Victoria confounds Liberal hopes of election revival, swinging even further to Labor
Fears of a Labor bloodbath in Victoria in the federal election were utterly confounded, with the Liberals recording a statewide swing against them and the party all but certain to lose several seats.
Late on Saturday night, according to the Australian Electoral Commission, Labor had won 23 of the state's 38 seats while the Coalition was at six – three held by the Nationals and three by the Liberals. Independents had three, with six still in doubt. The Liberals have seen a swing of nearly 2% away from them.
The Liberals had campaigned hard in the state, running advertising tying Anthony Albanese to the long-serving and and poor-polling state Labor government, led by Jacinta Allan, in the hope of clawing back outer suburban seats such as Aston, Chisholm, Dunkley and McEwen, and gaining seats such as Bruce, Hawke and Gorton.
Even senior members of Victorian Labor expected a swing away from the party of about 1.5%-2.5% – with some members of state caucus actively considering a leadership challenge against Allan if several seats were lost.
But instead there has been a swing of about 1.8% towards the party, on top of the 54.8% two-party-preferred result in 2022, itself a high watermark.
Labor is expected to hold Chisholm, Dunkley and Aston, as well as winning the seats of Deakin and Menzies from the Liberals.
In Deakin, one of the most marginal seats going into the election, Labor's Matt Gregg is expected to defeat the Coalition housing spokesperson, Michael Sukkar, while in in Menzies, Labor's Gabriel Ng is on track to take the seat from the Liberal MP Keith Wolahan.
Victorian Labor insiders claim the result in the eastern suburbs is a repudiation of the Coalition's election commitment to cut funding to the Suburban Rail Loop – one of the state government's flagship infrastructure projects, which runs through the three electorates.
In Macnamara, which stretches across Melbourne's inner bayside suburbs, Labor's Josh Burns is expected retain the seat, defying expectations a result would take days, as it was among the tightest three-cornered contests in the country in 2022.
About 10% of the electorate's population is Jewish, making it the second-largest Jewish electorate in the country. The community was angered by what it said was Labor's failure to stand firmly with Israel amid the war in Gaza, sparked by the Hamas attacks on 7 October 2023.
Burns, one of a few Jewish MPs in federal parliament, also faced a relentless campaign from Advance Australia and J-United during the campaign. But there has been a 5% swing towards him.
'I honestly didn't think this night would happen. We had blue to the right and green to the left, but the red army turned up,' Burns told party faithful at Port Melbourne Bowling Club.
'We have had a lot thrown at us and the lesson is one where you have to be true to yourself and this party.'
The Greens leader Adam Bandt suffered a 5.4% swing against him in his seat of Melbourne, leaving the seat in doubt on Saturday night. Bandt remained ahead on primary votes, but Liberal preferences were expected to flow to Labor.
Bandt did not address the swing against him when speaking to supporters, but said the party was confident it would retain between one and four MPs in the lower house. He said he was confident the Greens would retain the Queensland seat of Ryan.
The Greens were also behind in the seat of Wills late on Saturday night, despite a huge campaign mounted by the former state leader Samantha Ratnam.
'From the numbers we have tonight, we have had at least a 10% swing towards us,' Ratnam told the Greens election party in Melbourne. 'We still have a lot of counting to go – watch this space.'
The Liberals' attempt to win back ground from the teals also looked set to fail, with Amelia Hamer in Kooyong and Tim Wilson in Goldstein both behind Monique Ryan and Zoe Daniel respectively.
Speaking at Trades Hall, Allan said Victoria had yet again defied the polls.
'A lot of commentators and conservative politicians have built a career on kicking down on our state, our party and our unions – and every time we prove them wrong,' the premier said.
'The incredible results for Labor in our state aren't despite what's happening in Victoria, but because of what's happening here in Victoria.'
Tony Barry, a former senior Liberal staffer now with the political consultancy RedBridge, blamed the Liberals' poor showing in Victoria on the state branch, which has been bitterly divided since the former leader John Pesutto expelled Moira Deeming from the party room in 2023.
At the end of 2024 Deeming won her defamation action against Pesutto, who then lost the leadership of the party. She was promoted by the new leader, Brad Battin, as his 'representative to the western suburbs' days before the federal prepoll opened.
'The great problem for the Liberal party as a whole is to rebuild such a broken institution,' Barry said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
2 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
WW3 fears explained and if world is safer or more dangerous after US bombs Iran
Iranian foreign minister Abbas Aranghchi warned the Donald Trump-ordered bombing campaign would "have everlasting consequences" amid fears Tehran will carry out a strong retaliation to avoid regime collapse Donald Trump's call to bomb key nuclear sites in Iran has sparked fears Tehran could retaliate - with mounting concerns that instability in the region could spark World War Three. Over the weekend the US attacked three nuclear sites in Iran, including the deep underground Fordow facility, with President Trump claiming they had been "completely and fully obliterated." The US President ordered the strikes - dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer - after Israel carried out attacks against the country's nuclear, energy and military infrastructure last week. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Iran had been wanting to develop a nuclear weapon to threaten the Jewish-majority state, and said the strikes were to damage its nuclear programme. The International Atomic Energy Agency also found the Fordow site had enriched uranium to 83.7 per cent, which was close to the 90 per cent required to develop nuclear weapons. But Mr Netanyahu has warned of an imminent threat from Iran for decades, including him using a drawing of a bomb at a 2012 session at the United Nations to warn "by next spring" Iran would have moved onto the final stage of its enrichment programme. The Israeli leader has also called for regime change in Iran without explaining how this would take place and what the impacts of instability in the region could have. The attacks have split the American electorate, who are grappling with President Trump's move to go against his campaign promise of no more wars in the Middle East. They also have the possibility of splitting the US and its allies over what the next steps in the Middle East, with defence analyst Michael Clarke warning it could be the mark the "real end" of the Transatlantic relationship. What are the risks facing the world following the Iran bombing campaign? Cyber attacks 'likely' The US Department of Homeland Security warned on Sunday that cyber attacks against networks in the country were a distinct possibility. In an advisory shared on its national terrorism advisory system website, a Homeland Security expert said: "The ongoing Iran conflict is causing a heightened threat environment in the United States. "Low-level cyber attacks against US networks by pro-Iranian hacktivists are likely, and cyber actors affiliated with the Iranian government may conduct attacks against US networks." The department also revealed that both hacktivists and the Iranian government have previously targeted "poorly secured" US networks and internet-connected devices as part of their cyber attacks in the past. Iran out for revenge Iranian government officials primarily blame the US over the death of its general Qasem Soleimani who was killed in a drone strike near Baghdad in January, 2020. US security officials warned Iran's government held a long-standing commitment "to target" US government officials in retaliation for the attack. In a statement shared over the weekend, a Homeland Security advisory warned: "The likelihood of violent extremists in the Homeland independently mobilizing to violence in response to the conflict would likely increase if Iranian leadership issued a religious ruling calling for retaliatory violence against targets in the Homeland. "Multiple recent Homeland terrorist attacks have been motivated by anti-Semitic or anti-Israel sentiment, and the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict could contribute to US-based individuals plotting additional attacks." End of Transatlantic relationship Defence analyst Michael Clarke told The Mirror that the attacks on the nuclear facilities could spell the "real end" of the Transatlantic relationship. He added: "The politics of this will be impossible to smooth over and the lack of the common values that the Transatlantic Relationship has always been based on will from now on become very evident. "This week's NATO Summit will be the real breaking point - whatever the very short communique says." Iran's warning Following the American bombing of its nuclear sites, Iran's president Masoud Pezeshkian warned: "The Americans must receive a response to their aggression." His warning was joined by the country's foreign minister Abbas Aragchi stating the strikes would have "everlasting consequences." While Iran's capabilities to coordinate terror attacks across the Middle East has been severely dented after Israel carried out devastating strikes against its terror proxies Hamas, in Gaza, and Hezbollah, in southern Lebanon, there remains concerns its networks could inflict some significant damage on the US and its allies. Middle East 'regime change' Mr Trump's strikes have opened the door on further American involvement in the Middle East, just months after he vowed to put an end to the country's militaristic involvement in the region. The Republican even made mention of an increasingly loathed phrase in the US, namely "regime change" which invokes doomed projects to establish flourishing democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq following the 9/11 attacks. In a post shared to his social media platform TruthSocial, Mr Trump said: "It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!" The post reflects a change in tone from Mr Trump, who previously slammed both Democrats and Republicans over their support for regime change rhetoric over Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. Military bases on red alert British forces stationed across the Middle East are now on red alert for potential drone strikes from Iran, Defence Secretary John Healey warned. He added protection of UK Armed Forces was now at its "highest level" following the bombing campaign. In a column in The Telegraph, he said: "The safety of UK personnel and bases is my top priority. Force protection is at its highest level, and we deployed additional jets this week." Strait closure risks 'economic suicide' Iran has warned it could shut down a vital Middle East oil "choke point" that could send oil prices spiking across the globe. The US has warned any closure of the Strait of Hormuz would be a "terrible mistake." US Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned on Fox News: "I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them about that, because they heavily depend on the Straits of Hormuz for their oil. "If they do that, it will be another terrible mistake. It's economic suicide for them if they do it. And we retain options to deal with that, but other countries should be looking at that as well. It would hurt other countries' economies a lot worse than ours."
The Herald Scotland
4 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Trump vowed to keep US out of wars. What changed with Iran attack?
It's not clear what exact damage was done in Iran. The White House says U.S. bombers decimated three uranium enrichment facilities. What comes next is also far from certain: additional U.S. strikes, Iran's retaliation, a resumption of diplomacy, even? Is this the start of the collapse of Iran's clerical regime? Is it a historical moment akin to the breakup of the Soviet Union? What's indisputable is that one pull factor for the U.S. is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's long, complicated relationship with recent American presidents. The U.S. bombing of Iran is also the culmination of a process that traces at least as far back to the 1990s when Netanyahu, then a young lawmaker, predicted the Islamic Republic, Israel's sworn enemy, would one day either acquire, or be on the cusp of acquiring, a nuclear weapon and Israel would be forced to act - ideally with U.S. help. "Within three to five years, we can assume that Iran will become autonomous in its ability to develop and produce a nuclear bomb," Netanyahu said in 1992. His prediction was later repeated in his 1995 book, "Fighting Terrorism." Netanyahu's constant refrain: bomb Iran Netanyahu is the longest-serving Israeli prime minister in the Jewish state's history. He's occupied the role on and off for more than 17 years. In every one of those years he's sought to convince American presidents to bomb Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran insists is for civilian energy purposes only. Netanyahu has appeared at the United Nations with elaborate maps and cartoon-style drawings of bombs. He worked hard to scupper the 2015 nuclear accord between Iran and world powers that Trump exited because he said Iranian officials could not be trusted. In 2002, Netanyahu told a U.S. congressional committee that both Iraq and Iran would soon have a nuclear bomb. A year later the U.S. invaded Iraq. In 2009, he told members of Congress in private that Iran was just a year or two away from producing a nuclear weapon, according to a U.S. State Department cable released by WikiLeaks. Successive American presidents have listened and acted on Netanyahu's Iran warnings, most substantively politically in the form of the Obama administration's 2015 nuclear deal, which was designed to limit Iran's uranium enrichment in return for relief of U.S. economic sanctions on Iran. When Trump, in his first term, exited that agreement it was working in the sense that Iran was not enriching uranium at a level necessary to produce a nuclear weapon, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog. Netanyahu's public and private relationships with recent American presidents have been marked by chilly tensions and insults. In 2015, Netanyahu's spokesman apologized to former President Barack Obama. He has also clashed with former Presidents Bill Clinton and Joe Biden. Netanyahu has even annoyed Trump, although their relationship trends toward mutual lavish praise. But no American president - until now - has gone along with Netanyahu's war plans for Iran, fearing the U.S. could be dragged into a wider Middle East war. The experiences of Iraq and Afghanistan still haunt U.S. presidents. "The president more than anybody is worried about protracted military conflicts and that is not what we are getting ourselves involved in," U.S. Vice President JD Vance said on ABC's "This Week" program on June 22. Vance said the Trump administration is also not trying to force regime change in Iran. Reading Trump's Iran tea leaves Trump may also not be as risk averse to military actions as is sometimes portrayed, including by himself. In his first term, he ordered a missile attack in Syria to punish then-Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for using chemical weapons; a raid to kill ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi; and a drone attack that killed Qasem Soleimani, a senior Iranian military commander much beloved in Iran whose death led to Iranian reprisals on U.S. bases in Iraq. Also in the background: The IAEA, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, and former U.S. officials such as Dan Shapiro, U.S. ambassador to Israel during the Obama administration, say Iran's nuclear capabilities have advanced since Trump exited the nuclear deal. "Iran cannot be left with an enrichment capability, able to produce a nuclear weapon at a time of its choosing," Shapiro wrote in a recent blog post. Trump has made various comments for years that reflect that sentiment. The main thrust of his remarks in recent weeks have been to say he won't allow Iran to continue its nuclear enrichment program, and Tehran could give it up through negotiation or through what he called "the hard way." After first pushing for a diplomatic solution, Trump's tone changed after Israel on June 13 struck dozens of nuclear and military targets in Iran, killing many of Iran's military elite and senior nuclear scientists. By June 17, the president was threatening Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on social media, calling him an "easy target." See updated maps, satellite images: Iran's nuclear sites before and after Israeli attacks Trump likes a winner. He often says so himself. In the days leading up to the U.S. strike, Israel appeared to be winning. "Congratulations, President Trump, your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities with the awesome and righteous might of the United States will change history," Netanyahu said in a statement as he addressed the world on June 22 to update them on the war's latest development. He spoke in English, not Hebrew. In his own address, to the American people, Trump said, "I want to thank and congratulate Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. We worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before, and we've gone a long way to erasing this horrible threat to Israel." Not mentioned: U.S. intelligence agencies assessed earlier this year that they did not think Iran was close to building a nuclear bomb. Contributing: Francesca Chambers, Tom Vanden Brook
The Herald Scotland
4 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
From immigration to women's sports, Trump gets it right
Trump timed his missive shortly after nationwide "No Kings" protests that in part criticized his immigration agenda, as well as the chaotic and violent protests in Los Angeles this month in response to ICE raids. Opinion: Democrats scream democracy is in peril ... while proving that it's absolutely fine Liberals may be freaking out, but the reality is that Trump is following through on his promises to restore safety at the southern border and to deport as many illegal immigrants as possible. It was one of the pivotal reasons Trump won a second term. And the majority of the country is still on the president's side. Polling confirms Americans want Trump to fulfill immigration agenda Immigration remains Trump's strongest issue. A recent NBC News Decision Desk poll found that 51% of Americans approve of Trump's handling of border security and immigration; 49% disapprove. The poll was conducted while Trump was sending in the National Guard and Marines to help contain rioting in LA. Similarly, a CBS News/YouGov poll from earlier in June found the majority of Americans side with Trump's deportation agenda. In that survey, 54% said they approve of the administration's program to deport illegal immigrants, and the largest group - 42% - say these policies are making the country safer. Opinion: Hey, Democrats, LA riots make Americans like me glad Trump is president However, while 55% of those surveyed say they like Trump's deportation goals, just 44% like the way Trump is fulfilling that agenda. The gap between approval of Trump's goals versus his execution of those goals is seen in other areas, too, including the economy. Let's face it: Trump is Trump, and he's consistent in his unpredictability and bravado. Voters should have known by this point what they were getting. Yet, for the most part, he is standing firm on his immigration goals. Within weeks, Trump had effectively closed the border that former President Joe Biden had opened wide. Monthly border encounters have dropped to record lows, to fewer than 10,000 a month from more than 100,000 a year ago. That means far fewer migrants face deportation after illegally entering the United States. So while Trump is getting all the Democratic outrage, his deportation numbers as of late May remain below Biden's during a similar period of time. And former President Barack Obama - darling of the left - maintains the title of "deporter in chief." Opinion: Democrats waste $20 million to learn why they lost men. Here's my free advice. Are Democrats OK? They keep getting arrested to protest Trump. But why let facts get in the way of feelings? Through protests, riots and civil disobedience, Democrats have put their feelings on full display lately. Even public officials are getting in on the performance art. In recent weeks, a growing number of people in power have decided it is politically expedient to interfere directly with the work of immigration officers. For their disobedience, these Democrats have been handcuffed or charged, which seems to have been what they wanted in the first place. The latest example is New York City comptroller and mayoral candidate Brad Lander, who was arrested June 17 "after he linked arms with a person authorities were attempting to detain" in federal immigration court. Members of Congress, a Wisconsin judge and a mayor also have joined the ranks of those flouting the law. To what end, though, given Trump is doing what voters want him to do? Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. It's also worth noting that while progressives want you to think Trump's approval as president has tanked beyond repair, his 46.4% approval rating is higher than where Obama (45.8%) and former President George W. Bush (45.6%) were at this point in their second terms. From transgender athletes in women's sports to halting illegal immigration, Democrats keep finding themselves on the wrong side of issues that Americans care about. Good for Trump for getting it right. Ingrid Jacques is a columnist at USA TODAY. Contact her at ijacques@ or on X, formerly Twitter: @Ingrid_Jacques
