has the donkey vote, but ‘Independent’ (in an era where that’s popular due to the teals) may win him some votes from people more likely to preference the Greens.

So I think that Other will split: 3.5 to LIB, >1.5 to GRN, <1 to ALP.

3CP:
LIB 37.5, GRN 31.5, ALP 31.0

But, ALP & Green are so close it's genuinely 50/50 and could go either way, so I will provide both 2CP (GRN v LIB) and 2PP (ALP v LIB) predictions:

2PP – ALP 58, LIB 42.
2CP – GRN 53, LIB 47.

@Real Talk that completely disregards the facts that ethnic and religious groups have their own unique identities and communities. As a person of colour, I am part of multiple. I can tell you right now that a lot of them do care about certain issues. And most of my friends from other multicultural communities will tell you the exact same thing.

Yes, ethnicity and religion is not the only defining feature people have in determining their vote. And often, people from certain ethnic communities will overwhelmingly vote a certain way because of other factors like class and wealth. But in such a multicultural country, it can still be a factor, especially when you have a lot of 1st gen migrants who form such close-knit communities. I would be interested to see what other people of colour have to say.

@Mostly Labor Voter “insiders love it because it is a lot easier to build relationships with ‘community leaders’ who can then ‘tell everyone’ how to vote rather than build large broad class based appeal.” I do understand what you mean, but the reality is we do have a lot of multicultural communities, made up mostly of 1st gen migrants, who share common beliefs and will often vote in a certain way.

Also @Real Talk I actually find it quite offensive that you would compare ethnic groups to factors like red haired people and balding people. As far as I know, people with different hair colours don’t have their own communities, where they connect with each other in a country that can often ostracise them.

A A, if you are genuinely offended, then I offer my apologies.

I sought not to make a comparison with any ethnic group, but to mock those who seek to use such groups to make grand, sweeping generalisations about elections that fit their own particular narratives.

I abhor racism on any level and will try to do better.

That’s alright, I accept your apology. And I do understand the point you were trying to make.

Reading it again from that context, I can definitely understand what you mean. And I agree that there are some people who use ethnic and religious groups to make generalised election swings, and that is purely lazy.

While there are ethnic and religious groups that often lean one way or another (e.g Chinese and Jews leaning Liberals, Muslims leaning Labor) I think there are multiple factors for this not just their ethnicity or religion.

Here on the Gold Coast the Chinese and Japanese community is quite middle or upper-class with lots of Japanese businessmen (though they aren’t always citizens), so they lean more towards the LNP. In contrast, Lakemba, a Muslim-majority suburb in Sydney, is working-class which explains its heavy lean towards Labor.

Religion is also a completely different thing to culture but it can be intertwined. When we speak of Lebanese people it’s important to recognise the difference between Maronites (Catholics; ~40% of Lebanon’s population but most Lebanese Australians) and Muslims (~60% of Lebanon’s population, split between Sunnis and to a lesser extent Shia), as even if they don’t practise their religion as much they still have different cultural practises (Lebanese Catholics eat pork, drink alcohol, celebrate Christmas and most don’t practise circumcision, for example). This also affects voting patterns and political views. Lebanese Christians would be more pro-Israeli than Lebanese Muslims, for example.

@ Nether Portal
i have reponded in the general thread to you and keen to hear your views.
https://www.tallyroom.com.au/58279

YouGov MRP has the Greens going backwards here, and not doing so well in Wills, Cooper etc. Maybe there really is a bit of a swing against the Greens in inner city Melbourne?

@ Adam
I am reluctant to make a prediction for the following reason
1. You Gov will not be able to predict if Pro-Israel Jewish voters will tactically vote Labor to keep the Greens out or are Jewish voters so hurt that they will vote Liberal and risk the Greens winning the seat
2. Yougov may not be able to predict a ALP to GRN swing among Muslims in wills. I think White Green Left voters who are Pro-Palestine are already voting Greens

I take all the MRPs with a grain of salt when it comes to the seat predictions.

They are more useful to detect broader demographic trends at a national or state level, but they miss out on local dynamics including but not limited to candidate quality and the difference in ground campaigns from seat to seat. Specifically, the Greens have poured pretty much all their Victorian resources into Macnamara & Wills and an MRP won’t really pick that up.

Macnamara also shares a lot of demographic similarities to seats like Kooyong & Goldstein, where the Greens are pretty much running dead and the teal incumbents pick up more of that vote.

The MRP had a 4.7% ‘IND’ vote for Macnamara for example. Macnamara’s only IND is a weird medical cooker with a sketchy history who will get in the 1-2% range, and in the context of an inner-city electorate that ‘IND’ vote in the MRP is probably assuming a teal-ish candidate that simply doesn’t exist.

That MRP also has a 10.1% combined vote for One Nation & Libertarian in Macnamara. That also won’t happen. So basically, I would write off that MRP as just completely missing the actual picture of the seat.

On that note too, if you do assume that the support recorded between the 3 major parties in that MRP in Macnamara does exist as a baseline for each, but the 15% ‘Other’ vote is way off and a surplus of around 9% needs to be distributed between the 3 majors:

– That 10.1% vote between PHON & Libertarian will be closer to 5%, and that 5% surplus will overwhelmingly wind up being added to the Liberal primary vote;

– That 4.7% IND vote in the MRP is probably assuming a progressive/community/teal IND that doesn’t exist, it’s a non-major progressive vote, and most of that will probably end up with the Greens

If you make those adjustments for the wacky minor votes, you end up with the Liberals maybe around 32-33, Labor remaining around 31, and the Greens probably around 29-30, with an ‘Other’ vote closer to 6%. Which isn’t too far off what I have been predicting.

But I don’t think you can read too much into those low LIB & GRN primaries in a poll that has more than 10% between PHON & Libertarian and almost 5% for a sketchy cooker IND, in an educated inner city seat, because that way overestimated minor vote does need end up somewhere else.

The UK Election You Gov MRP was very accurate with only 1-2 seats wrong. I have more faith in You Gov results than focus group seat polls.

UK is a bit different in that it’s first past the post rather than preferential, and I think the problem with this YouGov is that the options don’t appear specific to what’s on the ballot. So you have ‘IND’ picking up relatively large shares of the vote where INDs aren’t even running or it doesn’t factor in the type of IND. You have a generic ‘Other’ vote sitting at over 5% when there is actually only 1 ‘Other’ party even running that wouldn’t get close to 5%.

This is my main point above. The minor vote is probably overestimated by around 9 percentage points based on what minor options are *actually* on the ballot. So that 9% would have to end up being tacked onto the major party votes in some configuration that wouldn’t be an even split.

To be fair, weren’t Labour like 10-12 points in front? You could probably have got just an accurate result off national polls.

Yeah and picking the winner is different to getting the primary votes right too.

For the record, if Labor do make the 2CP here (which I maintain is close to a 50/50 tossup), the MRP’s prediction of a 58-42 result is probably bang on.

It’s just those primary votes in the MRP that look ridiculous when you have a 10.1% between Libertarian & One Nation in an inner-city seat, and 4.7% against an ‘IND’ who may as well be non-existent based on the type of IND they are.

I wouldn’t trust any seat-specific numbers from the YouGov poll. Take a look at the Richmond numbers for instance which are WILD.

Also:

1) They can’t even spell Labor correctly and used “Labour” in the headline of the latest poll.
2) Certain seats they have predicted to change hands but haven’t correctly updated the 2PP figures.

Amateur hour.

The other issue with MRP YouGov is that if there are two independents that might do well and more importantly diamettrically opposed such as in Monash, Calare, Bradfield or Moore it just picks up one. The headline figure is pretty damn ugly for the Libs though. Not that Labor should crow too much if they win a comfortable majority from a PV in the low 30s – it is hard to be credible from there.