Yesterday’s post looked briefly at an overview of below the line voting, with a quick look at the results for those who voted ‘1’ Liberal (or rather, for any one of the Liberal candidates). Today I’m going to briefly look in a little deeper at something noted in passing then; the different sub-groups that feature within those who,regardless of their other votes, picked the Liberals as the first of those who ended up elected (Lib, Lab, Grn, Pup). This is a slightly different group than I showed in short form previously, but one which serves to show the noted split in preferencing clearly.
Within that set, I have then filtered for those who voted Family First in the early half of their vote (Pro FF), and the alternate of those who voted them in the latter half (Anti FF).
To show the difference this test makes not only to the votes for Family First, but also the differences in voting preference across the whole range, these are sorted in order from most difference against FF to most difference for FF.
Significant differences that correspond positively with support for Family First are support for ‘Stop the Greens’ and Andrew Roberts, an independent candidate. Significant differences that correspond negatively with support include the ALP, Pirate Party, HEMP, and the Sex Party.
Notably there is little differentiation on the two groups opinion of the Greens, and a small negative correlation with Rise Up Australia (another Christian Values based group, but one that is notably more extreme).
Now any theorising on the basis of why these differences exist is beyond the scope of this data; most votes don’t indicate why they voted the way they did, and for those which do… well the information isn’t transcribed into the system.
Feel free to speculate .
One final bit of information. This chart is based on ~8500 votes; ~3500 in favour of Family First and ~5000 against, all voting Liberals as the first of their majors.