Was the 2025 Australian Federal election rigged? It’s a question being asked on social media, as many Australians grapple with how Labor, despite its perceived failures, retained public approval, and what many have said were unforeseen and unpredicted results.

Take, for example, Peter Dutton’s defeat in Dickson. Party leaders rarely lose their own seats, even in a majority defeat. Dickson was considered marginal but winnable for Dutton. No consistent local polling or clear scandal explains the scale of the swing against him. His opponent had run before, but unsuccessfully.

Then there’s Labor’s two-party-preferred voting surge to 55%. Since WWII, no incumbent federal government has improved its vote share and seat count in a second-term election. Mid-term governments usually lose ground, especially amid cost-of-living pressures and inflation. The ALP defied these trends.

There’s also the collapse of the Greens in the House. The Greens had built strongholds in Brisbane and were expected to retain at least their core seats. No major shift in youth sentiment or dramatic internal event explains why they failed to hold or gain ground.

Labor also gained in some traditionally conservative rural areas. Some rural and regional seats that had long been Liberal or National strongholds swung towards Labor or independents. Without a strong rural campaign message or a farming crisis favouring Labor, these shifts broke with decade-long voting patterns.

Swings towards Labor were widespread—even in diverse seats with very different demographics and local concerns. Usually, such coordinated national swings reflect major events, such as economic collapse, wars, or scandals. Yet none of these defined this campaign.

The Coalition lost outer-suburban working-class areas, previously strong on issues like crime and cost of living. These voters didn’t shift to One Nation or TOP, but went directly to Labor or independents, despite economic headwinds that typically hurt incumbent parties.

Culture war issues have been successful in various global right-wing campaigns in the United Kingdom, the United States, and throughout Europe. The Liberal Party leaned into “anti-woke” rhetoric during the Voice to Parliament campaign and won. This time, it appeared to backfire—even in regions thought to be culturally conservative. What’s more, the party seemingly distanced itself from it, and voters didn’t engage with it, and there was no major polling prior to suggest such a disconnect.

Inflation, high rent, and economic pressures were widely felt—typically a recipe for anti-incumbent backlash. Instead of punishing the government, voters appeared to reward Labor—suggesting either a strong “fear of change” or a unique trust in their management, which wasn’t clearly reflected in pre-election sentiment tracking.

What’s more, the number of pre-poll and postal votes was said to have broken records, with some electorates seeing more early votes than votes on election day. There was no major public health crisis, like COVID in 2022, to justify such a large early-vote preference. The motivation behind the early participation shift is unclear.

All of this has led some to feel something was off. So, we ran a poll on social media and asked our followers if they believed the election was rigged. Of the more than 2,000 who answered, 55% said yes, and 13% said they’re not sure. That’s a good portion of people who don’t believe they can trust the system, or at least, aren’t sure if they can. How do you remedy that? No doubt, public trust in government is fairly low, especially since COVID. Which, again, makes it all the more bizarre that Australians would vote for bigger government.

However, one follower, who has been a scrutineer for the past three years, said he has seen nothing to suggest any rigging of the vote count, noting that staff are keen to address any concerns that are raised. He also added that the only point of vulnerability is the gap between the voter receiving the empty ballot and depositing the completed ballot. Once the vote is in the locked ballot box, it is only opened in the presence of a scrutineer who witnesses the cutting of the locks and certifies it.

Another follower responded by suggesting that every voter should scrutineer at least one election in their lifetime, as there is no way the election could be rigged. He said, as someone who dearly wanted a different result, he is very confident in the result counted by the Australian Electoral Commission team.

So, how exactly does it all work? First, it’s worth noting that the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) is an independent statutory authority responsible for running elections. It operates free from government interference.

Second, all votes are cast on paper ballots and counted by hand in the presence of scrutineers from various political parties. This makes digital manipulation impossible and further ensures transparency.

Third, although there are good reasons to dislike compulsory voting, it does mean turnout is consistently high (often above 90%). This is intended to make it far more difficult to manipulate results, as—hypothetically—a large and engaged electorate dilutes the impact of any attempted fraud.

Fourth, the electoral roll is rigorously maintained. Voters must enrol with accurate details, and voting more than once or impersonating someone is a criminal offence with heavy penalties.

Fifth, each candidate can appoint scrutineers to oversee every stage of the process—from the casting of ballots to the final count. This multi-party oversight adds another important layer of security to the process.

Sixth, votes are counted at thousands of polling places across the country. Any attempt to rig results would require a mass-coordinated fraud at a multi-state scale that would be not only highly visible, but virtually impossible to conceal.

And finally, seventh, the AEC performs spot checks and recounts, especially in close races. Discrepancies are taken seriously, and the system has mechanisms for full recounts whenever necessary.

Australia’s electoral system is fairly robust, transparent, and decentralised, which makes it highly resistant to tampering. We may be confident that the vote wasn’t rigged—at least, not in the sense of manipulated results after the vote. However, there are other factors at play, factors many Australians are vulnerable to—namely, pre-voting manipulation.

Though we do not allege any illegal activity by the AEC or political parties, Senator Ralph Babet of the United Australia Party responded to our poll, and his comments are worth sharing directly:

He said: “I’ll begin by stating the obvious: there is no meaningful difference between Labor and Liberal anymore. With that said—yes, the election was rigged. But not in the way most assume.

“It was rigged by a legacy media class that overwhelmingly leans Left. It was rigged by a public service that exists to grow itself and protect big government. It was rigged by educational institutions long infiltrated by radical Marxists. It was rigged by internal Liberal Party factions that deliberately sabotaged their own party. And it was rigged by decades of mass migration from countries where dependence on government is the norm, importing a new voting base for its duopoly.

“So yes, it was rigged. Just not with ballot stuffing. This is cultural capture,” he said.

It could really be that simple. Babet argues that the political climate has been shaped over time by dominant cultural forces in media and education which, in his view, undermine political neutrality. There was no illegal activity. It was purely a matter of winning hearts and minds. But it’s not a lost cause either. Last year in the UK Keir Starmer’s Labour Party secured 63% of seats with just 33.7% of the vote. Not because the people were all that fond of Labour’s platform. The shift was largely perceived as a rejection of the Conservative Party, which, like the Liberal Party in Australia, had seemingly lost its way.

But life isn’t any better for Brits under Labour. There is growing frustration and a general public dissatisfaction with both “major parties.” The people are looking for a real alternative, and for an increasing number of voters, Reform UK is promising just that.

In recent local elections, Reform UK secured 677 council seats and even won mayoral positions. Particularly notable was Reform’s breakthrough in historically Labour-dominated areas such as County Durham, where it tapped into working-class frustrations over issues such as immigration, cost of living, and government inaction.

The next few years in Australia might be challenging, but such conditions could pave the way for the emergence of a political force similar to Reform UK—one that channels public frustration into a genuine populist alternative. This could fundamentally reshape Australia’s political landscape and open Australians’ eyes to the very real possibility of breaking free from the uni-party system we’re currently subject to. The question is, who’s going to take the lead?