Throughout the history of Australian politics, voting behaviours have been caught in an ebb and flow between socio-economic and cultural influences. These influences can be categorized into three varying terms: long-term influences such as class or party identification, mid-term influences such as the impact of leadership or government performance and short-term influences such as the election campaign or policy announcements. In terms of broadly assessing the attributes of voting behavior in Australia, we are forced to consider the system of compulsory voting. It is recognized that an analysis of Australian electoral behaviour generally will focus less on questions of voter turnout and more on how (and why) voters choose between parties and candidates. However, there have been studies that have explored the advantages and disadvantages associated with the 5% of the eligible electorate who fail to vote, with Labor making a net gain in votes when turnout is high and the Coalition benefiting when the turnout is low (McAllister, 1986). While the question of 'who votes?' is essential to democracies where turnout is voluntary, compulsory voting plays a secondary role in the Australian context. Until recently, the trend among political scientists has been to assume that the most predictable aspect of voting patterns are related to the association between a persons party preference and their socio-economic background, and for younger voters the preference of their parents. The foundation of the Australian party systems has been heavily reliant on class demographics. .
The Labor party was originally formed by trade unions in the 1890's with an agenda of protecting wage-earners who were considered to be members of the 'working class', whereas the Liberal party which replaced the United Australian Party in 1944 attracted 'forgotten' members of the 'middle classes' (Brett, 1992). This association between the classes and political parties creates an unavoidable bond that stems from the systems foundation.