Sunday, August 17, 2025

South Australian 2026 Election - Political Updates Tracker

 Hello all, and welcome to my page dedicated towards tracking the movements of South Australian politics going into the 2026 election. This page, unlike my political party tracker, is meant to generally track changes and moves made by all politicians and hopeful candidates going into the 2026 state election. I'll be updating the page as various things occur, and will be giving my thoughts as well on every change that appears. In addition, I'll provide links to news (both textual and video) regarding each event.


18/10/2025 - More Candidates and Mark Aldridge's new policy


This will be a relatively short update, but another one that I think is quite relevant. To start, Travis Fatchen has announced that he will be running for the seat of Mount Gambier as an Independent. Fatchen's an interesting candidate for a couple reasons. Firstly, he's a big community independent, being a life member of the Mt Gambier Patriots and member of a few other local organisations. Secondly, he was the office manager for Troy Bell since 2014. Now, that second is a major piece of information. He was likely in Bell's inner circle throughout his time as an MP, and so has probably collected much of his connections and network. So on that side, its a plus. However, on the other side, Bell was literally convicted for fraud and theft, and Fatchen was there the entire time. This isn't to say that Bell knew of the crimes, though of course I am sure people will speculate as such, but even if he didn't he's marked by that reputation. Being the long-term office manager to a known criminal MP is not a great mark on one's reputation, and you have to imagine his campaign will look to push his image as a community member above anything else. 

There is a second candidate to discuss, this one being a Labor candidate. Just after Labor randomly dropped 5 candidates, a 6th even more randomly dropped the day after, with even less fanfare. This candidate is Jenn Roberts, and she'll be contesting the seat of Hartley. To note, this means she'll be facing off against Vincent Tarzia, the leader of the Liberal party, and yet she got essentially no fanfare. Not sure that's a good sign for Roberts' chances, but it is the reality. Now, there is scarcely little on her. From what I could find, she is an American expat from Texas, having worked in civil rights/personal lalw in the US. Nowadays, she is the practice manager of Lieschke & Weatherill. That is the law firm founded by Jay Weatherill, the Labor ex-Premier, and a firm which focuses on workers/unions. This is to say that, she likely has a strong legal foundation but I am very unaware about her political experience, besides her supposedly being on Labor's left.

Finally, there is has been a policy announcement by a minor party. That being, the United Voice Australia Party led by Mark Aldridge. Aldridge, on his Instagram and Facebook (but not on the party's social media accounts), stated that, if the UVAP won, they would "seek public ownership of Torrens Island, rebuilt [sic] it to a modern base load plant that can run on our own LPG, coal or any future greener fuel". I'm not going to go into the whole saga of the Torrens Island power stations, but suffice to say, they were meant to be retired this year fully with that being extended to 2028 at the latest. This policy fits Aldridge's anti-net-zero beliefs, but it is also quite weird in its own right. The power stations remaining are very much gas power plants, so to even suggest coal be used, in a state that doesn't mine coal, is either extremely ignorant or just downright insane. At the very least, it shows that the policy isn't the most well-thought-out. It is a policy however, and thats better than half of the minor parties contesting.

Article Links


11/10/2025 - Labor Announces 5 New Candidates

With the resignation of 4 Labor MHAs, it was only a matter of time before the party got around to replacing each of them. And today, in a drop thats only been reported by The Advertiser so far (and only in its physical copy so far), the party has done so, and given us 1 additional candidate, as if it were a treat. In any case, without further ado, I'll put the 5 names below and than go into each of them and give as much detail as I can about each.

* Meagan Spencer for Torrens (replacing Dana Wortley)
* Ella Shaw for Elizabeth (replacing Lee Odenwalder)
* David Wilkins for Lee (replacing Stephen Mullighan)
* Cheyne Rich for Port Adelaide (replacing Susan Close)
* James Rothe for Schubert

Alot to talk about here. Firstly, starting with Spencer, she is/was the Chief of Staff to Claire Scriven, and from what I can tell, has been politically active in the Labor party since atleast 2009. Rumour has it that Spencer was picked against the wishes of Dana Wortley, the MHA she's replacing, and that this was a captain's call by Premier Peter Malinauskas. While such rumours are hard to verify, I will say that this does flow with what I've been hearing more broadly, and so I wouldn't be shocked if they were true. Now, Spencer isn't the only disciple of Scriven's to be selected in this lot. James Rothe, the 20-yr old International Relations student picked for Schubert, is also the Business Support Officer for Scriven. If one wanted to read into this, it seems quite clear that Scriven is gaining alot of influence in SA's Labor party. And considering that she is speaking at the 'Seeking God for South Australia' event being run by the Australian Christian Lobby (she's the only Labor MP doing so), anyone who is for a progressive Labor may have good reason to be anxious.

Beyond Scriven's disciples, there is not too much to say about Rich and Wilkins, atleast. Rich is Malinauskas' Deputy Chief of Staff, and was his campaign director/caucus liaison before that. As such, it seems very clear that Rich's selection into Port Adelaide is a case of the Premier swapping out one ally for another, albeit one who likely owes much of his political 'life' to him. Wilkins, meanwhile, is the Chief of Staff to Chris Picton, and so his selection is probably to do with that.

That leaves Ella Shaw, who is the most interesting out of the lot. Shaw, previously Labor's campaign manager for SA/NT, was named by The Advertiser as one of SA Labor's future leaders alongside the likes of Olivia Savvas, MP for Newlands (and about 3 people I personally know aha). Prior to this though, she was notable for a whole different incident. Back in 2021, she and Ashley Jayasuriya were removed as Board of Directors from the Adelaide University Union (now YouX). The two, who were part of Unity (Labor Right) and Activate (Labor Left) respectively, had "refused to sign declarations swearing they did not leak in-camera information to On Dit" (in-camera information being information discussed at a session that cannot be discussed publicly) and so were removed from the Progress (Liberal) dominated board. Her selection then shows that the latest wave of Student Politics 'hacks' are now entering state politics, something that may be of interest to you all.

Beyond this, there have been some other rumours floating about. Namely, that Justin Hanson, one of Labor's MLCs, was nearly pushed out of the role and given the conciliation prize of being the candidate for Stuart, a seat currently held by Independent MP Geoff Brock with 67.1% of the 2CP. Once again, rumours like these aren't easy to verify, but having talked to Hanson in passing recently, the rumours would make sense with some of the comments he was making at the time. Either way, he apparently fought he was to the #4 spot on the Legislative Council ticket, and so barring a disaster of untold proportions, should retain his spot. All of this does point to the reality that Malinauskas and his allies are looking to turn SA Labor into a machine that can support Malinauskas' 'reign' for a long time to come.

News Articles

None yet, as this has seemingly been only reported in the physical edition of the Advertiser, which I'll put below for now. 

Labor has named five candidates in key seats for next March’s state election, including Premier Peter Malinauskas’s deputy chief of staff Cheyne Rich. He will contest Port Adelaide, now held by former deputy premier Susan Close, who is retiring from politics at the election. Port Adelaide Enfield councillor David Wilkins, who is Health Minister Chris Picton’s chief of staff, will contest the western suburbs seat of Lee – now held by former treasurer Stephen Mullighan, who also is quitting politics. Both candidates were tipped by The Advertiser, as were Meagan Spencer in Torrens and Ella Shaw in Elizabeth, where backbenchers Dana Wortley and Lee Odenwalder are moving on at the election. James Rothe, an international relations and political science student, will take on Liberal health spokeswoman Ashton Hurn in the Barossa-centred seat of Schubert. Mr Malinauskas said the candidates were “part of the next generation of Labor” who would bring “new ideas (and) fresh energy”. He said the candidates were “driven by a genuine desire to make a difference”.


08/10/2025 - More Labor MPs Resign/Will not recontest


Welp, another 2 Labor MPs have stated they will not recontest their seats in the 2026 election. Lee Odenwalder, Member for Elizabeth and the Government Whip, as well as Dana Wortley, Member for Torrens, have announced their intentions to retire from state politics at the election. Both have been MHA's for over 10 years, though neither has served in a major ministerial role. While their resignations may not be as impactful as the Susan Closes and Stephen Mullighans a few weeks prior (see the 19/09/25 update), they may make Labor voters begin to worry that a trend is beginning to appear. It is not a factional exdous, of the 4 politicians Close was the only one from Labor Left (though Wortley was part of those who had defected to the Right only a couple years prior), but it may say something that multiple long-term politicians are looking to retire at the election where Labor is looking to win the most. Of course, they all may just see this as an easy getting off point. If they were tired or done with politics, this election, where Labor pretty much cannot lose, is probably the best choice. However, them leaving at the same time, along with discussions I've had with Labor members and politicians recently, may suggest that many are beginning to grate under the politics of Peter Malinauskas. If this is true, Labor voters worries may have some merit. 

As a side note, this also means we'll need to keep an eye out for who Labor pre-selects for Elizabeth and Torrens.

I wanted to use this update to also note the piece of news which is most annoying to me. That Turning Point Australia (the Australian branch of Turning Point USA) will be expanding its tentacles to South Australia in time for the state election. Most annoyingly to me, this extension will see Turning Point 'SA' running events on university campuses in the same vein as Charlie Kirk did. I do want to note that, on many campuses, the reception that they will recieve is likely to be less than friendly. In any case, Turning Point SA is being led by George-Alexander Mamalis, who, as the news has noted was an "ex-staffer to former environment minister and opposition leader David Speirs, One Nation MLC-turned-independent Sarah Game, and federal Liberal senator Alex Antic." As you can see, some of the best in SA's political scene. Mamalis is also the one running 'The Adelaide Set', a conservative media brand set in SA. He's used it more recently to promote Sarah Game and Henry Davis, so expect to see them (likely Davis) turning up to Adelaide university campuses under the guise of Turning Point. I do want to note that Mamalis went to both the March for Australia and the Charlie Kirk memorial here in Adelaide, something that the news doesn't seem to know or hasn't brought up. Either way, expect some terrible American-style conservative politics in the lead up to the state election.

News Articles



News Clips

7 News (Odenwalder/Wortley resigns)


10 News (Turning Point SA)





05/10/2025 - The SA Socialists join the Public Transport Race

In another sign that this election may be fought on public transport grounds, and that the Labor party is falling woefully behind in this area, the SA Socialists have announced their own public transport policy. This new policy includes making all Adelaide Metro services free, waiving all outstanding fines issued for travelling without a valid ticket, and transitioning Metro services to a 'turn up and go model'. The latter means that, the SA Socialists would see public transport frequencies increased alongside the establishment of a city rail loop, creating a system where passengers can just turn up to their public transport of choice and go to their destination. This, of course, would likely exceed the costings of the Greens public transport policy, itself being the most expensive of the ones put up so far, but would also significantly increase the quality of life for many Adelaideans. In addition, the turn up and go model does exist, atleast on paper, in places like Brisbane, Sydney, and Melbourne, meaning that it would see Adelaide transitioning to a more equal level of public transport as those in the East.

Overall, while it is quite unlikely that the SA Socialists will do major numbers, this policy is almost certainly made to do two things. Firstly, push the other parties to do more. And secondly, show to South Australians there are alternatives on the left. Whether it is successful will be hard to tell. What is easy to tell though, is that, unless Labor does something soon, they are at risk of falling far behind on public transport. 

02/10/2025 - An upgraded Maternity Ward for Murray Bridge's Soldiers’ Memorial Hospital

 Bit of a small update today, but I think talking about independents across SA is just as worthwhile as the other updates focusing on the major parties. Independent candidate for Hammond (the seat which holds Murray Bridge), Airlie Keen, has put forward a petition calling for the winner of the 2026 state election to expand and refurbish the Murray Bridge Soldiers' Memorial Hospital's maternity ward. The petition, with signatures numbering in the hundreds, will likely see Keen bring this forward as a policy at the state election. The expansion is wanted by the hospital's advisory committee, and, according to Murray Bridge News, should be part of the SA Health master plan for the hospital. This, alongside the fact that Liberal MP for Hammond, Adrian Pederick, has also begun pushing for upgrades to the maternity ward, alongside other parts of the hospital, seemingly makes it clear that the maternity ward expansion will be a big part of Hammond's election in 2026, if not a unifying policy across the major candidates.

Now, as I mentioned, this is a small update, and it might seem weird that I'm focusing on such a small area. But, in my opinion, it is important to keep an eye on every part of SA's politics that I can, and update the tracker as things appear on all levels. If this tracker was just a 'major party' news story tracker, I may as well not be writing it. So, as we get closer to the election, expect more of these short updates as smaller parties and candidates write up policies, announce their intention to contend, and otherwise get into the electoral mix.

News Articles

Murray Bridge News | Murray Bridge maternity ward looms as election battleground

01/10/2025 - Are We Finally Having a Public Transport Election?


Hello public transport nerds, the 2026 SA state election might be for you (or it might not be). Hot off the heels of the SA Liberals promising 50c public transport fares, both the Labor party and the Greens have thrown their hats into the public transport ring. First was Labor, who have not gone with a promise, but instead made a change for before the election. Speaking a couple days ago, Premier Peter Malinauskas announced that, for the first time in seven years, a South Australian train timetable was being changed. More specifically, that the Gawler Line's timetable was being updated, and that travel between Gawler and Adelaide would now be 20 minutes shorter. Well, actually, that a person would save 20 minutes every week if they used the line to commute between Gawler and Adelaide. So actually, about 2 minutes in savings per trip, or less if you only use the train occasionally or don't get on/off at Gawler station. Seemingly, some of that creative accounting that the Liberals used for their 50c fares announcement is being used here. However, this is not all. The SA Labor government has announced a sorely needed extension to the Riverlea Park bus service, soon to be one of SA's fastest growing suburbs. I would like it to instead be a new train line, considering that Riverlea Park and the Dry Creek developments will both slam the finished Expressway at the same time, but atleast there's some thought being put in? In any case, Labor had one last tease up its sleeve, with Treasurer Tom Koutsantonis suggesting that they would do whatever they have to go to get "the tram over the bridge", making it seem like the SA Labor government was looking at extending Adelaide's trams to North Adelaide. However, I have it from reputable sources that Labor is aiming for no major transport projects this election, so it may just be hot air.

And that hot air may have been completely stolen by the Greens, as last night, they unveiled their new transport policy, a $759m upgrade to Adelaide's tram network. This includes extending the tram service to North Adelaide (with stops at Adelaide Oval, the Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Archer Street and Piccadilly Cinema) and Norwood (with stops at the corner of Rundle Road and East Terrace, Rundle Street in Kent Town, Sydenham Street, Norwood Oval and Norwood Place). It also includes the potential to extend the tram line to Prospect as well. This, of course, would be a significant transformation of Adelaide's inner city public transport, bringing us, atleast somewhat, in line with other cities in the country. If we consider this, Labor's tease, and that Independent for Adelaide Keiran Snape also holds the policy of extending the tram line, it seems very likely that this election will be fought on public transport lines. And that, in the seat of Adelaide atleast, public transport might be the key issue.

As a complete tangent, I've also noticed that Family First has claimed that they have raised $450,000 nationally as early as June. If this is true, and their claim that they've had 5,500 donaters in SA, it seems that they may have a war purse to use in the state election.

News Articles:





News Clips

10 News


9 News


7 News


ABC


27/09/2025 - Is SA's Labor Party shifting to the right?


Well, this last week has been somewhat low on major political happenings (hence the lack of updates), but there has been a steady stream of news that I should acknowledge. Most notably, in my opinion, Labor's shift to the right, and the mild disasterclass of a week they've had.

If you've kept up with this tracker, you'll know that SA Labor is in a weird place, having had Susan Close and Stephen Mullighan both announce their retirements at the upcoming election. Well it seems their retirement has caused a shift to occur. This started earlier in the week, when Premier Peter Malinauskas went to the National Energy Forum. There, he gave a speech on the Narrabri gas expansion in New South Wales, supporting it and stating that "if there's gas out there, this is the time to get it out of the ground". He also labelled those who opposed the gas expansion, and gas production as "eco-purists who fill Instagram with creeds", suggesting that anyone who believes that the country can transition to net zero without natural gas is ignorant or an idiot. This is, glaringly, a big shift in rhetoric from a Premier whose campaign rested on pushing for net zero through hydrogen, and whose state is currently suffering from an algal bloom whose cause is, amongst other things, climate change. 

Now, this one speech probably would have been water off a duck's back if it weren't for newly re-minted Treasurer Tom Koutsantonis. In an interview with The Australian, Koutsantonis talked about how he was worried about "that type of woke agenda", meaning the championing of politically 'correct' issues that 'drive young men to the right'. This is, once again, a shift in rhetoric from the party whose previously been happy to walk the line between progressivist and centrist. However, its not entirely new, as Malinauskas had said similar only a month ago (see the 21/08/2025 update). What is perhaps new is Koutanstonis essentially coming straight out and saying that "The Labor Party in South Australia is a lot more centrist than other political parties around the country... What you will see from me is an accurate reflection of the Premier’s will – a stable, no surprises government that is unashamedly pro-business and unashamedly labour. A more traditional Labor Party. The one your Dad would recognise." For anyone in South Australia still wondering if SA's Labor Party is still left-wing, the Treasurer has your answer. I also suggest that Koutsantonis read a history book, since unless he's talking about his dad, most younger Labor voters parent's would think of the Whitlam and Dunstan years, which, amongst many things, were eras of social change wrought by Labor party leaders. Also, both men are probably spinning in their graves hearing Koutsantonis call traditional Labor 'pro-business'. 

In anycase, its genuinely not been a good week for anyone who still wants to pretend SA Labor government is 'progressive' and 'left-leaning'. Beyond this, there have been a few other things of note that have happened. The SA Young Liberals may, in leaked documents, seemingly decide to back mandated drug testing for state MPs and also push for Medicare to be scrapped. So y'know, its not like the Liberals are doing any better right now. Also, back to the Treasurer for a second, Koutsantonis has essentially said the Labor government won't be promising any ambitious spending at the next election (aka, don't expect to see any big transport/infrastructure/housing policies). 

To end, I did also want to note that the Australian Citizens Party has applied for registration in SA, and after a quick check with the ECSA on this, it seems that their application can be finalised before the election as they just met the deadline. So, with that being the case, it seems we will have 18 parties contesting the state election, with the La Rouchists (who claim not to be LaRouchists) being one of them.

News Articles

Sky News | South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas lashes ‘eco-purists’ over opposition to gas expansion





22/09/2025 - 50c public transport, the promise that never fails


In decently big news over the weekend, the Liberal Party in SA has announced a new election policy, promising to bring 50c public transport fares to South Australia. This is part of their new transport policy plan, which would see $240m invested to boost commuter numbers. It also includes a promise to extend the Adelaide Metro bus services to Murray Bridge, and add additional on-demand bus services to regional centres such as Victor Harbor. The keynote promise of 50c public transport fares has made waves in the news, as it is the first good choice the SA Liberals have made in the last couple years.

Now, I do feel compelled to mention that the Liberals aren't even the first party in the state to present this policy. The Greens, back in April, did so as well, following pushes by the Adelaide City Council. So y'know, if anyone ever tells you the Greens ambitious policies do nothing, I guess point here? In any case, all of them were obviously piggybacking off Queensland Labor and Steven Miles, who took 50c fares into the 2024 Queensland Election as a key policy that they had actually already started. The policy was picked up by the Liberal party that won the election, and is part of why Miles' Labor managed to loss the election with some dignity, versus the landslide that was expected to happen to them.

With that in mind, Labor's response in SA may have you scratching your head. Peter Malinauskas has said that the Liberal's plan is missing $75 million dollars worth of funding (which sounds more like a poor excuse from him than anything else), and claims that it actually increases the cost for students. He gets this in a technicality, as the current 28 day pass for students technically equals 25 cents per ride, if you take public transport 2 times a day, 5 times a week. Mind you, I don't know any highschooler who uses the 28 day pass, as most just use their Metro card, and so its an incredibly weak technicality. At the same time, to be fair, Vincent Tarzia's claim that the change will save the average SA family up to $100 a month is also a technicality, only happening if all 4 people in the family (two adults and two students) use the bus every day, twice a day. This is not really a scenario I see playing out anywhere, so both sides are doing some funky business when it comes to whose saving what.

On a more serious note, I do think it is a mistake for Labor to have essentially rejected matching this promise, and it may be the first serious error Malinauskas has done since becoming opposition leader. Now, this is likely because he was already on unsteady feet due to the events of last week (read that chaos below), but it is a mistake nonetheless. While most voters with some historical memory will be hard-pressed to believe that the SA Liberals will actually go through with this promise, considering how they sold off public transport in the past, optics are important and this is something Malinuaskas knows well. Not matching what is a clearly popular promise, and a policy that has been shown to help increase the dreary prospects of interstate parties, may see the Liberals gain some ground. Now, it won't be enough, but unless Malinauskas and Labor can come together and provide their own policies with ambition within them, they may actually see their massive lead shrink somewhat. At the very least, they may not win all but two seats in the state as previous polls have suggested.

As a small aside, Pangallo is still facing backlash over his use of AI in regards to the algal bloom. And so, while Tarzia may have gotten some unexpected wins here, he's still under the pump over 'the watchdog's' position in the Liberals. One more mistake by Pangallo, and all of these small wins will be quickly trampled by the need to find a new candidate for Waite.

News Articles

ABC | SA opposition promises to slash public transport fares to 50 cents, if elected next year





News Clips

7 News


9 News


ABC


19/09/2025 - Peter Malinauskas has shuffled his cabinet, lets see whose gone where


So, coming off the retirement announcements of Susan Close and Stephen Mullighan, Peter Malinauskas has decided to undertake a full cabinet shuffle. While we are only 6 months out, and most of the new ministers won't get much time to enact much change, their new positions are telling. Should Malinauskas and Labor win the upcoming election, and that seems very likely, it is possible these positions now are a 'dry run' for a potential cabinet in 2026.

In any case, here are the changes;

- Tom Koutsantonis, MP for West Torrens → Treasurer

- Kyam Maher, Legislative Councillor → Deputy Premier

- Emily Bourke, Legislative Councillor → Minister for Infrastructure and Transport

- Blair Boyer, MP for Wright → Minister for Police

- Joe Szakacs, MP for Cheltenham → Minister for Industry, Innovation, and Science

- Rhiannon Pearce, MP for King → Minister for Emergency Services and Correctional Services & Minister for Recreation, Sport, and Racing

- Lucy Hood, MP for Adelaide → Minister for Climate, Environment, and Water

- Katrine Hildyard, MP for Reynell → Minister for Women & Minister for Domestic, Family, and Sexual Violence

On top of this, Malinauskas has taken the portfolio of defence and space industries for himself. Now, the shuffle has occasioned criticism from the Liberals, specifically Josh Teague, whose taken issue at a new minister being given the environmental portfolio, and Koutsantonis becoming treasurer again (he was last it between 2014-2018 under Weatherill). While I can't comment much on Hood's appointment one way or another, I assume Koutsantonis was given the position so that he could spend even more time ragging on the Liberals and specifically Pangallo to the media. I could be wrong but it also seems to be everything he does these days, so?

Either way, this is likely the cabinet that'll lead SA into the next election, barring any major controversies. It does leave one question though, who will Labor pre-select to replace Close and Mullighan in their seats of Port Adelaide and Lee. I will keep an eye out for their replacements, which I hope will be soon. 

News Articles

ABC | Tom Koutsantonis appointed SA Treasurer after Stephen Mullighan and Susan Close step down

The Advertiser | Tom Koutsantonis to replace Stephen Mullighan as Treasurer, full cabinet revealed as Susan Close steps down


News Clips

7 News


9 News


ABC


18/09/2025 - Susan Close and Stephen Mullighan retire and Sarah Game continues to hate abortions


The South Australian political landscape got hit with a large blow today as the Deputy Premier, Susan Close, and the Treasurer, Stephen Mullighan, have announced their retirements. More specifically, Peter Malianuaskas announced it for them out of nowhere, but tomato tomato. The two have given details on why they are retiring, Mullighan to spend more time with his young family, and Close as she's felt she has given everything she can to public life and wants more freedom. To be fair to them both, those are valid reasons, but they have left Malinauskas scrambling. In perhaps a rare bit of vulnerability for the premier, he stated that "was really disappointed by it. I like to think every now and then I can persuade people to do things. I was completely unable to persuade them to stick around despite my best efforts. So naturally, I’m really sad to be losing them both". If you read between the lines, it seems very clear that Malinauskas does not think this is the right move for them, his government, or the Labor party, and for a political operator whose normally on top of it all, it does seem to have him abit shaken.

One man whose trying to capitalise on this is Liberal leader Vincent Tarzia. He's come out swinging, claiming that the wheels have fallen off the Labor government, that Close and Mullighan are abandoning ship, and, not using a cliche this time, that the government used these announcements to hide bad ABS data about SA. The last one seems like an incredible reach, but this is the closest Tarzia's has come to a win in months, so he's taking it. He further claimed that the "veneer" had come off Malinauskas, which might be true but it doesn't mean he's gained one himself. In any case, it seems very likely that he'll ride this wave for a long while, if oonly to distract from Frank Pangallo running into every rake in the yard.

Now, we were apparently meant to get the full details of the cabinet reshuffle tomorrow, but half of it has either been leaked or announced today, so I figure I may as well say it here. Kyam Maher, attorney-general and leader of the government in the Legislative Council, has been sworn in as Deputy Premier. Alongside him, Member for Adelaide Lucy Hood and Member for King Rhiannon Pearce were made ministers in cabinet, while Member for Elder Nadia Clancy was made an assistant minister. Maher, chief of the labor left faction in the state, is an interesting choice considering Tom Koutsantonis' existence, but I suspect Koutsantonis doesn't want any additional responsibility and is just enjoying his role mocking Pangallo. Either way, if there's more to be said about it tomorrow, I will update this tracker.

While this may have taken over the news today, another news story has been bubbling away at the surface. As has been mentioned previously, Sarah Game has been pushing for a new anti-abortion bill, and has finally produced it in the Legislative Council. She also held an anti-abortion rally alongside Dr Joanna Howe on parliament steps, to show that this isn't just a PR move as she has been accused of. Interestingly, Keiran Snape, Independent candidate for Adelaide, was nearby criticising them and otherwise being against the rally. Based on his social media, it seems hes taken a pro-abortion stance against Game and Howe. 

Either way, Game has stated that she believes the bill will pass through the Legislative Council, and if it should, that she will push for it to be voted on by the lower house before the election. Now, I'm not certain she either has the power or that the bill will actually pass, but atleast she's confident? In any case, she also had a go at the Liberal party, particularly Tarzia, over making this vote a conscience vote rather than a strict vote for it as per the party line. She went so far as to call the Liberal's "wussy" over it, showing you that even a Legislative Councillor isn't below using terms you'd hear on a year 3's playground. And, I don't know if she knows this, but Tarzia has never really been anti-abortion, so he er attempts at baiting him (I think) probably won't work. Either way, this will likely be a continuing story until the bill either passes or is killed once again.

News Articles









News Clips

7 News


9 News


ABC


17/09/2025 - Frank Pangallo's AIGate


Two '-gate' controversies in just under a month, Frank must be gunning for a record. This time, ol' watchdog Frank Pangallo has gotten himself into hot water after using artificial intelligence to generate academic sources for his claims that SA's desalination plant has a part to play in the algal bloom crisis. He claims it was a mistake done when he was trying to fetch a list of academic articles to show to the Budget and Finance Committee, while Labor says it was a deliberate attempt to mislead parliament and people alike.

Starting up yesterday, it came to light that Pangallo had provided the Budget and Finance Committee with research showing that the desalination plant was likely a factor in the algal bloom. Now, this has been a theory (and conspiracy theory) that has remained popular throughout South Australia, even though there is no evidence for it. It's often used by people who want to deny climate change's role in the bloom, but others use it to show that the desalination plant, built under a Labor government and whose production was increased by Malinauskas in January 2025, is a mistake to have around, No matter Frank's motivation, he was attempting to peddle something less than scientifically accurate.

In any case, Labor had attempted to contact the authors, only to be told by one that they had never written the paper cited. This spiralled, with The Advertiser stating that only two from the list of five authors could be contacted at all. From here, Pangallo and Hood both claimed it was an administrative error, that something had gone wrong with the citations but that they did exist. Now, for anyone with a keen eye or whose in education, even from this point AI seemed like the likely culprit. Tom Koutsantonis, smelling blood in the water, began calling for Pangallo to apologise and resign from the parliamentary committee over this. And for many, that was where we thought it would end. Pangallo would deny any misconduct, suggest it was a simple mistake, and things would continue.

Today though, things changed. Confronted by reporters from the major networks at his office door, Pangallo has admitted to using AI, though he claims it was still simply a mistake. He stated that, he had already done the research on the papers, and just used AI to get a "list of authors or whatever", and was given the wrong information. Whether the true reason or not that this occurred, its very clear that Pangallo is in hot water. The Liberal Party, including Tarzia, have done their best to stick by him, but this may be a bridge to far. The dilemma comes now over whether it is worse to sack your 'star' candidate 6 months out from the big game, or keep them knowing that they are an absolute wrecking ball. Neither option does not seem exciting for a Liberal Party already on its knees as it enters the state election.

Koutsantonis, atleast, seems to believe there is only one option. He's stated that Tarzia needs to sanction Pangallo and remove him from the Committee, noting that "if any serious or professional researcher did this, they'd be sacked!". I guess time will tell whether AIGate will sink Pangallo, or if the watchdog can hold on once more.

News Articles




News Clips

7 News



14/09/2025 - The Liberal Bunch; or who the Liberals have pre-selected for the Legislative Council


Interesting news coming out today as we have learnt which candidates the Liberal party will be putting forward for the Legislative Council. To not bury the lede, the candidates are as follows;

  1. Ben Hood MLC
  2. Heidi Girolamo MLC
  3. Rowan Mumford
  4. Thea Hennessey
  5. Kanwaldeep/KD Singh
  6. Belinda Crawford-Marshall
These 6 will lead the statewide charge come campaign season, but you have to think that in the current state of the Liberal party's polling, even Hennessey, sitting at the normally 'comfortable' 4th spot, will be anxious about her chances. It should be noted that this pre-selection was not without its troubles. The Advertiser reported that Alex Antic, the far-right powerbroker of the Liberal party, had put up his own pre-selection ticket for the Legislative Council. This ticket included Hood at no.1, Hennessey 2nd, Playford Mayor Gleen Docherty 3rd, Crawford-Marshall 4th, and Girolamo (a sitting MLC) all the way down at 5th. His ticket was opposed by the 'Conservative ticket', which had Hood and Girolamo at the top, and then recommended voters preference Crawford-Marshall, Mumford, Hennessey, and Docherty in any order they prefer. As you can see, the Conservatives got the best of it in the end, with their top 2 picks going forward as well as their choice in Mumford. The Advertiser, interestingly, has described this as a spurning, but in my opinion it really is just showing a federal Senator that he can't run roughshod over a state party.

In any case, let's have a look at some of the candidates. Hood and Girolamo are obviously easy to find information on, being incumbent MLCs. Hood, the co-creator of children's book/TV character George the Farmer, has been an MLC since 2023, having been a fill-in for the vacancy caused by Stephen Wade's retirement. Hood's 2 years of sitting have been controversial, as he was the one to introduce the ban on late-term abortions which failed, and that was pushed by Dr Joanna Howe. It should also be noted that Hood, prior to becoming an MLC, failed to win the seat of Mt Gambier against convicted fraudster and thief Troy Bell in 2022. Girolamo was also appointed to the Legislative Council to fill a casual vacancy, caused by the resignation of David Ridgway. Previously a client manager for Deloitte for 12 years across 2 stints, and the treasurer of Kidsafe SA, both she and Hood stem from the right-wing faction of the SA Liberals. 

Moving on from the sitting candidates, we get to Rowan Mumford. Mumford is abit more of a mystery to me, but I know his political timeline quite well. Mumford's two biggest claims to fame are being a former state party president, and the candidate for Kavel in the 2022 election, a result he lost by a landslide to Dan Cregan (seeing a 26.4% primary vote swing against him). It was also rumoured by InDaily that he and now-Sarah Game Fair Go for Australia Legislative Council candidate Henry Davis were part of the pre-selection battle for Mayo in the lead-up to the 2025 election. If he were, he also lost that pre-selection battle to Zane Basic. Either way, Mumford's record is not the shiniest of them all. Now, he is joined by Crawford-Marshall and Hennessey, whom I won't go into too much detail on as I've already covered them both extensively. If you're interested, check out the update on the 25th of August 2025. For a brief overview, Crawford-Marshall believes in chemtrails, and Hennessey believes that through the power of prayer she once cured lactose intolerance. 

And that leaves us with KD Singh. The only 'moderate' Liberal pre-selected on the list, Singh is essentially in a horror spot, as the Liberal party will need to see significant gains for him to be elected (but without it being as impossible as 6th). Singh, who recently got featured in an article by The Australian (shudder), is the owner/leader of multiple businesses, including being the managing director of financial advisory firm Money Merchants Financial Service, and the owner/operator of Brice Hill Country Lodge, a tourism property in the Clare Valley. Singh also notes himself as a 'financial coach' on his resume, as well as a 'builder and developer', though provides no examples of what projects he has apparently led in 'sustainable building and community housing'. He also notes his extensive community leadership roles, including being a Governing Council Member of Adelaide High School. In any case, if this were a Liberal party not captured by the right, you'd almost expect Singh to be an ideal candidate and higher up on the list. The Australian essentially implies that, as he is looking to be the first Indian MLC in SA's history, he could be a salve to a party struggling with its image to Indian voters after Jacinta Price's messaging and the March for Australia. His being 5th, below Hennessey and Mumford, is telling of a party that is in factional disarray.

News Articles



08/09/2025 - Pop Quiz! Which Better Suits Salt Flats, 15,000 Houses or a Golf Course?


In a bizarre shift for South Australian Politics, the major parties have become embroiled in a debate on how best to use the Dry Creek salt flats. For a while now, Labor has touted its efforts to rezone the area for 15,000 houses, in an attempt to address Adelaide's housing crisis. This policy, divisive amongst South Australians, has become the target on a new feud between the Liberals and Labor. Two weeks back, newly minted Liberal Frank Pangallo was discussing the North Adelaide golf course redevelopment and LIV Golf, and while he did so, stated that "There’s a greenfield site at Dry Creek that the government could take over tomorrow and build one very quickly, in three years they can have it done". 

Now, this statement pretty much flew under the radar for the last two weeks, with no one I know even thinking about it. However, I assume some Labor staffers turned back to it, as today Labor has come out in full force, lambasting the idea. Housing Minister Nick Champion went as far as to call it "a fantasy", ridiculing Pangallo for even bringing it up. Now, I want to bring this to your attention because it is emblematic of the current state of SA's two major parties. The Liberals, confused and at eachother's throats, continually stumble when attempting to make political points. Pangallo here was obviously trying to state that you could go anywhere for LIV Golf, so there needs to be more reason given to the public over the choice of North Adelaide (which isn't an unfair statement). However, he put his foot in his throat when he chose a major housing development, and gave Labor political ammunition while poorly explaining his point. Labor, for their part, did what they are undeniably good at, and have turned the statement into a 'political row' designed to make the Liberals seem ridiculous. Because what seems more insane than houses on salt flats? A golf course on salt flats.

Overall, I don't expect this to affect state politics much, but it really demonstrates the ongoing pattern here. The Liberals, even if they have good points, aren't able to articulate them, and Labor, a cohesive and united party, are simply running circles around them. This row is symptomatic of what we will likely see in spades come the proper election campaign.

News Articles


News Clips

7 News


9 News


06/09/2025 - Sarah Game Enters SA's Ongoing Abortion Saga & Nicolle Flint Goes to War with Tony Pasin


Been a few days since we needed an update, but I've decided now is a good time to add one in. Ex-One Nation MLC and current leader of Sarah Game's Fair Go for Australia party, Sarah Game, has taken up the anti-abortion crusade less than a year after the debacle caused by Ben Hood's attempt. Standing alongside anti-abortion campaigner Dr Joanna Howe, whom we should all remember was banned from parts of SA's Parliament over her efforts to threaten and intimidate MPs (including ex-Liberal MLC Jing Lee), Game announced her introduction of a new bill which would place limits on abortions after 23 weeks. In summary, the bill seeks to remove the clause allowing abortion after that limit if the pregnancy would (with the approval of two doctors) lead to "significant risk" for the mother's mental/physical health, and instead only allow late-term abortions if it was to save a life or if the fetus risked significant 'abnormalities'. 

Howe and Game have both labelled the bill as a sensible way to protect the rights of babies, however, as ex-Greens MLC Tammy Franks has noted, this is quite clearly a "conservative dogwhistle". Howe campaigns against abortion far beyond the scope of this bill, and so its hard to believe her attempts will stop here even if she is successful. It should also be noted that Hower helped draft both this and Hood's bill, and so despite her being banned in parts of Parliament, her influence is still strong. Furthermore, as Franks has also noted (thanks for stealing all my analysis from me), it is also a "bid for votes". In essence, Game is attempting to increase her and her party's notoriety in the state before the election occurs, using an issue that will get TV, Radio, and coffee shop talk to get her name out there. Mind you, this is failing as both The Advertiser and the ABC have only noted her as an ex-One Nation MLC turned Independent, not even bothering to mention her party in the introduction of their articles. 

In any case, the bill, if voted on, will likely be one which does not follow party lines, as MLCs are provided the ability to 'vote with their conscience'. For anyone who needs reminding, the previous vote along the same lines saw Labor MLCs Clare Scriven and Tung Ngo, alongside newly minted Liberal Frank Pangallo vote for the bill, while SA Best's Connie Bonaros voted against it. The other votes fell as you may expect. It is likely that this bill will also not pass, as the number of MLCs voting against does not seem likely to change, but I will keep an eye on it over time.

Now, a few other things occurred over the last couple days that should be noted. Firstly, Alex Antic was off in Federal Parliament doing his best to imply conspiracy around the National Socialist Network. Antic, essentially the main powerbroker of the SA Liberals, stated that the NSN "seems like they're straight out of central casting". He'd go further, complaining about the media labelling the group as 'far-right' even though they have socialist in their name (I'm sure that Antic also believes North Korea is Democratic), before noting that they aren't the "face-tattooed overweight men like we’ve come to accept". I won't go too in-depth, as its obvious that Antic is being deliberately disingenuous while also comparing the NSN to biker gangs with connections to Nazis, but Australia's far-right have a history of being clean cut and 'professional' whenever they come together as a political group rather than something else. If I didn't know that Antic was purposefully being obtuse, I'd have to question his understanding of basic Australian right-wing political history (tbh I do question it anyways).

Speaking of Nazis, Mark Aldridge's saga with the March continues. He has continually distanced himself from the NSN who showed up in Adelaide, claiming that he did not want them there and had no power to stop them (despite them making it very clear that they both were going to be there for weeks and that they had a hand in leading the March), and has essentially been going through a significant amount of damage control. At the same time, him and Bec Freedom (who claims Annie Marlow was the real organiser) have been going at it on Instagram and Twitter over who actually organised the event. Its spectacularly entertaining to watch play out. All of this hasn't stopped Mark from claiming to be the organiser of a new March, titled "Australia Unites Against Government Corruption", which is apparently planned for September 13th 'nationwide' (at Rundle Park at 12pm in Adelaide). It seems that Mark has double-booked himself on this day, as he also plans to attend an anti-Nazi First Nations rally at Victoria Square (he does actually support Indigenous Sovereignty interestingly enough), and I imagine this fact will not go over well with the people who go to the AUAGC March. In any case, I cannot wait to watch how this one spectacularly crashes and burns. 

BREAKING NEWS: As I was writing this, a whole new development occurred that I need to talk about. The Advertiser just broke that Nicolle Flint, ex-Liberal MP for Boothby, is planning on fighting Tony Pasin for pre-selection for the seat of Barker. Such a move is clear evidence of the party's ongoing factional struggles, but one also has to imagine it is a move of sheer desperation from Flint. Having failed at the 2025 Federal Election to regain her seat, going head-to-head with an opposing faction's most prominent powerbroker seems to be Flint testing whether she can regain some control of the party. If Flint tries and fails to be pre-selected against Pasin, I would not be shocked to see her leave the party entirely and either stand as an independent or build her own micro-party. Only time will tell though. 

News Articles






02/09/2025 - No By-Election for Mount Gambier


A short update today, but one that is nonetheless quite pertinent. This is a follow-up on the Troy Bell/Mt Gambier saga thats played out over a couple updates, so be sure to check those out below if you haven't. In any case, it has been revealed today that Bell's resignation will not be leading to a by-election for the Electoral District of Mount Gambier. Speaker Leon Bignell noted that the cost of running a by-election, alongside the fact that anyone elected would only represent the district for 6-8 days in parliament prior to the actual state election, meant that running a by-election was impractical.

This has caused Liberal member for Barker, Tony Pasin, to go on what could be considered a tyrade against Premier Malinauskas (even though he is not the one who decides whether a by-election is held). I'll let you read it in the SE Voice, but its very clear that Pasin, and the Liberals, want to make this a fight. This is abundantly clear with the statement, "failure to heed this call is proof positive the Premier wants to govern for Adelaide whilst simultaneously offering the regions nothing but lip service."

In the terms of the upcoming state election, this leaves the political parties in a very interesting spot. With no elected representative for another 6 months, there is good room for pre-selected candidates to make a brand of themselves by simply being seen throughout the community. As such, it seems likely that both major parties, and perhaps even the Greens, will begin pushing their candidates, as a way to get them well-known before the election occurs. Only time will tell though.

News Articles






31/08/2025 - Mark Aldridge leads March for Australia in Adelaide


So, only one small update today, but worth noting nonetheless. The first, and most relevant, is that Mark Aldridge, leader of the United Australia Voice Party, has been confirmed as an organiser of Adelaide's 'March for Australia'. When asked about it by the ABC, Mark stated, "It's not anti-migration. The general consensus here is mass immigration, it's just not the right time. The way we're struggling with housing, the way we're struggling with hospital beds and everything else. Whilst there's not enough homes, not enough resources, I think we need to temper migration down and then have a national conversation as adults about the continuation of migration figures."

As anyone can tell you, these are not factual statements, and that Adelaide's very real health and housing crises are based on other systemic issues, not immigration. It should be noted that Adelaide's march descended into chaos as those within it seemingly rejected the arrival of the National Socialist Network, though its unknown whether Mark was aligned with their arrival/had invited them. What should be noted is that, throughout the March, multiple people could be seen wearing shirts with Aldridge's party logo on them. Seemingly than, Mark (who I've been told moonlights as a dodgy car salesmen on Facebook) utilised this event to essentially 'soft launch' his party. Considering how his party's site is devoid of information or policies, this is the first solid thing we can point to, beyond Mark's torrid past in far-right politics, that demonstrates where the party will lie on the political spectrum.

I should also note that a few other ex-political candidates showed up at the march. This includes Mark Neugebauer, Australian Federation Party candidate for Mayo in the 2022 Federal election, and Jacob Van Raalte, Liberal Democrat candidate for Mayo in that same election. If any more show up, I will be sure to alert you, though any larger politicians like Alex Antic, Sarah Game, or Carlos Quaremba all seem to have avoided the March. 

Unfortunately, there is no links to provide to this, however, there are a few photos of Mark and his party's shirts. 

Mark Aldridge at the March

The United Voice Australia logo appearing at the March

28/08/2025 - Troy Bell, MP for Mt Gambier, resigns from Parliament


Ex-Liberal MP Troy Bell has resigned from state parliament today, after his appeals against his convictions for theft and fraud amounting to over $430,000 were quashed. Bell, who had been found guilty of 20 counts of theft and 5 counts of 'dishonestly dealing with documents', had remained an active MP after having been found guilty, having been awaiting the outcome of his appeal hearing. His resignation does not come as an exact shock, rather, it is logically impossible that he could continue in his role should his sentencing include jail time. 

However, his resignation does put the state into a bit of a bind. With the 2026 state election only 7 months away, there is difficulty in knowing whether a by-election will occur to replace Bell. Premier Malinauskas, when asked, stated that such a decision will be made by Speaker Leon Bignell under the advice of the ECSA. He did note that the current calendar, close to the end of the parliamentary sitting year and containing school holidays which often do not include by-elections, did not leave much room for one to occur. In my opinion, it seems unlikely that a by-election will occur, as the candidate elected would only hold the role for a couple months at most before preparations for the election started. In any case, this does take Bell out of the running for the 2026 election, and leaves Mt Gambier very open for both the Labor and Liberal parties.

News Clips





27/08/2025 - Game On for Fair Go Candidates 


Got some interesting updates for the trackers today (please ignore the absolute horror show of a title, its the best pun I could think of lmao). One is a proper update of candidates, and the other is technically a few months old but just came to my attention, so enjoy that.

The first, and the proper update, is that Sarah Game's Fair Go for Australia party (horrific party name) has announced two candidates for the state election. Coming off the back of former Liberal party veteran Henry Davis joining as their lead Legislative Council candidate, the party has announced that Angela Rojas will join him, while Jake Hall-Evans will run for the seat of Colton. Rojas is perhaps the lesser-known figure of the two politically, being the co-founder of the International Coalition4Children, a Christian Conservative group which promotes the 'child safety' and the 'parental voice' over governments and teachers having a say on a child's "morality, ethics and identity". Put plainly, she is obviously for opposing LGBT+ rights, as we can see by her attempts to undertake a petition around "classification and borrowing conditions for 'pornographic' children's books in libraries and school", which is very much a dogwhistle for books which discuss gender and sexuality. 

Jake Hall-Evans, on the other hand, is likely a name politics hacks in SA have heard of. He was the Liberal candidate for Hindmarsh in the 2019 Federal Election and their candidate for Lee in the 2022 State election, losing both of those to Labor. He also ran in the 2025 election as an independent for Hindmarsh, receiving only 1.6% of the vote and beating only the Animal Justice Party and FUSION. Despite these setbacks, he was obviously trusted enough at one point by a not-yet-dead Liberal party to be their candidate, and so must have some political acumen. Hall-Evans claims that he joined 'Fair Go' as it focused on "real people" and "pragmatic outcomes", words we've all heard before in regards to parties such as One Nation, UAP, or Trumpet of Patriots. In any case, he is probably the most well-known name on the party's list right now, and that includes an MLC and a Councillor. Whether his name brand can help him win a seat he's never contested, for a new party that is a split off from One Nation, seems very unlikely.

We also learnt a couple of other things about 'Fair Go' today. These include some potential policies, which range from the mundane, such as "incentivising landlords to put solar panels and batteries on their homes", to the controversial, including "repealing the First Nations Voice to Parliament". Game also noted that the party would be focusing on "putting parents back in charge of how their kids are educated" an obvious dogwhistle that the party will look to demonise modern education around gender, sexuality, and likely history/society as well. Finally, it seems that the party's slogan is going to be 'Game On', which is unfortunately not horrible. 

Moving on, we find ourselves at the 'retro update', which is about a candidate who stepped forward a few months ago but who slipped under my radar until today. This section is abit of a look at their candidacy, as I think it might be quite relevant for the election.

The aforementioned candidate is ex-Greens member Keiran Snape, an Adelaide City Councillor who left the Greens over being unable to run for them. Specifically, he was disallowed from running in their upper house campaign as he still worked for Tammy Franks, the ex-Greens MLC who left the party with some controversy. Snape, a Councillor for 4 years and the Deputy Mayor in 2024, is planning to run as an independent for Adelaide, He’ll be facing strong opposition from Labor’s ____, but with endorsements from Franks, as well Adelaide’s cult classic Rex “FOI Warrior” Patrick, he’s got backing that most other independents won’t have.

In addition, his platform is one which will likely find significant support across North Adelaide and Prospect. Notably, he has attacked the Festival Tower and LIV Golf plans (the favourite punching bags of those in the electoral division’s wealthier area), while also proposing plans to make the Adelaide parklands both state heritage listed and even go for a UNESCO World Heritage bid. Furthermore, he’s also promising a favourite policy of transport nerds across Adelaide, a tram extension across to North Adelaide. These policies, local and targeted to a specific demographic, will likely find a cult classic, and it is possible that Snape will find himself in the 2 candidate preferred race if the Liberals continue to implode. However, I am unsure that even the most targeted policies will be able to beat a surging Labor who holds the hearts and minds of many of the Adelaide Division’s non-northern residents. 

News Articles



25/08/2025 - Frank Pangallo becomes the Lorax while the Liberal pre-selection potentials claim to be the cure for lactose intolerance


The last two days have been relatively slow in terms of news, however, there were a few things that went on for me to discuss here. From chainsaw-wielding politicians, to pre-selection potentials who believe they can use prayer to heal lactose intolerance, even a slow news period in SA is still a fun one.

Starting with Frank Pangallo, the newly minted Liberal has already gone on the attack, setting his eyes on a common target for many across the state, LIV Golf. A sporting event which has already gotten pushback due to its redevelopment plans, Pangallo has gone all in on the claim that LIV Golf's redevelopment will do irreparable damage to the Adelaide Parklands. Specifically, he has claimed that it will take down over 5400 trees from the 9000 across the current golf courses, something Pangallo says will be action "South Australians have not seen before". 

Frank Pangallo holding a chainsaw
Frank "I'm the Lorax and I speak for the trees" Pangallo

These claims have earned Pangallo the ire of Infrastructure and Transport Minister Tom Koutsantonis, who often feels like Premier Peter Malinauskas' own attack dog these days. Koutsantonis (commonly referred to as Kouts) noted that the government did not yet have a number for how many trees would be removed, but claimed that the Liberals number was a lie. He'd go even further than that though, stating that "I’m prepared to go as far as to say that if this number is accurate, I’ll resign." In my opinion, Koutsantonis (SA's longest running MP at just under 28 years) is simply giving himself an easy out to retirement. If Pangallo's claim is true, he gets to retire quickly and easily. If not, he gets to laugh at Frank. Now, I may be joking, but funnier things have happened in SA.

Now, things only continue to get worse for Liberals as a 'scoop' by the Daily Mail UK of all places has shown that one of their pre-selection hopefuls might not be the most representative candidate. Thea Hennessy, a small business owner and campaign manager for Zane Basic (the Liberal's federal candidate for Mayo), aiming to be pre-selected for the Legislative Council, has been recorded claiming miracles that most South Australians probably won't identify with. Specifically, she claims to have conducted the practice known as 'lay hands' so well that she cured a girl of her lactose intolerance. Hennessy noted, "we prayed for precious Daisy, and that was it. All dairy intolerance gone. She was really sick before then. God healed her completely", perhaps the most unintentionally funniest line said by a pre-selection hopeful. She also claims that her and her husband stopped their smoking addition - where she was smoking 30 a day and her husband 50 - when a friend of theirs simply said the word 'Lord' in prayer to them. All very interesting things to claim as someone wanting to run for parliament.

Surely though, the Liberals' other hopeful, Belinda Crawford-Marshall, the executive pastor at a Pentecostal church, must be a better choice right? Well, there is less of her claiming miracles, but she has previously posted to Facebook complaining about chemtrails. Now, you might think that both women have no chance of getting preselected based off all this, but you'd be forgetting that Alex Antic is the powerbroker throughout the SA Liberals and that he supports both of them. So, yeah, it is not unlikely that atleast one of Hennessy or Crawford-Marshall are on the Liberal's ticket next year.

News Articles


Daily Mail UK | Watch the moment a budding Liberal MP makes an INCREDIBLE claim about how she cured a young girl - as wild social media posts come back to haunt election hopefuls

News Clips

7 News


9 News


ABC



23/08/2025 - Tarzia and Mali face their demons


Over today and yesterday, both Labor Premier Peter Malinauskas and Liberal Leader of the Opposition Vincent Tarzia have been forced to, atleast in speech, deal with the longstanding issues facing their parties. In particular, both leaders were forced to reconcile with either past or future policy failures that would not do well electorally. 

Firstly, Malinauskas spoke at the Advertiser's Bush Summit yesterday, and during his interview delved on the topic of the state's ramping crisis. A massive issue going into the 2022 election, and one that still exists to this day, one of Labor's main attacks against the governing Liberals had been in regards to the failure to address ramping. Yesterday though, Malinauskas noted that his government hadn't deal with the ramping crisis in a satisfactory manner. Specifically, he stated, "In terms of the fixing the ramping crisis, of course we’d like better results. I’m not going to shy away from that. That would be unfair and not responsible." He even went so far to accept the label of his government's failure to deal with ramping as a 'broken electoral promise', not something you often see incumbent politicians do. He did naunce all this by pointing to the successes the state's Labor party has had, such as hiring more nurses and doctors beyond the initial targets, doubling promised hospital beds, and increasing spending overall. In any case, for many politicians, accepting that you have broken an electoral promise can often be the beginning of the end for your campaign. However, Malinauskas, well-loved by South Australians and a generally smart political operator, has likely accepted the label as to show humility, accepting that his government isn't perfect but has done work. Whether that strategy will work will come down to the media and the Liberals.

Speaking of, its not been a good day for Vincent Tarzia and the state Liberals. In a day that should've been used for pushing against Labor and the aforementioned election promise, Tarzia has instead been forced to go on the defensive. And not by anyone external either, in fact, it was by his own party. Today was the state Liberal AGM, meant to provide a clear direction for the party to go, looking towards the election. However, it became something of an 'undo' moment for the party, as Tarzia had to essentially prostrate himself in front of the media. The party's leader noted that the party had not only been distracted at times in his keynote address, but had also failed to connect to businesses and families in the state. Furthermore, Tarzia had to take the time to distance himself and the party from a leaked Liberal policy suggestion document. This document (likely coming from the Liberal's right faction (read: Antic)) held policy suggestions such as plans to "examine “excess deaths” linked to vaccinations, overturn Covid-19 vaccine mandates, restrict medical treatment for children with gender dysphoria and lobby the federal Liberals to overturn a policy to achieve net zero emissions by 2050". Such a policy platform would, quite obviously, alienate much of the centre-right in the state, and if implemented would destroy any small chance the Liberals have of winning. The fact that Tarzia had to respond to this is telling. 

If only the negatives stopped there for the Liberals. Unfortunately for them, The Advertiser came across ECSA disclosure documents, which revealed that less than a week before political donations were banned across the state, Dr Pamela Wall had donated 5 million dollars to the party. While obviously still legal at the time, the timing is obviously of interesting, and the donations size, the largest ever by an individual in SA, will raise eyebrows. Certainly, it will help the Liberals to campaign, but at the same time, could be used by Labor as a tool against them.

As a final note, Malinauskas did comment that Izak Rankine, the Crows Football player, deserved the 4 week sanction he got for using a homophobic slur on field during a game. 

News Articles

The Advertiser | SA Premier Peter Malinauskas concedes broken election promise over fixing ambulance ramping crisis

The Advertiser | SA Liberal Party receives $5 million donation from noted philanthropist Dr Pamela Wall

News Clips

7 News


9 News


ABC





21/08/2025 - The right bangs the culture war drums in South Australia

Firstly, there are no new political parties registering in the Gazette today, which makes me quite sad.

Moving on, it seems that culture war is the name of the game this week. A Parliamentary inquiry into the impact of stillbirths has seemingly struck a nerve with the state's right-wing parties, after one of the state's most senior health bureaucrats, Rebecca Graham, prefaced her evidence by stating that her use of women/woman was not intended to exclude transgender/intersex people. She quickly clarified her comments to The Australian, stating that her words were not intended "to imply that a transgender woman could give birth", a position that Labor Health Minister, Chris Picton, agreed with. He and Graham have both stated that Graham's preface was simply to ensure that all perspectives are considered.

However, this has not stopped the state's right-wing parties from jumping on the issue. The Liberals shadow Health spokesperson, Ashton Hurn, stated that "It’s a bizarre point to raise at the stillbirth committee when surely everyone in the health sector would agree only a biological woman can give birth to a baby and experience the trauma of a stillbirth first hand". Meanwhile, the Liberal's sadly ever-present Alex Antic used the moment to complain about the definition of what a man or woman was, and went so far as to state "will he [Premier Peter Malinauskas] allow it to freelance in radical gender theory?” Unfortunately for us, Family First also took their moment to chime in as well, with their Legislative Council candidate, Deepa Mathew, 'asking' both Malinauskas and the Liberal's Vincent Tarzia "whether the major parties agree with the falsehood that men can bear children". 

I should note that the founder of Still Aware (a stillbirth awareness charity), Claire Foord, stated that humanity should not be outraged "by how a person wants to identify, but rather that six babies are born stillborn in Australia every day". While she also expressed disagreeance with Graham bringing gender into the picture at all (and, according to The Australian, made some weird comments about the Women and Children's Hospital name that aren't on The Advertiser's article on it), she ended by saying that "I wish they had the same convinction towards that [stillbirths] argument.

Unfortunately for us, this wasn't the only culture war moment today. Premier Malinauskas, on a podcast with Kos Samaras and Nick Dyrenfurth (both Labor-affiliated), stated that Australians were 'turning away from both woke and anti-woke elements'. Furthermore, he suggested that Labor needs to do more to connect to both disillusioned young men and religious Australians, or see people like Andrew Tate continue to commandeer that space. He did go abit further though, stating that he thinks the association of masculinity and toxicity (atleast in terms of presence) is too perjorative. Finally, he stated that, progressives (which he included himself in) preach inclusion and tolerance but are quick to denounce Christianity, something he finds perverse. As you might guess, both The Australian and The Advertiser were quick to jump to attacking 'woke', with The Australian's title of "SA Premier strikes a chord by endorsing the end of woke" being so obviously just ragebait considering Malinauskas attacked both sides (even if was weighted to one side more). 

Hopefully my next update will be less about culture wars and more about other issues in the state, otherwise at this rate we'll be ending up in another culture war election, which, shockingly, will probably play better to Malinauskas' centre-left/centre Labor party's strengths. Also, as a sidenote, you'll notice that not a single centre/left-wing source has really picked up on all this, even though The Australian claimed the "stillbirth remark" fueled a "woke row". 


News Articles:





20/08/2025 - Family First opposes "any attempt to outlaw smacking in South Australia"


Well, this is not the next update I thought I was going to make. But Family First have decided to give us this to work with, so here we are. To give some background, earlier in the week a South Australian Royal Commission into Domestic Violence handed down its results and recommendations. One of these was to ban parents from disciplining children through the use of physical violence, such as slapping. Now, the Attorney-General has already come out and essentially said that South Australia has laws which deal with the issue well-enough, but said that the government would consider all recommendations carefully. This, of course, has caused Family First to blow a gasket.

Their head candidate, Deepa Mathew, has gone on record to state that the party will oppose any attempt to ban smacking. She also said some of the following quotes;

  • "But a smack on the backside without injury is not violence—it is a time-tested way to ensure children learn key life lessons."

  • "You can't negotiate with a two-year-old," she said. "Sometimes words are not enough to curb dangerous or defiant behaviour. A quick, measured smack has helped generations of parents set boundaries that children understand."

  • "Family First stands with responsible parents who love their children enough to teach them right from wrong. The state should be supporting parents, not undermining them with ideological bans."

Furthermore, she used a poll from the Advertiser (whose readers are generally right-wing and older) to claim that 80% of South Australians opposed banning smacking. I don't think I need to comment on how insane of a claim this is from that single source, so I'll just let you think on it. In any case, I really hope that this does not become even a minor part of the election campaign going forward, and remains as far away from normal people and politicians as possible. 

News Articles:


20/08/2025 - SA Liberals endorse Lamorna Alexander & Rebekah Rosser for the seats of Mount Gambier & Mackillop


We now know who will be facing the joint set of Liberals-turned-Independents who are currently in legal battles. Technically, we knew two days ago, but these two announcements got far overshadowed by Frank Pangallo. Lamorna Alexander, a lawyer, will be facing off against Troy Bell, who has been found guilty of stealing $430,000 from not-for-profit educational organisations in the seat of Mount Gambier. Rebekah Rosser, also a lawyer, will be taking on Nick McBride, who currently faces three charges of assaulting his wife. These two choices are perhaps the direct opposite of the parties' choice earlier this week to endorse Frank Pangallo for Waite, presenting two serious lawyers as choices in the state's South East vs someone who deliberately calls themselves an 'attack dog'.

More specifically, Alexander is someone who has worked on governance and regional politics across the Limestone Coast, having been part of Regional Assessment panels over the last two years. Rosser has less going for her in this department recently, having worked mostly with Cricket SA and Cricket Australia, but was at one point a ministerial advisor for Rob Kerin and had worked in John Howard's Liberal party as a clerk for the whip. Potentially bigger for her is the scuttlebutt going around that McBride's wife is looking to support her, and that could play massively in the election to come.

In my opinion, I think there's two stories that will play out here. First is Alexander's, which is unlikely to be a success. While Bell has been found guilty of his crimes, he is appealing, and they are less eye-catching than McBride's. She'll face strong opposition from Bell and the Labor candidate, and I don't think she has the backing to win there. Rosser, on the other hand, seems to have support from the current MHA's wife, and in a seat where Labor is unlikely to pull ahead (McBride absolutely destroyed Labor last election), it seems like it'll be a two-horse race where it comes down to whether McBride's alleged crimes have damaged his reputation enough. 

News Articles:




18/08/2025 - One Nation announces lead candidate, Carlos Quaremba

In an announcement that slipped under my radar, Pauline Hanson/One Nation has named their lead candidate for the election, State President Carlos Quaremba. Quaremba is not an entirely notable candidate, with his biggest 'claim to fame' being that he is currently a Councillor for Victor Harbour. He was their second candidate in the Federal Election, and funnily enough, his webpage hasn't been updated on the One Nation site, with it still mentioning him helping Jennifer Game (hilarious thing to leave on). In terms of policies, Quaremba has few, besides being anti-Labor and anti-net-zero.

Funnier than all this is that Hanson used the news article announcing Quaremba's candidature to lay into Sarah Game. Literally, she spent more time attacking her old MLC over uplifting her new candidate. Hanson described Game as lazy, untrustworthy, and stated that Game "didn't campaign one day". Game, for her part, called Hanson a liar and essentially two-faced. So, obviously, no love lost there. But it is really funny that Quaremba gets lost in an article that is meant to be about him. 

News Articles:

The Advertiser | Pauline Hanson lashes Sarah Game as “lazy” as Victor Harbor councillor announced as lead One Nation candidate for state election

18/08/2025 - Handshakegate continues

The event I am now dubbing Handshakegate has continued to make headlines today in SA. To sum up this mundane issue blown large, yesterday, when Frank Pangallo announced he was joining the Liberal Party, it seemed that he shunned SA Liberal's leader, Vincent Tarzia's, attempt to shake hands thrice over. As I mentioned yesterday, it was already well-known that Frank didn't hold much respect for Tarzia (and the Liberal Party as a whole), so this blunder has become a headline grabber. Labor and 7 News both have grabbed onto it with two hands, in any case.

In my opinion, its not that big of a deal, besides cementing what we already knew about Pangallo and Tarzia's relationship. It does leave room for speculation about Pangallo's true motives in the Liberal Party. Myself, and a few others I've talked to, are somewhat confident that Pangallo has entered the party with the objective of winning Waite while the rest of the Liberals flounder, and than oust Tarzia and rule over the ashes. Him and the Liberal Right faction are aligned, so it seems possible, although it does require Pangallo to win Waite which seems highly unlikely at this very moment.

News Articles:


News Clips:

7 News



17/08/2025 - Frank Pangallo joins the SA Liberal Party

Frank Pangallo, former news journalist and SA-Best/Independent MLC, has officially joined the Liberal Party and will be running in the seat of Waite at the next election. In his eyes, it's a natural way of working for the community which (and this isn't false) he's lived in for a decent while. On the other hand, Labor claims it is simply a way for Pangallo to try and keep his place in parliament. Either way, he has a 4% margin to overcome, which may not seem like alot until you consider Labor is currently polling better in the state than its results in the 2022 election.

Now, in my opinion, this is not going to be a successful move. Frank has some 'name brand' value in the state and is a dogged campaigner, certainly, but his style, personality, and politics just aren't what's needed to beat Labor and Catherine Hutchesson (the seat's MHA). Furthermore, Frank doesn't seem to respect Tarzia (not hard to think why) and is a very stubborn man, so it's very possible we see trouble in 'paradise' very soon. At the very least, it's not hard to think of a scenario where the SA Liberals look towards a certain policy or promise closer to the election that Frank disagrees with, and that causes a public spat. In addition to all this, I also think this is just a very poor use of a candidate like Frank. He isn't the best candidate for sure, but his name brand and style of campaigning is something you'd want working to boost your vote statewide, not just in one seat. This is sort of like if, when Fiona Patten joined Legalise Cannabis, she instead was put down as a candidate for a lower house seat, rather than the Senate. It's just a misuse of a candidate, that, to be fair, is quite representative of the SA Liberal's political intelligence these days.

News Articles:




News Clips:

7 News


9 News


ABC







Thursday, May 8, 2025

2025 Australian Federal Election Review

 Well, the 2025 Federal Election is done (voting is still ongoing though), and I will be real, I did not expect the result to be so drastically in Labor's favor. I'll talk more about that below, but I think that is the headline this election. The majority Labor holds is historic, both in terms of 2pp votes and in the seats they now hold, and on the other hand the Liberals are in an absolutely dishevelled state. In addition, more Australians than ever, once again, have voted for minor parties and independents, and the crossbench is one of the largest in history. I was expecting election night to have been a long one, prepared for close results that would decide the election to be going into midnight, but was stunned to be laughing with mates about Dutton losing Dickson by 9pm. Now, there is still plenty of vote counting to be done, so I will not be as certain as I like in some of my thoughts, but nonetheless, I think I have let the dust settle enough to bring you this review. 

General Thoughts

I mean, what is there to say that isn't obvious here? The Labor party, under a steady but not incredibly ambitious Albanese, has managed to achieve a result better than any Labor party since World War Two. If that isn't a complete refutation of the muddled lack of vision that Peter Dutton and the Liberal Party were bringing to the table, I don't know what else is. Labor won seats where most people would never had even predicted it had the chance, while the Liberals have been relegated to the regional areas of states and Queensland. Labor is looking likely to reach near-on 90 seats, the Liberals look like they'll be struggling for more than the low-40s, and meanwhile Teal Independents have held and made gains while the Greens have floundered.

I should say that this election result shouldn't have been overly surprising. Yes, the polls were off once again, giving too little to Labor except for a YouGov MRP and Roy Morgan poll which managed to be on the money, but I don't think that are to blame for the surprise most felt. Rather, the spectre of 2019, that the polls were overestimating Labor, remained a major part of predictions and analysis throughout the campaign period. People thought Labor would do worse, because, quite frankly, no one believed that a win on this scale was even possible in this day and age. The result is surprising to us all, but only because of the spectres which remained over the last two elections.

Where does this leave parliament now? Well, Labor, with its large majority and seemingly only needing the Greens or Coalition to help pass bills in the Senate, has room to do what it pleases. Ignoring a major fracturing of the Labor caucus, Albanese and his government have near-free rein to not only undertake the policies and platform they wish, but to be successful in seeing them all through as well. The ambition of their policies can only be limited by themselves now, no longer can they blame other parties or the media, or being a first-term government. 

For most others, this election result will lead to many wounds needing to be licked. While no party (bar maybe one) was destroyed this election, no party besides Labor will be approaching the line to happiness with this result. Post-mortems will be had, strategies analysed and reconsidered, and in the end we'll do it all again in 2028. Only time will tell though whether parties like the Liberals or Greens will have learnt their lessons by that point, and whether they, especially the Liberals, can escape the wilderness.

Party by Party Thoughts



Animal Justice Party


What I predicted: The Animal Justice Party is in a good place right now. They've been growing slowly but surely over the last decade, and now have an MLC in NSW, Victoria, and WA, while also gaining at every federal election. While I don't think they won't see major growth at this election, they represent a niche rather than a specific side of politics, it is not impossible that they break past 2% of the national vote (in the senate) this time round. They won't win any seats, but they'll keep going up.

My Review: The election was not the one for AJP. Seemingly surging in the states, it looked likely they'd only see that surge continue at the federal election. Not so. The party has either seen stagnation or loss in every state bar WA when it comes to the senate, with its biggest loss being in NSW, where its vote share fell nearly an entire percentage point. This should be seen as a major failure for the party, in an election where other minor parties were gaining votes left, right, and centre, they had one of the largest falls (in NSW their loss of vote share was only beaten by the Liberals). Their gaining votes in WA may be seen as a silver lining, but it was only 0.23% of the vote share gained, and is rather small when you consider the population differences between NSW and WA.

Not much can be said explicitly about their efforts in the House of Representatives, having 18 candidates this time round compared to 48 in 2022 means any effort to compare votes on a national scale is nonsensical. But looking at places where the same candidates were running in both elections, such as Victoria Davies in Hunter or Matt Pastro in Hindmarsh, is telling. Pastro, in Hindmarsh, received nearly 0.8% less votes than his previous time around, a major failing cutting him from above 2% of the vote to just 1.3% now. Davies isn't much better, having lost 0.7% of the vote in Hunter and being cut down to the same vote share as Pastro. So, on a seat-by-seat basis, it seems that the AJP also lost votes in the House. 

All of this is to say that, while it isn't an outright rejection of AJP's policy platform, it is a sign that the party needs to restrategize. Perhaps they are a party better suited to state elections, more able to get their platform out in the smaller campaigns of those elections. Maybe they keep trying at federal elections, but another failure like this one would essentially leave the party in the grave federally. At the very least, they can take solace in the fact that, despite having fewer candidates and doing worse, they still polled better than multiple other parties.


Australian Christians


What I predicted: A surprise winner in WA's state election, I am not certain that success will translate nationally. Besides the fact they're only running in WA, and having a small go at NSW's senate, which will obviously limit any success, they're competing with a surplus of active right-wing parties. If we're looking at WA specifically, they may hit closer to 3%, but even if this gets them near the quota, its more likely that the final/6th seat goes to One Nation or Legalise Cannabis. They'll see growth, but not enough to gain anything concrete. 

My Review: The Australian Christians will certainly be quite happy with their results this election. Unlike my prediction for the AJP, this one was essentially spot on. In Western Australia, the party is now on the cusp of hitting 3% of the vote share for the Senate, putting them below only the Nationals, Legalise Cannabis, and One Nation before they would be hitting the 6th quota position. As all three of those are national parties, the Australian Christians becoming their equals would be big for the party. The same can be said for the lower house results, as they are now also on the cusp of hitting 2% of the vote in Western Australia. While it doesn't mean they're close to getting a seat, it does mean that sustained effort might let them do so in coming elections.

Their 'small go' in NSW ended up being quite the success. Gaining 1.2% of the vote share, they're properly competing with other right-wing parties such as Family First, Trumpet of Patriots, and the Libertarian/HEART/People First group ticket. While it is hard to say whether they'll see the same success in NSW again, it is probably a win the party will take.

Overall, the Australian Christians seem like they may become a staple party of Western Australia in the next few elections. While I am not sure if they'll get a senate seat at any point in the foreseeable future, they may soon be challenging One Nation and the Nationals to be the main, non-Liberal, right-wing party in the state.


Australian Citizens Party


What I predicted: The party's attempts at obscuring its past (and current) ideology may help it in some ways, as there is only so much people like myself can do to combat that, and I know that some people in my life who should've known better were drawn in by the allure of some of their policies. I don't think they'll gain much from it, and since they are one of the most obscure parties in this election, it isn't likely they'll see major growth. ACP will probably sit between .10% - .30% of the national vote. 

My Review: Another one spot on. The ACP got 0.1% of the vote overall in the lower house, and while this may not seem impressive initially, I assume they'll be taking it as a success. This is despite the fact that they were running over double the candidates in the lower house, which, of course, would naturally make their vote count increase, but I assume they'll still be celebrating. They didn't do better in the Senate though. They essentially stagnated in every state, seeing only small increases in WA and a modest increase in Tasmania to about 0.4% of the state's senate vote. 

All of this is to say that the ACP remains an incredibly fringe party. They'll keep trying, I'm certain, but it is difficult to know which will come first; their inevitable deregistration due to a lack of members or them voluntarily giving up. I suspect we'll see them again in 2028, but beyond that, LaRouchism just isn't an ideology that has the legs to survive for long.


Australian Democrats


What I predicted: The Democrats exist in such a weird place that it is difficult to predict where they'll go next. They've been, very slowly, increasing their vote share from 2016 when they were deregistered, but who knows where their limit will be. Some on the Centre-Left might see them as an opportunity to vote for something that isn't Labor or the Greens first, so its possible they still gain some votes this election. Expect a maximum of 0.5% nation-wide from the Democrats, and not a cent more. 

My Review: The Democrats are in the same place as they were at the start of the election. Their single lower house candidate got about the same amount of votes as they did in the 2022 election, and so is barely worth noticing (respect to them for running, even if its abit of a non-factor). Senate-wise, they are looking at 1 step forward, 1 step back. In Victoria, they lost nearly 0.3% of their vote share, taking them back to 0.5% in the state. Meanwhile, they saw minor gains in WA and Queensland. The loss in Victoria will probably sting more than the salve that the gains will provide, in any case.

So where do the Democrats go from here? Well, if they can keep up their membership numbers, likely to a continual stagnating vote share, as without something major they are somewhat thing a of the past. But their big issue will be keeping their membership high enough. Voters don't equally equate into members, and while for such a minor party the ratio may be somewhat close, it still will be tight when the AEC comes calling next. I suspect they'll survive into 2028, but without a boost there its hard to know what is next.


Australian Greens


What I predicted: Well, here's probably the hardest prediction I'll have to make on this review. Where will the Greens end up? Senate-wise, I think balance of power is easily secured for them, though I don't think they'll see their senate seats increase this election. The House is where things get very spicy though. It seems likely that the Greens will lose atleast a couple of there seats there. And I can't disagree, it is almost certain they'll lose atleast one seat in Queensland. However, I also think they may gain a seat or two, either in Victoria, or, and this is my dark horse prediction, in the electorate of Sturt in SA. Also, expect them to end up above 13% of the vote, and don't be shocked if they hit 14%.

My Review: This was nowhere near the election that the Greens wished it was. The party's lower house representation is looking to be cut down to a single seat at most, as Ryan remains the only place in which their polling has held up. With both other Brisbane seats gone, and Melbourne going Labor's way, the party now has to look at what happened to lead them to this place. And despite calls on the night that things weren't so bad, as the Greens' vote share had increased nationally, its now the case that it has actually backslid to see them lose 0.5%. 

So, what is there for the Greens to do? Well, this shouldn't be seen as a nightmare scenario or the apocalypse. They lost seats and votes in what was a Labor surge, and so they can take solace in that at least some of the losses weren't in their control. However, some were. Labor, and Albanese in particular, has attempted to portray the Greens' losses as down to them running a grievance platform. Ignoring the fact that this is the type of campaign they ran in 2022 (and somewhat this time round too), I don't think that really holds water. Rather, the big failing of the Greens campaign, in my opinion, is a lack of local policies. For a party with a strong grassroots core, it gained a sort of tunnelvision for federal-level policies. Now, I'm not saying throw those away, the Greens have perfected them to the point where they essentially hold the balance of power in the Senate for the foreseeable future. But, they do need to modify. Local policies help win seats, and if the Greens want to transition from perennial balance of power holders in the vein of the Democrats, to a party which can contest the election in the House, they'll need policies which win seats, not just broad votes. And there are plenty of local policies around the country they could implement which would align with their overall platform, so it isn't really an issue of ideology. In my opinion, if the Greens don't transition their campaign strategy into the next election, they won't lose anything but they certainly won't gain much.

Now, this is not to say all is bad. The Greens are pretty much certain to keep all of their seats in the Senate (as I predicted). This is a strong point for them, and will ensure they're kept in the national conversation across the next three years. They'll need to rebuild from this area though, which won't be the easiest. But there are ways forward, especially when you consider that in SA and Tasmania, they increased their Senate vote share by 2.4% and 1.3% respectively. With both those states essentially now Labor strongholds, the Greens should see them as perfect bases of opportunity to expand.


Australian Labor Party


What I predicted: (On Bluesky) That they'd win ~76 seats and maybe increase their vote slightly

My Review: Well, who expected that? Labor is on track to its best election since World War Two (as I mentioned previously). It has more seats in both houses, and has seen its vote share surge upwards in every state. On the numbers-side of things, there really isn't much to talk about. Labor won, and they won hard.

What about their campaign though? Well, they also won that. It turns out that Albanese wakes up for 5 weeks every 3 years to absolutely demolish the Liberals, only to return to a state of hibernation during the next 3 years. Okay, maybe that is hyperbolic, but once again, Albanese campaigning seems like such a different person to the guy in parliament. He ran a tight ship, rarely gaffed, and took every chance to destroy Dutton, getting to the point where he essentially told Dutton, in jest, to 'get f*cked, f*ck off' (implying it via the Angel's song, Am I Ever Going to See your Face Again?) without a single shred of backlash. Watching Albanese on the last couple days of the campaign was to watch a man unleashed. The Labor party was much the same. Their policies were, while not the most ambitious, neat, tidy, and without any clear weaknesses. They beat the Liberals on cost of living, energy, environment, and more, and even managed to outdo them on taxes. This review is short because, practically, there is little to criticise about Labor's campaign. Could they be more ambitious? Certainly, and would hope they will be considering the majority they now have. But beyond that, its hard to point out issues when their opponent also ran one of the worst campaigns of the century.


Australia's Voice


What I predicted: With the relative dearth of left-wing parties compared to 2022, and, anecdotally, the fact that some socialists in states without socialist parties feel better served by Voice than the Greens (a combination of Payman's increased focus on Palestine and a dislike of the Greens taking on a military policy) it is possible that Australia's Voice sees some success. And by that, I mean not the lows that parties like TNL saw in 2022. Expect around 0.3% of the national vote going towards these guys, maybe closer to 0.5% if they get lucky.

My Review: Here's a party that I vastly underestimated. The new 'kid' on the block when it comes to left-leaning parties, Australia's Voice was a party I believed would do okay, but not spectacular. And while they didn't blow the roof off of any states, they have certainly set themselves up quite well for success going into the next election. 

Looking at their results, the party hit 0.8-0.9% of the vote in NSW, Queensland, SA, and WA. For a new party, with far less media attention than others, that is a rather good result for their first election. The news gets even better when you look at Victoria, where the party received 1.1% of the vote. To jump to over 1% of the vote in a party's first election is a very difficult task, and AV having done it means that they may have a decent shot in Victoria in the next election. Now, they will be facing difficulties there. Victoria still has a rather strong Greens vote (sitting at 14%), and AV will also be competing for votes against Victorian Socialists (who also did rather well this election), so its not like the state is an instant-win for them. But these results are good, and with proper effort (and more policies), AV could be in a very good place in three years time.


FUSION | Planet Rescue | Whistleblower Protection | Innovation


What I Predicted: FUSION's luck could go one of two ways. Either, it's compromise strategy could get it voters from a wide umbrella, increasing its voterbase and knowledge of the party, or it could alienate 'core' members while failing to entice those on the right. While I can't be certain which it is (I lean to the latter), what I do know from experience is that FUSION did best when it had volunteers at booths. If FUSION's changes alienate active volunteers, this could be a large wound for the party. All of that being said, I expect stagnation in regards to the party's vote share, taking 0.20%-0.40% in the senate and maybe 0.10% in the House. 

My Review: Stagnation is perhaps the best word to describe FUSION's results at this election. Despite an alliance designed to reach across the aisle, votes have not increased in the manner in which a compromise may suggest they would. And for a minor party, stagnation is perhaps the most dangerous thing, as decline can motivate members to push back. 

Perhaps most disappointing would be their results in the lower house. Despite having 4 more candidates running for seats (13 vs 9 in 2022), the party's overall national result is the exact same as it was in 2022. Now, while it isn't a disaster, it does suggest that FUSION is failing to either get it's name and policies out there, which is a fixable issue, or that voters don't really care for their name and policies, which is far more difficult to fix. After 2 elections, one would start to lean towards the latter case, but there is a chance it remains the former. In any case, running more candidates should get you more votes, naturally, so the lack of progress there is worrying. A simple search to do see how their candidate in Adelaide did, who ran both in 2022 and 2025, demonstrates this. That candidate received 0.26% less votes than in 2022, and was the only minor party to go backwards (the Liberals and Greens also did). As such, the lack of progress in the national results must be worrying, because stagnation with increased candidates only means those increased candidates are hiding the worse results elsewhere.

The story isn't good in the Senate either. Normally, a place where a minor party can find solace, even with a poor lower house result, this has not been the case for FUSION. Once again, they've stagnated in these results, seeing no gains (actually, minor losses), in every state they ran in bar South Australia. Their SA vote is perhaps their only silver lining, as the party actually gained 0.2% of the vote to increase to 0.5% in the state. Why this is, is hard to say, but I do assume it is down to the quality of their president, who was their 2nd candidate in the state and quite active in promoting his party. But that is only a small silver lining, the lack of results elsewhere is not great. And while I don't think FUSION will be disappearing before the 2028 election, it does seem like the party is in sink or swim territory.


Family First Party Australia


What I predicted: Trying to predict where Family First will end up is difficult. They weren't around in the last two elections, and politics has somewhat moved past them. Despite this though, their name is known, and the values they represent are supported by some in our society. Looking at the field they're contending with, they'll probably slot into a comfortable spot for a revived party. Nothing above 1%, but also not completely forgotten. Expect something below 0.5% nationally, but don't be shocked if it is abit higher. 

My Review: Turns out I got this one very wrong. Politics has not, apparently, moved past Family First. That is frustrating when you consider who runs the party and their values, but alas, I've already thrown enough venom at the party and Lyle Shelton in my initial post on the minor parties of the election. Their success may suggest that there is room for culture-war politics tinged in religious conservatism, but on the edges of the right-wing.

Looking at both their Senate and House results, Family First did rather well. They gained a national vote of 1.7% for the lower house, having them be competitive with parties far more discussed in the media like Trumpet of Patriots and Legalise Cannabis. In the Senate they gained anywhere from 1.7% (in NSW) to over 2% in Queensland and South Australia. While that is an interesting result considering the fact that Shelton was their NSW candidate, and so him getting the worst result is quite ironic, it does mean that they have bases for growth in every state they ran. Particularly in SA, where their name has held value over the last decades, and Queensland, where the right-wing vote is higher, the party could come to eclipse all on the right besides One Nation and the Liberals, demonstrating themselves as an alternative on that side of politics. Its hard to say because the party has a history of infighting and fractures, so it is possible that by next election it has split, but if it manages to keep itself together don't be shocked if it only continues to go upwards.


Gerard Rennick People First


Whate I predicted: Rennick's put a lot of work into this party, and the party itself seems to have dedication throughout it, however, I don't see where Rennick can really look to gain seats. The Liberal party isn't dead yet, nowhere near it, and One Nation is the party gaining the most from those on the Right who find the LNP to no longer represent them. Even in terms of Trumpian politics, the Trumpet of Patriots has the name brand and money behind it to outdo People First. Expect People First than to end up in a similar place like the many left-wing minor parties last election, with less than 0.30% of the overall vote. No seats are to be had here, and even Rennick will be in for the fight of his life (I suspect a fight which he is likely to lose). 

My Review: People First is in a very interesting place right now. It has seen success, far beyond what I expected, in the places it ran. But at the same time, its entire reason for existing, the Gerard Rennick in the People First, may be one of this election's biggest failures. 

Firstly, in the national vote for the House, People First has reached around 0.5% for the total votes. While this is better than I expected, it is still quite low for a party with as many candidates as it had. Polling lower than Family First and the Libertarians is not a good place to be when there were so many parties fighting for the right in this election. 

Its a completely different story when you look at the Senate. Having utilised joint tickets with Libertarians and Heart to their advantage, the party saw some major successes. These include 2% of the vote in NSW, 1.2% of the vote in Victoria, and similar vote shares in WA and SA. Not the best votes, and very much predicated on the joint tickets they shared, but still a success for a new party. However, I will say that essentially none of this actually matters, because this party was just a vehicle designed to do one thing, keep Gerard Rennick in parliament.

When you first look at the Queensland Senate results, you'd believe that it did that job well. People First are floating just under 5% of the vote, trailing the majors, Greens, and One Nation. However, in this case, it just isn't enough. Rennick's only competition, the one thing he had to beat this election, was One Nation and specifically Malcolm Roberts. And yet, he trailed by 2%. While there is still much to be counted, it is hard to see his path to victory unless preferences really fall his way. I don't think Rennick will accept defeat until the final whistle is called, but his loss will likely signal the end of this party, as Rennick will probably jump to another, more established minor party should he continue to exist in the political realm. In the end, it'll come down to the fight between Rennick and Roberts, which only makes sense if you've seen the 6News Queensland Minor Party Debate.


HEART (Health, Environment, Accountability, Rights and Transparency) Party


What I predicted: I want to predict that these guys will get 0 votes, but considering the fact that RFK Jr. sits in the white house as I write this post, that is obviously not going to happen. They got 0.3% in the senate last time, and I suspect that they might get similar this time, though with the Pandemic not on as many people's minds these days it is also likely they'll end up with less votes. 

My Review: Trying to analyse these guys is pretty much impossible, as every Senate spot they ran for was in a joint ticket. They go from 1.2% of the vote in Victoria alongside People First, to 0.2% of the vote in Queensland alongside the Great Australian Party. Based on People First's other successes, though, and GAP's failures, I do think reaching the conclusion that they did not do well isn't unreasonable. Furthermore, it is also difficult to ascertain how much worse or better they did in the lower house, as they went from over a dozen candidates in 2022 to 3 this election. And with not a single candidate running in both of those elections, there's no real comparison to make either. In the end, the downgrade of candidates and the need for a joint ticket suggests one thing, that the party is declining.


Indigenous-Aboriginal Party of Australia


What I predicted: It is quite tough to predict how these guys will go. They're pushing for a niche beyond the regularly left and right fight that you see in Australia's elections, and so it'll be up to them to get their name out to that niche and show that they are the best option for them. That being said, they did receive nearly 0.5% of the vote last election, so don't be shocked if they end in a similar place this time round. 

My Review: It's always difficult to exactly analyse how a niche party like the IAPA is doing, as it requires you to consider them amongst their niche, not more broadly. That being said, the IAPA did quite well this election. Their lower house votes are stable, but that is recognising that they were one of the least voted for parties this election, so its not really a success. The part they did well in was the Senate. While they did lose 0.15% of their vote in NSW, dropping them to 0.7% overall, they also reached 0.7% of the vote in Victoria and 1.5% of the vote in Queensland on their first time running. That Queensland vote is perhaps the most interesting thing, and suggests that they may find long-term success in the state if they focus there. Specifically, I could see the party transitioning well to state elections in Queensland, and becoming a relevant political force in the state over time. It would require effort, and revamping their policies to be more substantial, but it could be possible.


Jacqui Lambie Network


What I predicted: Beyond Jacqui probably retaining her seat at this election, it is unlikely that the other candidates will see much success. That is, of course, excluding Rex Patrick, who I've seen personally win over crowds he has no right in winning over. While I don't think he's a shoe-in, his name brand, prior experience, and enthusiasm give him the potential to be a big underdog for the 6th senate seat in South Australia. It's too fine to say whether he'll make it or not, but expect him and One Nation to be in a big fight over the seat this election.

My Review: The JLN is likely dead as a brand past this election. Jacqui's tried everything with it, and besides some temporary success in Tasmania, has continually come up short. In NSW the party got less than 1% of the vote in the Senate, which I'd normally call a success for a party contesting the state for the first time, but for an established brand like JLN it's disappointing. Its a similar story in Queensland, where the party only got 1.5% of the vote.

The two main focuses for the party this election were SA and Tasmania, and neither is particularly good news for them either. In South Australia, Rex Patrick, who I stated might be able to take the 6th Senate seat, has failed to get even close. Polling at 2.6%, he lands underneath Trumpet of Patriots, Legalise Cannabis, and One Nation in what must be a disappointment for the time and effort he spent in the state. Tasmania is also a poor showing. While Lambie herself seems likely to get the last Senate seat there by the skin of her teeth, fighting off both One Nation and Labor, it is still very close and very possible she'll fall short. Even if she wins, a swing of 1.5% away from her is massive, and suggests that her brand is failing. Should she survive this, she might be tempted to try the JLN nationally again, seeing as she has the one election buffer for her own seat, but I doubt it'd be anymore successful. The JLN, to be truthful, is really just a lesser sibling of the Teals now.


Katter's Australian Party


What I predicted: This is probably the easiest call I will make in my life. Bob Katter will win his seat, every other KAP candidate will lose. Not much more to say, honestly. 

My Review: I was talking to a bunch of friends on election night, and one of the first things that popped up on the ABC's site was Kennedy, Bob Katter's seat. I joked, why don't the AEC just immediately assume that Katter has won the seat and save the resources? Now, obviously that is just a joke, but the reality is that Katter is a permanent fixture there, until he retires or dies. Beyond him though, the party didn't do great. Losing 0.2% of its lower house vote in Queensland strings but isn't the end of the world, even if People First and Family First did end up surpassing it. In the Senate though, it has no chance of being elected, as its joint ticket with Rennick means it is supporting his bid to win, which looks ever less likely by the hour. So in the end, its one step back for the KAP, but I doubt Katter particularly cares. The party, much like People First, is a vehicle for his name and keeping him as a relevant political force when the election season isn't on. Beyond that, how it does is barely of relevance.


Legalise Cannabis Australia


What I predicted: Legalise Cannabis has been growing around the country, as it becomes quite clear that Australians want the plant to be either legal or decriminalised. Last election, they received over 3.3% of the vote, and I don't see that going down any time soon. Their goal, alongside their name, mean they will get votes, and be shocked to see that number jump past 4%. 5% is abit of a stretch, but in the senate it is anyone's game. 

My Review: Legalise Cannabis continues to be a growing political movement. On the long and short of it, that should already tell you a lot. There is a significant amount of want for cannabis legalisation in Australia, and if I had to guess, it'll happen sooner rather than later. When it does, the spread of votes from LCan will be very interesting to see. 

Taking on their first proper lower house venture, one has to be somewhat impressed with their gain of 1.1% of the national vote. While it won't win them any seats any time soon, it will start to mean that lower house seats are won and lost on their preferences, and that is an incredibly strong incentive in pushing their agenda. Parties win government through the lower house, so strategic candidates could become keys to being kingmakers for the majors.

In the Senate, the news is even better. In most states, the party increased their vote, polling anywhere from 3% to nearly 5% in SA, WA, NSW, and Victoria. The only losses they saw were a minor one in Tasmania, and a drop of 1.5% in Queensland, which is rather significant. However, both drops still keep them in that 3-5% bracket, which is just below what parties tend to need to start aiming for a quota. And since that is happening in every state, it means that this election, Legalise Cannabis was only a swing of a couple percent to gaining a senator in every state. Now, do I think such a swing is plausible next election? Not entirely, but I also am not sure Legalise Cannabis will be around next election. There's a lot of pressure on its one topic, and eventually the majors will have to respond to it. 


Liberal Party of Australia


What I predicted: (On Bluesky) 39 seats by themselves, not as a coalition (54 as a coalition).

My Review: Well, this is not the result that Dutton and the Liberal party would have wanted. I could talk for a long time about the state of their party in parliament, about their seats, and what not, but I'll leave that for the news sites. One thing I will note is that the Liberal vote in the Senate is down anywhere from 6% to 9% of the vote share in most states, only seeing an increase in NT and only a slight decrease of 3% in Victoria. That, in no uncertain terms, is not good at all. 

What I want to focus on is what this result means for the Liberals. Lets be clear, unless they see a miracle occur, there is essentially 0 chance they form government at the 2028 election. Maybe its possible at 2031, but I'm skeptical that they'll fix their issues by that point. What are their issues? Well, ignoring the absolutely atrocious campaign that Dutton ran, there's two key issues. Firstly, the party is missing talent. Liberals and liberal-aligned media have been saying it since the election night, but there is no one in the party who screams out as being a leader. Not the leader who will get them out of this situation, but a leader in general. As bad as he was, Dutton at least felt like the Liberals' leader when he took over, even if he was the clear second choice to Frydenberg.

But that issue is leagues below how important their second one is. That being, the Liberal Party doesn't have a base anymore. It is uncertain about whether it wanted to be the centre-right party which focused on economics and defence, or if it wanted to be the right-wing party which focused on the culture war. And in its wavering, it bled votes from both sides. This isn't an easy issue to fix either, as the party is now bookended on both sides by other parties. In the centre the party has ceded ground to both the Teals and Labor, while on the right One Nation, Family First, and a cacophony of other right-wing voices hold that ground. Its also not like the party really has the core to fix these issues. Pushed completely out of Tasmania, Adelaide, Perth and most of Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane, the party lacks an urban core that most voters would be able to identify with. Instead, it is now a party of the regions, and of Queensland. That means its biggest decision makers may be out of touch with what most of Australia wants, and trying to get those voices back in will be a difficult task indeed.

So, where does the Liberal party go from here? In my opinion, its got two choices. Firstly, moderate itself and attempt to merge back together with the Teals. This won't be easy, considering the above issues I mentioned, and may not be the task most of the Liberals prefer. But in my opinion it is the most sensible option, attempting to win back the centre from Labor. The other option is of course continue right, and attempt to merge with One Nation and its ilk. This will certainly bring in primary votes, but I think it'll cause even more people to preference Labor above Liberal, and would be a losing strategy. Considering that people like Gina Rinehart think its the right option though, the Liberals may just try it. Of course, there is a secret third option. The party could do neither, and try to stay the course. I think such an option is a mistake, and would lead to many more years in the wilderness. I also think it'd make it so that the next right-leaning party to enter government wouldn't be called the Liberals any longer. It'd be a reformed party, similar to the UAP/Nationalists/Menzies Liberals of the mid-1900s. 


Libertarian Party


What I predicted: Now, despite doing terribly last election in the lower house, the Liberal Democrats actually polled well in the sentate, earning around 2.2% of the vote. This time around, they are fighting a more fractured and prominent right-wing scene, so they may struggle. They are also missing the crutch of the Pandemic, which helped propel them. All of this being considered, I think its likely that they dip below 2% this election, though someone like Craig Kelly might do well in their state.

My Review: Another party whose drop in candidates makes it difficult to understand their numbers. The Libertarians went from 99 lower house candidates in 2022 to 47 or so in 2025, making the drop on their national vote of 1.2% hard to see as anything but a drop in candidate numbers. To be fair, it is also a drop of over 2/3rds of their initial vote, which would suggest more than just a lack of candidates. A quick check of Lalor, one of the few seats where a candidate for the party crosses over the two elections (Patrizia Barcatta), tells the story. There, the party lost 2.6% of the vote share, going from nearly 4% to just above 1% this election. That is highly telling, and suggests that the party not only lost candidates, but lost voters.

Senate results aren't much better for them. Ignoring their joint tickets in places like NSW (which are dismal anyways, 2% of the vote from a 3 party joint ticket!), the party did not do well. In Victoria, they only received 0.6% of the vote, in Queensland 0.5% of the vote, WA 0.7%, and Tasmania 0.5% as well. Its only in SA where they managed to breach the 1% line, just. Considering that in 2022 the Liberal Democrats, the name the Libertarians went by in that election, got 2.26% of the Senate vote nationwide, these results are actually incredibly dismal. Furthermore, when one considers the effort and energy put into the Libertarian campaign, I swear they were one of the most well-known right-wing parties besides the LNP, One Nation, and Trumpet of Patriots, the result seems even worse. One has to wonder where the Libertarians go from here.



National Party of Australia


What I predicted: (On Bluesky) That they would hit 15 seats in the lower house

My Review: The National Party remains the only solid component of the coalition. With 9 seats of their own, plus a few in the Queensland LNP, the party seems undamaged by the swing against the Liberals. This does make sense, considering the parties performances in state election blowouts for the Liberals. Their regional focus, something both major parties aren't well-known for, insulates them from the worst excesses of national swings. 

What does this mean for the party now? Well, multiple politicians for the party have suggested that they want a bigger piece of the coalition pie considering the balance of results. Such a change up is likely, but may also be a negative for the Liberal party as they end up being brought more to the Right due to the Nationals. More interesting is that multiple politicians for the party have brought up the idea of splitting the coalition. While all have said it wouldn't occur, the fact that it is being mentioned suggests that the idea is being floated in some capacity in the party room. I doubt a split will occur now, but should things only get worse for the coalition, it is hard to say where things may lead.



Pauline Hanson's One Nation


What I predicted: One Nation is in an incredible spot right now, as the party on the Right with the most clearly-defined base. This is being reflected in the polls, which have seen One Nation's share rise all the way into the double digits at times. Should such polls be replicated on Election Day, One Nation would end up with its best results in its lifetime. Does this mean One Nation will win any seats? Well, I suspect that One Nation will be in the running for multiple senate seats, with states like Queensland and South Australia being their most likely places to win. Expect the party to end up with 2-3 Senate seats once counting is done, and maybe up to 5 depending on how other states do. And while I don't think they'll win anything in the House of Representatives, I do think its more than likely that they will end up in the 2PP race for atleast one seat. In the end, looking for a total vote share of just under 10%, I don't think they'll hit double digits just yet. 

My Review: Poor old Pauline (not really, but you know). If there was anyone the polls did dirtier, I do not know. The swing that they suggested would manifest on election day did not appear, and the seats they were seemingly destined to gain did not arrive. Now, it isn't all bad. The party did see a swing of 1.3% nationally to them. But, lets be real, One Nation wasn't just meant to get more votes this election, it was meant to get seats, especially in the Senate.

The Senate result is perhaps demonstrative of the majority of Australians' rejection of Pauline Hanson's message. In a pre-election context, most analysts suggested that One Nation would be competitive for a seat in every state, and would likely pick up atleast a couple of those seats. What actually happened was far from that. While One Nation did demonstrate itself to be the number four party in nearly every state, it never actually got close enough quota-wise to pick up seats after election night went past. In NSW, Victoria, WA, SA, NT, and Tasmania, One Nation failed to pick up the 6th seat, and have become uncompetitive in most of those states. The only place they did gain a seat was in Queensland, with Malcolm Roberts very likely to be re-elected, but even than his seat hasn't be confirmed yet and votes for the party are down half a percent. 

All of this, the bad result in the Senate and the lack of growth in the lower house should be a warning call for One Nation. Even with the Liberals significant decline, they were not rewarded on the rebound. Voters instead moved to Labor or the Teal Independents, and those on the right who've fled the Liberals seemed just as likely to pick Family First, for instance, than One Nation. So where does this leave the party? Well, with rumours that Pauline is looking to retire, and their only other senator the same age as her, it seems like the party is in a really bad place. I suspect Pauline wanted this election to provide successors to carry on the party past her retirement (if it is occurring), and was hoping either her daughter in Tasmania, or the mother/daughter duo of the Games in SA would be voted in. It was not to be though, and so, while I think Pauline may not retire just yet, it is hard to see where her party can go from here. If it can't capitalise off the Liberals losses next election, perhaps the party has hit its ceiling.


Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party


What I predicted: These guys are relics of a conservatism that time has somewhat passed by, in this current moment. They are and will continue to be swamped by newer parties, and simply won't be able to retain votes over time. They probably dip below 0.5% of the vote share for the senate this election, and into the next period, I think they'll have to have a serious conversation about their party's future. 

My Review: Not dead just yet. That is about the best I can say for the SFF. Despite the increase in right-wing parties, and more modern right-wing parties, the SFF was not completely blown out of the water. Now, that isn't to say they did well. There are multiple failings that suggest that the party's brand is not a thriving one, and if the SFF had a proactive leadership, they'd be signs of needing to change, to move forward. But I doubt they do, and I doubt they will.

One of the clearest identifiers that things are going poorly is in the lower house. There, the SFF has managed to retain the same vote share as it had in 2022, something that would seem only slightly negative for them. However, a quick look presents the reality that SFF is in a worse spot with this than a surface-level peek suggests. In 2022, the SFF put up 4 candidates for the lower house, in 2025 that increased to 7. If you've read the rest of this review, you'll know why this is a bad thing. Now, there's no crossover candidates so I cannot analyse any deeper, but its clear to see that the party's fortunes are on a downwards trend.

Things aren't much better in the Senate for the SFF either. They've seen a 0.12% decline in their vote share in Victoria (a 10% drop overall), and while they've seen an increase of 0.3% in Tasmania, the reality is that it isn't enough of an increase to help the party overall. Looking at all of this, it seems that unless the SFF modernises and finds some appeal for younger conservatives, it is destined to only die a slow but sure death.


Socialist Alliance


What I predicted: Socialist Alliance won't be winning any seats (if they were close we'd be in a new red scare). However, I do think many on the left are disillusioned with Labor and even the Greens in some places. Socialist Alliance, therefore, only stands to gain from those on the far-left who cannot find a home in the more mainstream parties. I don't think such a left-wing flight will be massive, but possibly enough to get Socialist Alliance 0.3-0.4% of the vote share.

My Review: Socialist Alliance is one of the mixed bags of this election. While they didn't see as many gains as I said they would, they also didn't falter in most regards. The party probably wishes their increases were bigger and any losses smaller, but that'd only come with a more national campaign, in my opinion, and I don't see that occurring from the Socialist Alliance side of the socialist parties for a while.

Their Senate outcomes are perhaps the most interesting thing here. They saw increases of 0.1% in both NSW and WA, which is a decent increase considering their overall vote shares in 2022 for both states was just 0.2%. Queensland, on the other hand, will probably be considered a major success for them. There, they've increased their vote share by 0.3% to increase to 0.6% overall. Increasing their votes by double is significant, and if I had to analyse why this happened in Queensland of all places, it was probably Greens voters moving even further left in an election that saw many Greens voters in Queensland to move to other parties.

There isn't much to talk about in the lower house here. The party remained stagnant in their overall vote, and since their candidate numbers remained essentially the same (5 in 2022 to 6 in 2025). The increase in candidates isn't enough to suggest that the stagnation of votes is a bad thing, but it does demonstrate that more work would need to be done in their lower house races to change the trend to a positive. Overall, things aren't terrible for Socialist Alliance, but more effort will be needed next election if they don't want to be left behind.


Sustainable Australia Party - Universal Basic Income


What I predicted: 2022 saw SusAus end up with just over half a percent of the vote share in the Senate, up only 0.1% from the year prior. This time round, I can't really see why they would increase much. They shouldn't appeal to many on the left, though some who like social democratic style policies but who are also anti-immigration might find their place there. Furthermore, I can't see them appealing to the right, as their policy list besides their anti-immigration stuff is simply too left-leaning. I suspect that SusAus will stagnate at this election, remaining at 0.5% of the vote at most.

My Review: Another mixed bag, though this one is weighted mostly to the negative. Sustainable Australia is a party which appeared to have some momentum in the last election, and in this one I suspected that stagnation was the way they'd go due to their voters working out the true ideology behind the party. Whether that is why they got the results they got, I can't say, but it is clear that in the states atleast, the party is suffering.

The Senate is such an interesting bag of results for the party. In NSW and Victoria, the party saw its results fall by 0.2% overall, while in Queensland they saw a disastrous fall of 0.4% overall, sending them to near the bottom of the results. Meanwhile, in WA and SA the party stagnated, seeing incredibly minor increases and decreases to their vote shares. Tasmania is the only success story they have in the states, increasing their vote share there by 0.2%. However, the biggest story is in the territories, where they were one of the only minor parties to run. In the ACT, they increased their vote share by nearly 0.6% to hit 1.1% overall, and in the NT they increased by 2.2% to reach a vote share of 3.9% overall. These would be excellent results, and something the party would be celebrating, if it weren't for the reality of territory senate elections. They only get two senators who get elected every election, and so the near 4% of the vote that SusAus got in the NT which would normally be enough to have them contending for a quota spot next election, is nowhere near enough. Labor and the CLP only got past 1 quota each by getting 34% of the votes. So, for SusAus, these territory votes may be a success, but they'll never truly lead anywhere (unless Senate reform occurs).

There's nothing to talk about lower house-wise, since the party ran no candidates there. These results are, overall, not terrible, but suggest that the party is failing to engage with state voters. Perhaps they could keep trying in the territories, but it'd only be in the states where they could gain enough votes to ever be competitive for a Senate seat. And in their current condition, it seems unlikely they'll ever be competitive there.


The Great Australian Party


What I predicted: Its hard to predict where the GAP will land. Last election, they got above 0.5% of the vote share, but this time round they seem far less likely to do so as other right-wing parties appear with the resources and people to take that vote away from them. And with, rumour has it, Rod Culleton not in the picture right now, it seems unlikely the party will do much better this time round. I expect a small decline to below 0.4%, but wouldn't be shocked if GAP remained at 0.5%.

My Review: I'll make a bold prediction here. This will be the last election that the Great Australian Party ever contests. Its not hard to see why I've made this prediction. The party has gone from 17 lower house candidates in 2022, to 1 in 2025. That one candidate came last in their electorate (Hasluck), gaining only 1.5% of the vote in that seat. The story isn't better in the Senate. There, one of their only candidates (on a joint ticket with HEART in Queensland) withdrew from the party before the election even occurred (due to the party's leadership aka Rod Culleton), so his dismal results don't even really count. Meanwhile, in WA, where Culleton ran, the party lost 0.16% of the vote share, taking them below 1% of the vote share overall. 

All of these results and changes make it very clear the party is in a terminal place. With no real candidates and the few that are still with them withdrawing with issues over the party's leader, the party probably won't survive to be in the next election. The smoking gun that confirms this all to me is the rumours I've been told of, that Rod Culleton has done a Fraser Anning and possibly fled Australia due to his issues of bankruptcy and fraud (in regards of lying to the AEC). While I can't confirm this, it seems very obvious that Culleton has disappeared, and probably won't be seen again to run in an election.


Trumpet of Patriots


What I predicted: Clive Palmer spending an absurd amount of money to not win a single seat but to try and influence politics is becoming a horrible but utterly predictable part of our election cycle. Trumpet of Patriots, if it was the original party, would have been a party I'd have predicted for less than a percent of the vote share, but because Clive has spent inordinate amounts of money of annoying and terrible ads, people will vote for him. I suspect that ToP might get anywhere between 1%-2% of the votes, likely buffered from gaining more to a surging One Nation, but still enough to unfortunately be relevant on the day. 

My Review: Clive Palmer has now spent inordinate amounts of money to not only not win a single seat, but also to completely fail in trying to influence an election. That is fantastic, and also hilarious news. ToP themselves also managed to do worse than the UAP did in the 2022 election, and with Clive suggesting this is his last rodeo, we may finally be rid of his shit finally.

The party's lower house vote share has been cut, essentially, in half. While ToP ran around 2/3rds of the candidates that the UAP did, they only gained 1.9% of the national votes, while the UAP gained 4.1%. The party can't use the lower amount of candidates to claim that this is why their votes are much lower, and as such it seems very clear that Australians rejected the outright Trumpian rhetoric and ideology. This is good news for the rest of Australia, but bad news for the party.

Its a similar story in the Senate, though worse since the ToP ran in just as many places as the UAP. The party saw a decreased vote share in every single state it ran in, and while these decreases were anywhere from 0.5% to 2%, the lack of any increase is enough to demonstrate that parties ran by Clive Palmer are going into extinction. There is only one place where this reality doesn't stand, and that is in Tasmania, where the UAP only held 1.6% of the vote there in 2022, but where ToP gained 3.2% of the vote this time round. Why Tasmanians seem more receptive to the Trumpian rhetoric and talk is unknown, and I ask any journalists or analysts to look into this, but I am somewhat disappointed in Tasmanians for this. Hopefully we won't see a Clive Palmer party in 2028, so we won't have to talk about these guys ever again.


Victorian Socialists


What I predicted: Last election, Victorian Socialists managed to get just 0.5% of the vote share in the lower house and 0.7% in the upper house for Victoria. With an influencer behind them, an army of active volunteers, and a significant dearth of left-wing parties this year, it seems possible that VS might be able to capitalise and grow. While they won't win any seats, not even close, do not be shocked if VS hits above 1% in either the lower or upper house.

My Review: Well, Victorian Socialists turned out to be one of the surprise winners of this election. With good results in the Senate and a shockingly decent result in the lower house despite a lack of candidates, they are probably one of the minor parties that did best this time round (maybe only Family First did better than them, when we look at proper minor parties).

In Victoria's lower house, the party lost 0.1% of their vote share. While this may seem like a bad thing initially, the party actually went from 11 candidates in 2022 to 4 candidates in 2025, and so the level of loss they got is actually better than one may expect. If we look at their only candidate who contested both 2022 and 2025, we see that the story is actually insanely positive. Kath Larkin, who ran for Cooper in both elections, saw a swing of 5.5% for her vote, seeing the total reach to 8.9% overall. Seeing as the Liberal party only reached 14.6% in that same electorate, in an extreme but possible scenario where VS grows while the Liberals continue to decline, the Socialists might be able to leapfrog the Liberals to come third next election.

Its a similar success story in the Senate. The party received an additional 1% of the vote share, increasing their total to 1.6% and putting them in distance to start hitting results of 2-3% next election. While this isn't the best result, with an influencer like PurplePingers as their number one candidate they probably wanted more, it still is a good results (and makes my prediction correct most importantly).

A final note here is the fact that Pingers suggested Victorian Socialists may look to expand nationally by the 2028 election. Whether or not this is a good idea, I know personally that there are talks in other states, serious talks, of expansion by VS. I suspect we'll see a name change sooner rather than later, as the party attempts to capitalise on its success this time round.


Conclusion


The 2025 election was a rather insane thing to watch in the moment. Its even more insane now seeing the divides which are appearing in the Coalition. A red wave swept over Australia, and it seems that the Blue and Green wall may crumble due to it. A bit hyperbolic? Perhaps, but also, everything happening in the Coalition should not inspire confidence in any of their voters or members.

Looking at the winners and losers of the election, I think there are some clear ones. Labor, Family First, and the Victorian Socialists are big winners (in relative ways), while the Liberals, Gerard Rennick, and the Libertarians are some of the biggest losers. The Greens and One Nation did not see the election go the way they wish either, though their losses (or in One Nation's case, small gains) aren't the end of the world. Other parties, like FUSION or the SFF need to change things up, or their results this election will be seen as a portent of what is to come. A small few, like Australia's Voice, are in a good place now if only they dedicate the time, effort, and manpower to capitalise going into 2028.

One final thing I'd like to predict are what parties may still be around come 2028. Immediately, the Great Australian Party is out, while I think there's a 90% chance People First and HEART are also gone. Others, such as SFF and FUSION need to step up their game, or risk losing registration as members move away. Less likely to disappear, but always at risk are parties like the Democrats (whose survival is insane these days), Trumpet of Patriots, Sustainable Australia, the Indigenous-Aboriginal Party, and the Australian Citizens Party. I don't think all, or even most of them will disappear, but these parties will teeter on the edge. There are also a few parties that I think will just disappear because of reality, such as the Better Together Party which didn't end up properly running this time round. Similar is Centre Alliance, since I think Rebehka Sharkie will finally let the party die off. Two final hot predictions I want to make include that I think there is a chance that the Jacqui Lambie Network disappears next election, if not in 2031, as Lambie either retires or tries to focus on her own election survival, and that the Dai Le & Frank Carbone Western Sydney Community could become a massive regionalist force in 2028 if the proper effort is put in.

All in all, I've had a heap of fun this election writing my guide, reviews, talking on Bluesky about it, and finishing up this. It was great to engage with the community around Auspol and the election this year, and will keep engaging as we enter the normal political period. Also, keep an eye out for guides, reviews, and the like for the state elections occurring over the next three years, with the South Australian election coming up next. Thanks again for reading!

A Retrospective on Nick Xenophon and SA-Best | Or, how I learned to stop worrying and drive a small car around parliament

This week marks the end of Nick Xenophon's political party legacy (statewise atleast) as SA-Best has been voluntarily de-registered. As ...