mumble



WWW
  mumble

home

about

  email: elect AT
mumble.com.au

seat 2pp graphs '07

2005 WA Pendulum

Federal pendulum (old)

margins since 1983

Qld election 2004

Federal results by two party preferred

See the lemmings!

published articles

two decades of Newspolls

state votes at federal elections

Votes and seat
representation
1949 - 2001

Newspoll
preferences

Newspoll &
Morgan graphs

preferential voting

Newspoll Opposition leader approval ratings

Newspoll Opposition voting intentions

 
 

A table revisited: Two party preferred cut-off points since 1949

I've done this table before, but before the 2004 election.  As you know, five elections since 1949 have seen the winner of the two party preferred vote lose the election. We could say that in these cases the electoral terms favoured the winning side, in that they only needed less than 50% to win. 

But the terms always favour one side or another, in that the on-paper cut-off between winning and losing is never exactly 50-50. 

For example, the ALP got only 47.2% in 2004, but that doesn't mean it was 2.8% away from victory. In uniform terms, Labor would have needed another 4.4% to get a majority, ie they needed 51.6% of the vote. (I think Malcolm Mackerras calls this number the "point of pendulum", but the context is generally pre-election.) So the terms favoured the Coalition in 2004.

The table has the 23 federal elections since 1949, sorted by decreasing order of favourableness to the Coalition. It shows that 20 had terms favouring the Coalition. That is, they were able to win with less than half the vote. 

The cut-offs are shown in the two right columns. At the top, in 1955 the Coalition could have won with as little as 46.5, while at the bottom is the 1987 election which Labor won with 50.8, but could have prevailed with as little as 47.4.  The top 20 of course includes the four at which the Coalition did win with less than half - in 1954, 1961, 1969 and 1998.

Two party preferred cut-off points since 1949

  year ALP
2pp vote		 Coal
2pp vote		 ALP
seats		 Coal
seats		 Tot
seats		 Govt
maj-
ority		 winning
margin		 ALP
2pp for
change		 Coal
2pp for
change
1 1955 45.8 54.2 47 75 122 28 7.7 53.5 46.5
2 1958 45.9 54.1 45 77 122 32 7.0 52.9 47.1
3 1951 49.3 50.7 52 69 121 17 3.2 52.5 47.5
4 1949 49.0 51.0 47 74 121 27 3.3 52.3 47.7
5 1998 51.1 48.9 67 80 148 12 0.9 52.0 48.0
6 1969 50.2 49.8 59 66 125 7 1.5 51.7 48.3
7 1977 45.4 54.6 38 86 124 48 6.3 51.7 48.3
8 2004 47.3 52.7 60 87 150 24 4.4 51.6 48.4
9 1966 43.1 56.9 41 82 124 40 8.5 51.6 48.4
10 1963 47.4 52.6 50 72 122 22 4.1 51.5 48.5
11 1961 50.5 49.5 60 62 122 2 0.8 51.3 48.7
12 1954 50.7 49.3 57 64 121 7 0.5 51.2 48.8
13 1975 44.3 55.7 36 91 127 55 6.9 51.2 48.8
14 1972 52.7 47.3 67 58 125 9 1.6 51.1 48.9
15 1974 51.7 48.3 66 61 127 5 0.6 51.1 48.9
16 1983 53.2 46.8 75 50 125 25 2.2 51.0 49.0
17 1980 49.6 50.4 51 74 125 23 1.3 50.9 49.1
18 1993 51.4 48.6 80 65 147 13 0.5 50.9 49.1
19 2001 49.1 51.0 65 82 150 14 1.7 50.8 49.2
20 1996 46.4 53.6 49 94 148 40 3.9 50.3 49.7
21 1984 51.8 48.2 82 66 148 16 2.2 49.6 50.4
22 1990 49.9 50.1 78 69 148 8 1.4 48.5 51.5
23 1987 50.8 49.2 86 62 148 24 3.4 47.4 52.6

The three which favoured Labor - including 1990, when they won with 49.9 - are shown at the bottom of the table. They were all during the Hawke government. Incumbency is obviously a big factor. 

The big question is: what will Labor need this year? That's impossible to know. On paper (ie, the 2004 result plus redistributions) the number is about 51.5. (It did go down to 50.6 after redistribution, but Peter Andren's decision to leave the HoR changed the equation.) But that doesn't mean the election will wash through like that.

Probably once again the terms will favour the Coalition somewhat, mainly because they're in government and can rain pork onto the marginals. 

But with fair boundaries since the early 1980s, the Coalition's natural advantage has depleted. And incumbency doesn't always guarantee favourable terms: note Paul Keating's two elections, in 1993 (no 18) and 1996 (no 20).

.