Where did all the Democrats voters go?

2001 election

In the 2001 election, the Democrats vote fell 1.2 per cent in the Senate but rose 0.3 per cent in the House. The Greens vote rose by 2.2 per cent in the Senate and 2.3 per cent in the House. This was largely at the expense of the ALP, whose vote fell 3.0 per cent in the Senate 2.3 per cent in the House. The Coalition picked up around 4 per cent, largely at the expense of One Nation, but also picked up votes off the ALP and the Democrats. While it is not clear where the Democrat vote went in the aggregate figures, it is clearer in the electorate figures. Our House vote tended to go up in ALP seats and down in Coalition held seats, especially in Victoria. Our biggest increases tended to be in safe inner city Labor seats (e.g. Sydney, Grayndler, Brisbane, Perth, Melbourne, Melbourne Ports, Gellibrand), while modest swings were recorded against us in many safe Liberal seats. This trend suggests we lost many small “l” Liberals back to the Liberals, and picked up some (but not most) disillusioned Labor voters. The 12 safest Liberal seats in Sydney, with a quarter of the State's population, accounted for half of the fall in our NSW Senate vote in 2001.

Change in Democrat vote in House of Reps seats 2001:

In the Senate, the Coalition increased its vote sharply, with part of that coming off the Democrats. The Democrats also lost some votes to other micro parties and, to a lesser degree, to the Greens.

To a degree, the party's strong stance on refugee issues probably cost us some voters on the right. Detailed Liberal and Labor party research showed strong swings to the Liberal party across “women, middle and upper class voters” on refugee issues. This was certainly the case in the 2002 South Australian State Election, where many ex-Liberal voters in 1993, who helped push the Democrats to a 17 per cent vote in 1997, returned to the Liberals (or the new right wing Family First party). The Democrats went backwards in many safe Liberal seats where the party had outpolled Labor in 1997.

2004 election

Nationally, the Democrats Senate vote fell by 5.2 per cent. The Greens Senate vote rose by 3.3 per cent, leaving a deficit of 1.9 per cent unaccounted. This appears to contradict the conclusion by Democrats activist Danny Carroll that "the diminution of the Democrats primary vote since 2001 has lead to the rise in the Greens primary vote dure to attrition on the Democrats left (with) some marginal attrition on the right". This analysis becomes even more flawed when one considers the broader left parties. The vote for the Progressive Labor Party fell 0.5 per cent nationally, HEMP fell 0.2 per cent, and decision by Unity and Phil Cleary not to contest was another 0.5 per cent. Much of this vote is likely to have returned to the Greens, suggesting that the proportion of the Democrat vote switching to the Greens was likely to have been closer to 2 per cent, less than half the fall in Democrat support. Indeed, had the full Democrat vote switched across to the Greens, the Greens would easily have won extra Senate seats in Qld, NSW, Vic and SA, and the Coalition would not have ended up in control of the Senate.

Did part of the Democrat vote leech to Family First? Demographic modelling by John Black suggests that the Family First vote came largely from Liberal and Labor supporters, with some holding a strong resemblance to former One Nation voters. Black argues that Family Firsts supporters appeared to form two groups - the first were typical religious activists - middle income, professional, evangelical and Liberal. But, the second group where agnostic, blue collar, lower income, single parents, typically ex-ALP or One Nation voters. It is unlikely, based on his analysis, that there was a large leakage from the Democrats to Family First. Like One Nation's support, Family First's vote tended to be weakest where the Democrats were strongest and vice versa. In Queensland (Family First's second best state), 6 of the 8 best results were in regional seats, while the three worst results were in the Democrats' inner city heartland. In South Australia, rural and semi-rural seats made up 3 of the 4 best Family First results, while the inner city seats were the worst.

The following matrix seeks to give some guidance on the moves in Senate votes on a State by State basis. The “micro” parties are divided into two groups - “left-leaning” parties (e.g. HEMP, Unity, Progressive Labor, Aged Pensioners, Socialist) and “right-leaning” parties (CEC, Liberals for Forests, DLP, Ex Servicemen, Fishing). The APA vote is added into the Democrats vote and the Family First/CTA votes are combined as a “Christian block”. The figures in the attached table represent the increase/decrease in the vote for each group since 2001 by state:

Senate election 2004: Shift in party vote: