Revealed: The groups that propelled Labor to victory
A survey of 3500 voters by the Australian National University and researchers at the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems shows which key groups propelled Labor into power last month.
The answer? Women, under-55s and those with higher levels of education, and people in the latter two groups were most likely to have abandoned the Coalition, the Guardian reports.
The study found that Labor enjoyed an edge among women: 35.2 per cent voted Labor and 30 per cent voted for the Coalition. Among men, 35.7 per cent voted for Labor and 34.2 per cent for the Coalition.
Although Labor did enjoy an advantage among women, the “difference is mostly due to a higher vote for the Greens”, which “flowed back to Labor through preferences”, the study concluded.
Coalition voters tended to be older, non-Indigenous, with low education, living outside of capital cities and with household incomes higher than the bottom 20 per cent.
The Coalition lost more voters in capital cities, with 30.7 per cent of former Coalition voters living in capitals changing their vote in 2022.
More than one in 10 voters (13.6 per cent) made up their mind on election day; a further 19.7 per cent did so in the days before 21 May. Some 21.9 per cent reported changing their intended vote from April 2022.
Are you surprised at the survey results? Did the Coalition do enough to win over female voters?
My God, where do I begin. A university asks 3500 people how they voted and suddenly we find that Labor supporters are better educated than coalition voters. They also found that women changed the government when the truth is far more complex than that. I note that city dwellers voted green more than their country cousins which is not at all surprising given the information about climate change, closing mines and stopping gas exploration was centred around city seats whereas these topics are not promoted in country areas. It should be noted that the coalition's primary votes were higher than Labor's primary votes.
It's time that the lies around climate change are made more public by the media which is supposed to put both sides of any discussion. Yes, there is climate change, just as there has been a change in climate since before man walked the Earth. The fact that man cannot stop a pandemic but wants us to believe that man can alter climate change by the introduction of taxes and closing mines shows what a farce the climate change warriors are foisting upon us. There is an old saying; "follow the money trail" and if one is to do that we find that countries are paying billions to various groups and organisations who are not having to account for where it all finishes up.
Australia's annual output of CO² equates to a fortnight's output just by China and if we listen to the zealots and close down Australia we will make 3/4 of 5/8 of bugger all difference to the climate. Politicians since time immemorial have been telling us about an impending disaster that only they can fix. In my time, I've lived through a threatened Ice Age, a hole in the ozone layer, the oceans heating to kill all life, global warming which has now mutated into climate change and the death of the Great Barrier Reef. None of the predictions have materialised and I don't expect to see the sea rising 8 metres by 2030 as predicted.
I've had a gutful of the lies and abuse from zealots who label me a denier when all I have ever done is to quote reputable scientists who don't agree with the scientists who rely on grants to pay their way. The media, including Google and other search engines have somethings to answer as well. Just do a little exercise which won't take up much time at all, Google "climate change" and see how many pages you have to scroll through to find a dissenting voice. This doesn't mean that those climate change scientists who are in the first 40 or so pages are right, it just means that Google has made a decision to promote their views.
Anyway, having had my rant, the views of 3,500 people interviewed by a university without any detail of who was asked, what demographic was involved or what questions were put is of little interest to me. The Guardian is of the far left and I question their impartiality in putting forward their version of the university study. The last election was decided on a multitude of factors which were more than women, the intelligence of voters or where they choose to reside.