Macnamara – Australia 2025

I cant see the Libs winning this anyway. Still a green gain

Also, I feel like the final list of candidates was a factor.

There was really nobody that Burns could put above the Greens without controversy anyway:
– Libertarians are more right-wing than Liberals
– One Nation are more right-wing than Liberals
– John Myers is a disgraced doctor, suspended for sexual offences

If he preferenced any one of them above the Greens he would cop blowback from progressives. Which would have given him no choice but to put the Greens second, and that would have been a much worse look than burying them around the middle of the ballot below other progressive parties like AJP and Legalise Cannabis.

Josh Burns’ partner is probably the most prominent AJP member in Victoria (Georgie Purcell) so that may have been why AJP sat out of the seat as their preferences overwhelmingly flow to the Greens.

I have a feeling the lack of progressive or centrist candidates to put above the Greens may have been the catalyst for the decision. It was basically put the Greens or Liberals second, not a decision they would want to make.

This time around, the Greens will probably get the weakest preference flow from the minor candidates though.

Perhaps the decision was taken by Burns personally out of his own conscience and was not a strategic decision. After his office was vandalised and sprayed with anti-semitic slogans by apparent Greens supporters who can blame him.

Yeah the Liberals aren’t getting a +12% 2CP swing here even with an open ticket vs the Greens.

In Prahran which has had very similar primaries & 3CPs to Macnamara over the last decade, the Liberals scraped through by <1000 votes in the absence of Labor with an ex-Labor candidate's HTVC putting them second and getting 70% of his preferences.

Labor preferences will still flow more to the Greens than Liberals (outside Caulfield), and the polling trends that has seen Dutton's approval and the Liberal primary vote decline nationally will make a significant swing to the Liberals especially difficult in a seat like this.

A month or two ago, I would have thought an open ticket could be closer to a 50/50 GRN/LIB contest but not so much with the way the trend is headed. They would probably need a primary vote north of 37 which seems very unlikely now.

@ Trent
Outside Jewish Labor voters I don’t see any other Labor voters prefencing the Libs over Greens.
There aren’t many Christian conservatives in this seat and if there were any I don’t think they will vote for Labor in their first place. No real DLP demographic here

Labor running an open ticket here is both a surprise and not a surprise. It’s weird that they going to have preferences (if they get excluded in the count) potentially split between the conservative Liberals, mainly around Caulfield and Port Melbourne, and the progressive Greens especially around St Kilda and Southbank. But on the other hand, the concern that the Greens are ‘anti-Semitic’ predominantly among Jewish and Zionist Labor voters, and the attacks Josh Burns has had, I’m not too shocked, but I do think it could be a bad move for them and it could hand the Greens or even the Liberals the seat.

With the number of candidates and the quality of them (aka anyone other than the three majors are complete cookers and tossers of the worst kind), the key for Labor now is to finish in either 1st place or 2nd place for an easy win on either Liberal or Green preferences. I think as long as Labor can hold its current vote with minimal movements to Liberals or a swing away from the Greens (of even 1% or something) they’ll easily win.

Having said that, a win from 3rd place on primaries isn’t impossible with the bunch of ‘other’ candidates (if one can use that expression)’ preferences likely favouring Labor/Libs over the Greens which can help them usurp the Greens on 3CP if the Liberals finish first, but if the Greens are the ones who finish first then Labor loses this to the Greens.

I agree Nimalan.

I think the win probabilities have gone from probably 49% Green, 49% Labor, 2% Liberals if Labor ran a traditional HTVC, to around 55% Greens, 35% Labor, 10% Liberal with an open ticket. Basically increased chances for both GRN and LIB at Labor’s expense.

@Tommo9, I think the Liberals are certain to finish first, the two big questions are:

– Will their PV be high enough to win a 2CP? (I very much doubt it)

-What will the gap between ALP and Greens be for second, you’re right that without AJP the Greens will get the least minor preferences, so so I’d say the Greens need to clear Labor by between 1-2% at least on primary votes to make the 2CP.

Greens are actually able to do alright compared to Labor on right wing minor party preferences. The problem for Labor is that right wing voters just preferences Lib first, and than the Greens get the anti-majors voters. Labor is often the 2nd choice.

Look at Griffith, off a 5.73% One Nation and UAP vote, Greens gained 1.78% compared to 0.77% for Labor. In the seat of Brisbane, Greens gained 786 votes over Labor with Animal Justice voters but at the 3CP they were 1809 votes ahead of ALP. Mainly from gains from the UAP vote. Seems the problem is a lot of right wing voters preferences are 1. Lib 2. ALP 3. GRN but their vote just gets stuck in the Lib pile.

In Macnamara Greens gained 1371 votes over Labor from preferences, but only 521 were from the Animal Justice party. It was actually the UAP where the Greens gained a bunch of votes over Labor.

It’ll be interesting if the Greens are able to come up with some sort of message over the preference decision that not only help them here, but other Labor vs Greens seats.

A very conservative 60% ALP->GRN pref flow still would of got Greens about 53% TPP in 2022. I get 47% in 2019 which is probably the high point of what the Libs can get in this seat again.

The more I think about it, the more baffling a decision it is.

They’re expecting people who were switching their vote from ALP to LIB over the Middle East are going to be won back by an open ticket? When the Libs are going to take a much stronger stance and put them last?

All they’ve done is given the Greens free ammo that they absolutely will use that they’re the ones to keep Dutton out. That, I can see winning some ALP-GRN swing voters over.

Trent, agree with something along the lines of your win probabilities.

Yep. This decision pretty much benefit everyone but Josh Burns. They have upset the Greens and given them a perfect opportunity to campaign on the this in places like Wills. And have made Liberals more viable in Macnamara.

This decision has pleased those who would have never voted for Labor to begin with.

This was an extremely dumb move by Labor, I was initially confident that Labor would hold here but this could very well help get the Greens over the line.

@SpaceFish
Agree, but Labor are in a bind here because of the national publicity over what The Greens would expect from Labor in the event of a minority government. As far as support for the Greens in Macnamara, it’s an authoritarian outfit, might have some appeal for the Refuseniks who moved there from the Soviet Union in the late 70s and 80s.

I don’t think it is a dumb move at all. Are you really expecting to say to people ‘vote for us so you don’t get the Greens’ while at the same time directing your preferences to the Greens? Make it make sense, please?. Personally, I think this was the only chance Labor had of holding on here, trying to keep Lib/Lab swing voters onside.
I know this is a psephology website, but I think everyone here massively overestimates the rate of tactical voting.

So far the reaction seems to be that Burns is copping it from both sides.

Jewish organisations (and many Jewish commenters on social media) attacking him for not putting them last.

Greens already on the attack, and as ChrisW says about giving them ammo to say they’re the only ones keeping Dutton out, the Greens’ Macnamara campaign slogan was literally already “Vote Greens to keep Dutton out and get Labor to act”.

This plays right into that because now they can say Labor are NOT trying to keep Dutton out, and hours after the news broke they already posted “If you want to keep Dutton out, the only progressive vote in Macnamara is 1 Greens”.

Honestly, I don’t feel like the open ticket has actually saved any votes. It’s just copped a backlash from both sides.

@Trent I think at this point Labor has realised that they’re pretty much stuck between a rock and a hard place. They issue an open ticket and risk losing out both sides and the seat ends up going Green over a leakage of preferences and primaries, but if they issue a standard HTVC (with Greens 2nd) then the Jewish community will flap their gums and get their knickers in a twist whilst voting Liberal 1 whilst the Greens in Prahran, St Kilda, Port Melbourne, Albert Park etc aren’t guaranteed to vote Labor and will probably still vote Green anyway.

It’s as if they can’t win even though it’s not Burns’ fault for the situation he finds himself in, I guess Labor just decided to YOLO it and take a bet each way with an open HTVC. He still has time to backflip on it though so hope they take it.

I strongly disagree that anyone will think a vote for Burns is a vote for Dutton given the Coalition is Labor’s main opponent nationally, and quite clearly a vote for Labor is not a vote for the Liberals regardless of the preference machinations of this individual seat. The national campaign really trumps all this.

It’s not like Labor is preferencing the Liberals, it’s open. If people don’t want the Liberals to win they shouldn’t preference them. Simple as that.

I still think the easiest thing for him would have been just to run a normal HTVC simply based on the fact there was probably only around 3-4% of the entire electorate (Jewish Labor voters) that he would have had to explain that decision to, and it’s an easy group to communicate to because of the tight-knit and relatively self contained community.

I get MLV’s point that it’s hard to say “vote for us to keep the Greens out” while preferencing them, but it’s such a tiny segment of the electorate that he would have had to explain that to, with pretty good channels to do so.

I also think a LOT of the pressure for Burns to run an open ticket (or preference the Greens last) actually came from people who were never going to vote for him anyway, Liberal interests.

Instead, I don’t think his decision really gained much with that 3-4% of Jewish Labor voters but he has the roughly 55-60% of progressive voters in the seat now hearing everyone else’s mostly negative interpretations of it through attacks from both the Greens and Liberals.

I think this open ticket is a bad own-goal from Labor. They’ve just awakened the chance for the Liberal winning the seat, which significantly weakens the argument to that hardline anti-Green voters should vote 1 Labor strategically!

This open ticket could push Labor voters *both* ways.

@Adam, I agree but it’s more about optics.

The Greens aren’t saying a vote for Burns is a vote for Dutton, but saying Burns would rather see Dutton win than a progressive, which puts Burns’ progressive values under scrutiny.

He only needs to lose 300 votes to the Greens fall out of the 2CP (probably less since Windsor was added) and he’s unnecessarily opened himself up to an attack.

Again, I think it comes down to the potential impact on the Jewish vote being overstated. The electorate is 10% Jewish and they overwhelmingly vote Liberal anyway. He probably only had to convince about the 1-2% who are Jewish ALP/LIB swing voters.

Now he’ll have to fend off Greens attacks targeted at the 55-60% who voted ALP or Greens outside the Jewish community.

Well no one can argue there is any danger of a formal ‘Labor-Green’ government now can they? Is that possibly what some of this is about – creating distance on a more national level as well as the local implications for this seat?

It’s true that Burns has been copping it from both sides but that might just help him if anything, as he managed to achieve what he sought in putting distance between himself and the Greens. Positioning himself in the middle between the Greens and Liberals is perhaps the optimal play as opposed to being seen as “left” alongside the Greens vs the Liberals, even in an electorate as generally left wing as this one. I think in times of uncertainty people do prioritise the “safe pair of hands”, like how Mark Carney in Canada is riding high with even NDP voters flocking to him.

Even though the Jewish population is relatively small part of the population, I think there may be some solidarity of the non-Jewish population with the Jewish population, particularly in light of the anti-semitism in the area (vandalism of Burns’ electorate office, the incident at the synagogue etc). The Jewish community is very prominent in and around Caulfield so even if you’re not Jewish, there is a good chance your neighbour is. These things clearly have an impact on the whole community and its social cohesion.

I think one thing I take issue with is that it just gets accepted as “fact” that the Greens are responsible for any of the anti-Semitism.

There’s nothing to link the Greens to what happened at Burns’ office. And thinking locally in particular, a lot of the anti-Semitism has been from far-right white supremacist groups. From a neo-Nazi gathering at Elwood beach, to swastikas being drawn on signs, to clearly anti-Jewish (not anti-Israel) graffiti, flyers that say “Australia for the white man” put in letterboxes, and more broadly in Melbourne, the disgusting neo-nazis on the steps of Parliament with anti-Jewish signs.

To try to link an increase in neo-Nazi, white supremacist activity to the Greens is insane. As if any of those groups would vote Greens, or would even have been inspired by the Greens’ pro-Palestine stance!

Meanwhile One Nation are running in the seat, and there are Jewish groups actually criticising Labor for not issuing a HTVC that had the Greens below One Nation. What?? Yeah the Greens might be pro-Palestine but the types of people in black masks and neo-Nazi symbols at Elwood beach are much more likely to be aligned with One Nation than the Greens.

I feel like the Greens have been made a convenient scapegoat for an increase in far-right anti-Semitism, which they absolutely oppose.

(That isn’t to say there isn’t also far-left Anti-Semitism too but it’s from more Socialist Alliance activist types, not the Macnamara Greens!)

Now that the ballot order has Burns at number 1, would the Donkey Vote help his narrow margin? The AEC never gives out the actual numbers of Donkeys (as it’s hard to distinguish them from legit choices), but we could make a reasonable guess? Interested in your thoughts.

Only scrutineered ALP votes at Stale Pale booths, donkey votes there are unusual occurrences. I wonder if it was ever common or just a convenient excuse when a member or candidate lost?
Albo in the carbird seat atm, could imagine him blaming Cookers if he got beat?

Burns being #1 plus running an open ticket that just says to put him 1 and number all boxes may lead to a small number of Labor voters just numbering 1-6 down the ballot.

@Trent: “There was really nobody that Burns could put above the Greens without controversy anyway.” Well said. If Labor issue a normal HTV, they have no choice but to put the Greens second. There are some vocal Labor voices calling for Labor voters to preference Greens below the Liberals or even put the Greens last from people including Michael Danby, Tony Lupton and Philip Dalidakis. Burns might worry that some Labor volunteers would refuse to hand out HTV cards that put the Greens second. What’s worse, if Burns issues a normal HTV card that puts the Greens second, there could be a risk that Danby, Lupton or Dalidakis would mobilise supporters to hand out their own versions of HTV cards that put the Greens last, which may help the Liberals more than open HTV cards. This would cause greater controversies and divisions within Labor that would further undermine his campaign.

That’s why the decision of running an open ticket is more likely to be a compromise decision made by Josh Burns to avoid controversies and divisions within his own party and get more volunteers to hand out Labor HTV cards, with no intention by him to encourage voters to preference the Liberals over the Greens.

The coalition have no hope against Labor here or in any or the 3 corner comtests.(Ryan, Brisbane, Griffith) there only hope is a lib v grncontest due to weaker preference flows. The same for the nats in Richmond

@joseph the teals have the same problem

Peter Dutton has visited here today, both leaders are hitting a lot of seats in Victoria over the last couple of days.

Dutton visiting Macnamara won’t help. Saulo needs to focus on his own CV and distancing himself from Dutton to get the 37%+ PV he needs for a shot at winning.

Also has been confirmed by Josh Burns on his Instagram that he will be running an open-ticket for Macnamara.

@Trent – I feel that Saulo needs to mirror what Rachel Westaway did in the Prahran by-election. She ran a strong campaign and what sealed the deal for her was she largely distanced herself from the right-wing leader, Brad Battin, even her how-to-vote card didn’t include a picture of Battin, enhancing the effect that she was a moderate Liberal and not associated with the broader Liberals. We saw how the played out.

@ James
Libs cannot win Macnamara. Prahran they actually had Tony Lupton giving preferences and there was a low turnout plus it was a by-election a vote for Saulo is a vote for Dutton and will help put him in Kirribilli if the good people of Macnamara want a Moderate Liberal govrnement sometime in the future it would be best to put a 1 next to Josh Burns this will be best bet to deny the Greens the seat and the more seats Labor wins the more likely that Dutton can be ousted sometime before 2028.

* Libs cannot win Macnamara with Dutton as leader although they could potentially with a moderate leader.

@Nether Portal and Trent. Your posts about the differences between Hawthorn and Richmond, and Windsor and Toorak are very interesting.

To my knowledge, historically Richmond and other places that were more flat ended up being industrial land. On the flip side, anywhere with a bit of a rise had a view, the possibility of a sea breeze in summer (at least early on, before it became too dense), and had the big advantage of distance from the smoke and smell of industries like tallow works and tanneries.

I suspect that these differences made the land prices substantially different despite being geographically pretty close, and that led to people self-selecting which side of the Yarra they wanted to be on.

When inner Melbourne deindustrialised from the 1970’s onwards, I think that the feeling of suburban tribalism strengthened in part as a reaction to the job losses.

Maybe this process played out similarly in Sydney and Brisbane as well? I don’t know these cities well, so I can’t comment on them.

And in the current housing bubble, let’s be honest – the majority of people living in these spectacularly expensive suburbs are choosing to do so, either because they’re living in an (inherited) family home or because they can earn enough to buy or rent there.

Some observations:

Josh Burns’ open ticket is worded in such a way that says “Start here” with 1 in the first box, and then “you must number your ballot from 1-6”. This for some people could imply just putting 1 to 6 in ballot order given Burns is 1. Which would put the Greens above the Liberals.

Also at a candidate forum last night – the second of which the Liberals candidate was invited to but didn’t attend – Josh Burns copped some heat about not preferencing the Greens.

He spoke a lot throughout the forum about how we absolutely can’t risk a Dutton government and how destructive the Liberals were last time, as well as having shared values with the Greens. And then a guy in the audience asked why, if as he says Dutton must be kept out, is he running an open ticket instead of directing preferences against them?

Then the very next question was a woman who echoed the same, but brought up how at last week’s Jewish candidate forum he said to them that “the worst outcome” would be the Greens winning, but now to this audience he’s saying the worst outcome would be the Liberals, and questioned why he would tell the other forum the Greens would be worse than the Liberals.

Burns really struggled to answer both questions. Other audience members accused him of telling Jewish voters to put the Greens last even though it’s not on the card, to which he had to say “I’m not Tony Lupton, I haven’t done that”.

Sonya Semmens was short and sweet and got a big round of applause – “I want you to vote 1 Greens and 2 Labor to keep Dutton out, and that’s what will be on my card”.

The whole interaction looked very uncomfortable for Burns and I feel like he’s stuck between trying to please two different audiences who want the opposite, which is why he ran an open ticket but it doesn’t seem to be pleasing anyone.

A very small percentage of the electorate attend those events, and those who do have mostly made up their minds regardless of what they will tell you. All I’ve gained from the Josh Burns HTV saga is that there’ll probably be a slightly higher informality rate of votes cast here than on average for Melbourne metro seats.

I lived in this electorate for ten years, until recently, and my read is that the Greens vote has hit its ceiling. Additionally, although many of the Greens voters are committed, it doesn’t have the same feel as the inner North seats where “vote Greens to get Labor out” is dogma. I agree with the previous commenter that the kinds of people who attend candidate forums are a tiny, and very politically engaged, minority. Burns is in a devilish situation of trying to play both sides, yes, but he’s also been given astonishing- and clearly deliberate – leeway by Albanese over the past three years. He’s been able to publicly criticise the party on numerous issues, to forge his own path, and indeed to publicly date a pro-Palestine state MP while maintaining his qualified support of Israel. He has a strong presence across the community and is very quick to jump onboard local issues (Council considering selling off childcare centres, gymnastics clubs being kicked out of their rental space) to target centrist and middle-class voters. Meanwhile, although of course I don’t think the Greens are actually responsible for much (if any) of the anti-Semitic issues in the area, it hasn’t helped their cause. Macnamara doesn’t have the ethnic diversity of those other Labor/Green competitive areas and I don’t know if Palestine gets people going here in the same way it does in those seats.

My suspicion is that the Greens vote will stagnate, maybe even decrease by a tiny bit, and very possibly so will the Libs’. This is the third time in a row they’ve run a candidate who doesn’t have any real community presence. (In 2019 and 2022, a local Councillor with a strong profile ran for preselection but lost out internally to more conservative candidates; I don’t know if he ran again this year.) I get why they’re running Benson Saulo, as the Jewish community in the area has a strong and loud affection for Indigenous Australians; much like Julian Leeser, there’s a strong identification with what they view as their indigenous right to Israel. But Saulo’s biggest news headline is that he’s a former Green and fringe party member, and his rapid move to the conservative right looks opportunistic (and too linked to Dutton for this left-wing area). Not that the Liberals could win, but there’s a risk that they haemorrhage even a small amount of remaining centrist voters across to Burns, to help him shore up against any losses to the Greens.

Labor are now also running different senate HTVs from the rest of the state here and in Goldstein. Macnamara with the Greens of Vic Socialists outside their 6; in Goldstein, just the Socialists excluded.

For the well-engaged cohort that Burns is supposedly trying to win back, I think this would come across as duplicitous and sneaky? How could someone in Caulfield feel reassured by Labor’s open ticket, when down the road in Carnegie they have Greens at 3 and VS at 6 (for the same set of senate candidates)?

The Greens have run with it as expected. The whole idea has pleased nobody.

The best response Josh Burns could’ve come up with would’ve been ‘Because in this democracy, you decide how to preference your candidates according to your own circumstances. Vote for me, and you decide the rest’. That would’ve shut the gobs of the Greens and Jewish community alike from talking about this sort of thing about ‘betrayal’ and stuff. Simple as that and not controversial.

@Tommo9, to his credit I think that is Burns’ angle. But he’s still copping the backlash from both flanks anyway. Even if it is just from the rusted on Greens / Libs and not the swing voters, it may influence the broader narrative.

@Sammy, I agree that the Greens support is probably at a ceiling around the 28-30% range. The biggest risk for Burns is not an ALP to GRN swing but a swing to the Libs, even just 3-4%, putting him below the Greens. I think the more progressive ALP/GRN suburbs don’t have much reason to change their 2022 vote, the risk is more the ALP/LIB swing voters.

@ChrisW, that’s great new info for me. Had no idea. It could definitely come across dodgy but not sure how many swing voters would be engaged enough to notice.

I do think Animal Justice’s decision not to run in a seat they usually do way above average in is due to Burns & Purcell’s relationship. AJP would usually preference the Greens. That would be awkward here…

@ Trent
I think it may be the case that Burns was forced to do this. I think Jewish community leaders may have warned him privately they were not willing to encourage tactical voting for him if he had a HTVC that preferenced Greens. There maybe things that we dont know know that Josh Burns does know. I think given Dutton currently tanking and yesterday’s debate performance when he said if he is unsure about Climate change i cant see non Jewish voters in Macnamara swinging to Dutton. What is different about Macnamara compared to say Wills or Cooper is that it has a lot of soft tealish Greens voters especially in the Parks, the parts of Melbourne 3004 still in the seat, South Bank, Beacon Cove and non Jewish residents in the Glen Eira parts who may have voted for Turnbull in 2016 who may actually like Albo and see Josh Burns as a pragmatic centrist politician. The Real question which i dont know and i think it would be great if someone from the Jewish community does say come on tallyroom and say if are they so angry with Albo/Labor that they are willing to risk a Greens MP? I dont want to speak for another minority group but that is the millon dollar question.

In Macnamara I am voting for the Greens for the first time ever. I often vote for women though as I want to see more of them in all Parliaments. The Green booklet-like leaflet was comprehensive and she is from Middle Park Vic where I live.

How can any party or candidate support the current murderous neo fascist government in Israel? While Burns is generally a moderate politically he still supports Israel.

@Adrian Jackson:
It’s a tough neighbourhood. Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia are ruled by mafias, with their secret police and torture chambers.
That’s Hamas ruled Gaza right now, speak out, get tortured and murdered.

@Adrian that booklet-like leaflet is actually one of the best pieces of campaign material I have seen in an election. It was simple to digest but at the same time very detailed, well explained, and outlined a lot of very tangible benefits that I think most people would be onboard with.

Also it comes across as very much the opposite of the so called “extreme” allegations being made by Danby & Lupton’s lobby group.

I don’t think anyone especially the Jewish voters are gonna be fooled by labor’s open ticket in Macnamara especially because in Caufoeld which is in a variety or seats labor are preferencong the greens. And their neighbours friends and family would be telling them this. For that reason this is gonna be a Labor loss and greens gain. I’d say there will be alot of donkey go to g given burns is at the top of the 6 candidate ticket. And this will help the greens. Greens gain.

I’m not sure why people are still worked up about this. Yes it’s different to what’s usually been done but having said that, even if Labor preferenced the Greens over the Liberals, it’s not going to guarantee that people outside Caulfield will vote Labor to keep Dutton out and they might still lose to the Greens with it. Whereas the open ticket, as much as it is unconventional and certainly risky itself, it gives people the choice to choose. How they do it is up to them, why should anyone care about what the other side chooses anyway? Let the people decide.

Maybe they should do that everywhere