“Parties depend on identification for their survival. Polling in 2026 shows that party identification has moved but ideological identification is moving its needle slightly in favour of the right across the board,” writes political columnist ANDREW HUGHES. 

From the north or south? How about sport – a traditionalist (rugby, AFL, real football, cricket) or maybe something else? Is it a flat white or bubble tea? Apple or Android? 

The list goes on. But it defines who we are. And brands depend on it for survival and viability in the short, medium and long term. 

Politics is no different. Parties depend on identification for their survival electorally and financially. Polling gives us an idea on where we are on identification. What it shows in 2026 is that party identification has moved but ideological identification is moving its needle slightly in favour of the right across the board. 

Identification in politics is complex. So let’s look at just two big factors that influence it politically: geography and performance. 

Geography

Broadly speaking, the further we get from an urban centre, even if that urban centre is a town like say Jindabyne or Yass, the more right we become. Which then means that the closer we live to an urban centre, the more centrist we are. 

So we seek out part of our political identification geographically with those who are similar. Andrew Barr? Centrist and urban for sure, and hence why he polls so well in his electorate. Go south to Tuggeranong and the identification changes in us, and so it does with how we identify with our politicians. Isn’t that right, Jessie Price? 

This is just part of the story though in 2026. Just ask the Nationals, who in one recent poll were at two per cent federally. That’s in the margin of error for polling companies, so who knows if it could even be lower. 

Their strategy of rural and regional identification once was near spot on: leader, policy and party nearly always aligned with the identification of the voters of the seats they held. 

Now, with our cities becoming overpriced mortgage prisons, people are being pushed to regional areas in record numbers. But we still identify as urban, even though we may live in a rural area. 

A more diverse market opens up the door for other political players, and closes the door more on the Nationals.

I heard persistent rumours of a regional Voice-style movement putting together candidates and funds (in the magnitude of multiple millions) early last year to have a run at the 2025 election.

They left it too late, but from what I heard they were more likely to be reflective of regional voters living in urban centres, like Yass, than the Nationals. 

Similar things have already happened in this space in urban areas: teals are what the moderate Liberals should be in 2026. The Greens (aka the Renters Party) are going after seats once seen as solid Labor working class. The independents are taking them all on. 

While our geographic identification has changed in our minds, most parties have been too slow at recognising and responding to it. They’ve been more analogue, less digital you could say. 

Performance

That slowness of change then becomes another symptom of another critical identification factor in 2026: performance. 

The world we are in is changing fast. Just look at the speed of AI. It will fundamentally change so many occupations. You have to be quick. 

Is this populist politics? I actually think it’s more about performance. Are your policies, people and party reflective of 2026? Even in your own particular ideology? Or are they 1986? 

Nationals Leader David Littleproud once said people expect performance number one from politicians. Why would I identify with a person, party or policy if it wasn’t reflective of 2026? 

This is what hurts the major parties the most on identification. They seem slow to react. Minor parties and independents can move dynamically, efficiently and remain reflective of their base. It’s a significant advantage in the modern era and one the polls are picking up on. 

Will we go back? Have we ever? No. The right has splintered. It lies on a spectrum from soft right (Labor/Teals) to hard right (One Nation). 

The real reason we won’t go back though is who we see ourselves as being has changed for so many. Until parties get that, we won’t identify with, or vote, for them. 

Dr Andrew Hughes lectures at the ANU Research School of Management, where he specialises in political marketing.