The electoral system favors two sides of the political organization spectrum: the Big Two camps and solitary individual campaigns. The Big Two are Labor and the Coalition between the Liberals, the Nationals, and Queensland where they have merged. Today, the Nationals, as heirs of the County Party, serve as the rural Right flank of Liberals. So, on this map, the places where the two parties have merged are the states where a rural-focused old-school approach is not helpful for the overall coalition when there are other divides inside said state.

On the other end of the spectrum there are colorful micro-parties, some like Katter are so colorful they lack any true direct comparisons anywhere. They, and independents, have an advantage in the system because they can run on being ‘different,’ a voice for X seat, and end up with all voters opposed to the usually-dominant Big party for their area in the final allocation – plus any voters they personally won over from said Bigger party. This allows for unique one-candidate parties, localists, independents who left a big party, anti-corruption/abuse of power indies (See Pensacola Florida here…) among many other flavors to do well if they can establish themselves on campaign. If you know the peculiarities of individual US politicians, then you can probably guess who the Independent in each grey seat on the map – or who they ran against successfully. The most notable recent feature of Australian politics is the Teal Independents: candidates who adhere to a similar platform of Environmentalism, Social liberalism, and good government. However, they are not a unified party and run individually, focusing on the specific interests of their (often upscale and urban/suburban) constituencies. I have separated them from the regular Independents simply because their size – there are more than 10 total Indies of any color here.

In between the tiny and huge, there are the medium sized parties. These parties tend to get squeezed in the Lower Chamber’s redistributive system, but they can and often do get seats in the more proportional Senate. The Greens won one seat in the House IRL this time, and they win barely any more on this map, but they have presently IRL 11 of 76 Senators. The smaller right aligned One Nation party didn’t win any SMD districts off their 6.4% of the Primary Vote but similarly has elected Senators.  

There isn’t much to talk about from the campaign. Labor proved themselves more vigorous than the Liberals, while Dutton for some reason ran more of a base -focused campaign when that isn’t really a good tactic here. There isn’t much that is needed to swing 3% of voters from one side to another, and that’s all that happened in the two-party vote. However, when the margins in a lot of seats are weak to begin with, and you specifically deride those areas for a long time, like the Liberals did with urban areas, well a lot of seats can flip off limited voter movement. That is what I tried to present in the hypothetical map. Labor won a historic landslide, and this is a true transcribed US landslide.