Idle speculation: February edition

The previous federal election thread was getting long and unwieldy, so I’ve closed it and set up shop here. Perhaps you might like to discuss today’s front page splash in The Australian, "Labor in strongest electoral position since 2001", based on a 56-44 Newspoll result.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

324 comments on “Idle speculation: February edition”

Comments Page 5 of 7
1 … 4 5 6 7

  3. “The Greens are where the ALP should be.”

    If the ALP were like the Greens I would join the Liberals. I can’t stand those self-righteous hippies and their 50s policies.

    The best thing about the Greens is they keep the Left Faction weak.

  4. Isnt Kath and KIm set in Holt, i think these people are the type the guru is referring too.

    Yes people like this, once they become ‘effluent’ usually do start to vote blue

  5. My sources tell me Ken Aldred is running for Liberal preselection in Holt. I have no idea if he has the numbers or not, but if he does run, there is no way in the world the Liberals will win this seat (and untold damage could be done elsewhere).

    In think long term this seat could enter the blue column but I don’t think I’ll move against the tide, especially if Labor win anywhere close to what the polls are now suggesting.

  6. I think Labor took its beating in Holt last time. Is Aldred a NCCer? He doesn’t like Israel or free trade. I did phone poll work for Labor in 1990 in Deakin which he won that year and I don’t recall any complaints about Aldred by voters, still that was a bad year for Labor. On Holt if only Jill Hennessey was the MP rather than the unknown incumbent.

  7. The margin for Holt at the last Election was under 2%. The population change between then and now is greater than that. With all the growth of new suburbs if the same result as last time applied Labour would probably lose.

    John Howard will come bak. Don’t belive the polls at the moment. it is Rudd’s honeymoon. The election will be a lot closer. I predict that Holt will fall to the Liberals. I don’t think the voters care that much about who the candidates are.

  8. If the candidate is average they dont care

    however if the candidate is poor it can cost upto 5%, site example, Brisbane 2004 (Tall)

  9. Guru,
    There is no chance that Labor will do worse in Victoria this year compared to 2004. This is especially true of the outer eastern and south-eastern suburbs, where the Liberals made extravagant and highly succesful play of tolls on the Scoresby Freeway.
    Howard is much more damaged goods now, thanks to interest rates and housing affordability, Iraq, AWB, Hicks and especially Work Choices. Even more significant Rudd is distinctly more electable than Latham.
    The only State where it is possible that Labor will do less well than in 2004 is WA, and even there it is likely that Labor’s fortunes will improve.

  10. I know that I’m a little late to the debate, but I’d just like to point out that the policy Bob Brown was referring to was NOT phasing out all coal exports within 3 years, but WRITING A PLAN to do so before the 2010 federal election. And opposition to nuclear energy within the party is largely created by the economics of renewable subsidies and the enormous amount of money and wasted time that needs to be poured into nuclear energy to even make it a little bit viable. Germany is phasing out all nuclear energy by 2020 and is moving to a renewable future. We should be too.

  11. And in regards to the 2007 election, I believe that Labor will win (and I’m looking forward to holding the champagne bottle when they do, I may be a Green but I’m really on the same side) and that the crossbench – ie Family First and the Greens – will hold the BoP in the Senate. An interesting proposition given that this requires a massive drop in the coalition vote, i could see this happening in NSW, QLD and SA, with an outside chance of a 3-2-1 ALP-LIB-Grn split in Tassie and possibly a Green in the ACT. Both very slim chances though.

  12. Next Poll Results

    From a totally netural position, I think Rudd’s popularity will go right up and Howard’s down to 1997 levels. If anyone watched Parliment today, Howard is digging himself into a hole. Being angry at a politician and party is fine. It’s natural. Accusing them of being onside with terrorists is unforgivable, if you are John Howard, Kevin Rudd or a person on the street. Even though history shows against it, my prediction is Howard won’t come back and I am personally waiting for his term as Prime Minister to be over so Australia (a country I love) can begin to move into the future.

  13. The senate should look like this after july 2008

    39 libs 32 labor 5 greens 1 famliy first

    nsw 3 lib 3 labor
    vic 3 lib 3l abor
    qld 3lib 3 labor
    wa 3 libs 2 labors 1 greens (new)
    sa 3 libs 2 labor 1 greens (new)
    tas 3 libs 2 labor 1 greens
    nt 1libs 1 labor
    act 1libs 1 labor

  15. The ALP should win Kingston not because of the candidate but due to the non party tied YR@W campaign. I don’t know if that is happening in other marginal seats but the way YR@W is run here its very open to non ALP anti Howard parties. My vote is crucial ( 6% at last poll) and will go along way to match the Family First Vote ( also at 6 %) which has a huge following here i am sad to say. With the help of the AMWU my vote should go up quite well. It was interesting to see the attitude of the ALP candidate now MP for Mawson in last South Australian election. The arrogance to not even meet with my wife (Green Candidate) and yet her vote (5%) helped him to win after his sneaky deal with family first fell through. Interesting enough the MP and his MP girlfriend are not liked here as they don’t seem to do much.

  17. James,

    I dont mean to nit pick, but the nationals are going to win a seat in Queensland And NSW, they may even be thrown a bone in Victoria.

    I know thats what you meant, but i just thought id say anyway

  18. Like James I too think it will be difficult to wrest control of the Senate from the Coalition.
    However, if you believe the Morgan poll of last November (before Rudd’s assension) regarding Senate voting intentions, it paints a grim picture for them.
    http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2006/4103/

    This yields a chamber more like
    ALP 30 Coalition 35 and the rest between Grn and FFP.
    A backlash from Howards abuse of the Senate is a windfall for the crossbenches.

  19. Truth is people vote differently in the senate, and people will probably not vote for the coalition because people dont like one group controlling both houses.

    people may be apathetic generally but they understand the difference. i think the coalition will be down and minor parties up.

    the final makeup will come down to preference flows.

    like it always does

  20. I’ve heard people talking up Green chances in the ACT (Senate) As well as the ALP taking both seats. The ALP bit is highly likely I think, with the Greens at about a 30% chance

  22. Bill Weller, pardon my ignorance, but what is YR@W? And what do you mean “My vote is crucial”? Are you a candidate?

    James, If the ALP wins 3 seats in Queensland no-one will be more surprised than the Qld ALP.

  23. Well if the Coalition control the Senate and the ALP take government, there’s nothing more certain than a double dissolution as soon as the criteria can be met. We’ll be back talking about an upcoming election as soon as this one’s complete.

  25. Hey Queenslander

    The next Senate election in Victoria will see the Libs and Nats put up a combined Senate Ticket. The Nats have position number 4 and have no chance of winning that seat.

    The candidate has already been endorsed and comes from Western Victoria and is no friend of the member for Gippsland

  26. Howard is looking seriously rattled lately – he clearly believes that Rudd has a chance. It’s still a tall order – the maths as much as anything else are against Labor – but I feel more confident every time Howard opens his mouth.

  28. re Ray: Never believe a Senate poll – they’re always all over the place. The killer for me is the supposed 18% vote for the Greens in Queensland – if that happened I would probably have a heart attack (and so would the Queensland Greens!!).

    Adam had a quite good analysis of the likely composition in the Senate way back in this thread, with the only other possibility being the loss of the short-term Senator in ACT. This almost happened in 1998, when the Lib vote fell to 31.5% (below the quota) and had to be elected on preferences. In 2001 their vote went back up to 34.3, and last election (on the back of the Howard swing) to 37.87, with a Green vote of 16.36.

    The problem is, as Adam has previously commented, that with the continued demise of the Democrats there is no party able to pull right-of-centre votes across to the left. The Dems should always have redirected themselves to being to the left of the Libs, not to the left of the ALP…

    Personally I think the Greens have a good chance in Vic, SA, WA, with Tas being a return. NSW will be hard to re-elect Kerry Nettle, so an outside chance, and Qld being further off still. I don’t rate NT because there’s no hope, and the ACT has seena rising Lib vote, so its extremely unlikely.

    As to the ALP in the Senate, well, I wouldn’t have rated their chances too well, but NSW, Vic & SA would have to be their best chance for getting a 3rd. NSW & Vic also remain the best possibilities for 3 ALP, 1 Grn – but in reality I think we’re stuck with a conservative Senate until 2010.

    Mr.Q is probably right about a DD if the ALP gets a good win and takes Govt, but the conservatives hold the Senate.

  29. According to Morgan with ALP 37% and Lib 35% it could be 2-2-1-1 with Greens and Family First taking a seat each. Greens will have to edge above the ALP residue over 2 quotas and FFP will have to edge above the Lib residue.

    More likely it will be a 3-3 split again.

  31. Ray you have asserted this before, and I remember you don’t like to use God in your arguments, but other than God said to kill homosexuals a few hundred pages away from the place where God says women should be treated exactly the same way as slaves [I’m putting this there for you I know you don’t like the Bible], you still haven’t explained how ‘a centrist’ option can arbitarily discriminate against human beings on the basis of sexual preference.

    You haven’t been able to explain this because the only explanation other than ‘God said’ is homophobia, and as misplaced as I’d believe ‘God said’ it would be both a more courageous place to argue and a more intellectual place to argue from.

    Which of the extreme Howard legislation has FFP actually stopped in the Senate? Not opposed I don’t care about the vote when it doesn’t count, when has the Senator actually stopped something that is unfair and regressive for Australia?

    With a 58% TPP support polling for Labor now, Labor has to lose a whole heap of votes before FFP can be at all relevant in anyway in the upcoming election. And it is an extreme religious party no more central than extreme right wing religious nuts in the USA.

  32. Centrebet now has ALP on $1.80, the Coalition on $1.90. ALP never had favouratism under Latham, and has not happened since 2001. Howard will need another Tampa.

  34. Fielding is basically a conservative who makes occasional gestures to the “centre” on family-related economic issues or conscience issues. I have no doubt that if the Coalition were to lose one Senate seat this year, and Fielding were to hold the balance of power, on crucial votes he would support a re-elected Howard government if that was the election outcome. (Although, if there is a swing big enough to cost the Coalition a Senate seat, they will probably lose the election.) My actual Senate prediction, as I have said before, is that there will no change in the left-right balance – merely a change of numbers within the left, with the 4 Democrat seats going to either the ALP or the Greens. The really interesting question about the Senate is how it will deal with a Rudd government after 2008.

  36. I’ve heard this opinion that Kerry Nettle will be difficult to re-elect before, it really all depends on preference flows. What are the thoughts out there about it? There was a roughly 3% swing to the Greens on primaries in 04 in NSW (from memory…) so presumably if that vote at least holds up and preferences are favourable she’s in with a very good chance (given she was elected off something like 4 or 5 %). What d’you reckon?

    Also, the next state election here could be a barometer for Green support perhaps? It’s traditionally higher in the state elections than feds, but it should be interesting to see. Special circumstances though.

    And I’d like to think that the ALP-FFP deal won’t be repeated, not only because I generally oppose FF policies but also because the ALP is mostly ideologically closer to the Greens, and it makes more sense to deal with them – that is, us. Hopefully we’ll see a Vic senator this time.

  37. I am surprised by the news that the Nats got the fourth spot on the joint ticket, by convention they usually get second, at least when they are run jointly here and in NSW anyway. However these things are usually up to whoever is actually running the division at the time the deals are made.

    Its time the NAts stood up for themselves, but with something worthwhile to say, unlike Barnaby Joyce

  38. In Victoria the Nats get a winable position on the Lib/Nat ticket only every second election, which is fair really given the relative strengths of the parties here. Indeed most Victorian Liberals are of the view that this arrangement is too generous to the Nats.

  40. Fielding is rarely in a position to “stop” anything, he doesn’t hold the BoP, but he has hoisted his flag up the Labor pole on numerous occasions. So I’m sure that if he does hold BoP in the next parliament he will work very well with a Rudd government.

    I know Rudd was pretty shitty with FFP in 2004, but this was not that there was an intrinsic values gap, but primarily because of the mistreatment of the ALP with HoR preferences. That will not happen again.

    Fielding was given a standing ovation by the Labor side of the house at his maiden speech. Costello walked out.

  41. OK credit where credits due if he stopped more refugee bashing perhaps he has flicked through the new testament at some point and this is good for us all.

    What was Costello doing in the Senate? It is Senator Fielding isn’t it?

    It has been a long day I’m confused.

  43. Maiden speeches are not held in both houses.

    And Julian McGauran’s shift from the Nats to the Libs in Victoria was very largely due to concerns that the agreement on the Nats getting number two on the Senate ticket every second election would cease to exist.

    Yep, you guessed it, Julian’s up the election after next.

  44. The Border Protection Bill didn’t get to the Senate vote.
    Howard didn’t take it there because he actually found some Liberal Senators who had a heart?

    Fielding had already declared that he would not support the bill.

  46. Coota Bulldog provided the link which tells us the average number of electors in House of Reps seats for each state and territory in 2004:

    NSW 86,582
    Vic 89,454
    Qld 88,414
    WA 83,248
    SA 95,629
    Tas 68,561
    ACT 112,770
    NT 56,465
    Av 87,323

    We Croweaters have a grievance. Not only are we at the wrong end of the River Murray but, with the ACT, we are robbed of our voting rights.

  47. This is because the apportionment among the states is done on the bassis of population not electors because of the wording of the Constitution, so states with non-voting people have more powerful voters.

  48. Shane Easson on Bennelong
    copied from Mumble

    HOWARD and BENNELONG

    The release of the Federal Commissioners proposed boundaries for New
    South Wales has again put the spotlight on Bennelong. I think that much of
    the commentary on Bennelong including the new margin is just plain wrong.
    To help clarify things I want to address four questions. These are:
    1. What is the effect on Bennelong’s margin of the proposed boundaries?
    2. Is State Election voting patterns a useful guide to predicting Federal
    results?
    3. Did Andrew Wilkie (who got 16.4% as a Green in 2004) distort the true
    2PP vote in Bennelong?
    4. Are there any special factors in play in Bennelong?
    5. Is Bennelong really a marginal seat?
    John Howard is correct when he says that the impact of the Commissioners’
    proposals in Bennelong has only slightly affected the margin in his seat. The
    addition of around 7 500 electors from Beecroft and Melrose Park takes his
    margin down by just 0.2% to 54.13%.( On 2004 figures the new votes added
    to Bennelong break down to 2PP Lib 3360 (51.7) to ALP 3138).
    Now that that’s out of the way, let’s deal with the suggestion that John
    Watkins, the NSW Deputy Premier whose seat of Ryde is entirely within
    Bennelong would beat Howard. That partly concerns the proposition that
    State voting patterns can be a pointer to Federal results. No they aren’t. A
    good recent example can be seen in the 2004 Queensland State and Federal
    results. At the State poll the ALP romped in with 63 out of 89 seats. Later that
    year the ALP only got six out of 28 Queensland Federal seats. The
    contrasting performance is explained by the fact that whereas State Labor got
    57.5% 2PP, federally its Queensland vote was only 42.9% 2PP. Had Federal
    Labor in QLD polled the same as in the State then 17 extra seats in QLD
    would have been won.
    I’ve just pulled down a straw man. It’s more complicated than that. For an
    associated question is can an MP in a metropolitan seat build up a strong
    personal vote? The evidence in favour has been historically weak as one
    might expect in a Westminster System. But in the last 10 years the evidence
    in support has become so strong that the proposition can no longer be denied.
    I’ll cite a few examples from NSW, one of which is John Watkins. In 1999, as
    a result of a State redistribution his former electorate of Gladesville was
    abolished and Watkins was forced to contest the new seat of Ryde, (which
    was entirely within Bennelong). Watkins, needing a swing of 4.2% simply to
    remain in Parliament scored a swing of 10.8%, well above the State average
    of 7%. Yet he barely won Eastwood polling place (50.8% 2PP). At the next
    election, in 2003, the swing to NSW Labor was a tiny 0.2% but Watkins got a
    further swing of 8.9 % in his seat( taking his overall margin to 65.5%).
    Eastwood polling place itself recorded a 2PP of 66.1% and provided the best
    swing (15.3%) in the seat. Another example, at the Federal level is Dana
    Vale, MP for Hughes. She has gained a swing at every election since 1996,
    totalling 16.6% more than 10% above the swing in NSW to the Coalition.
    Why MP’s can now build a following I have no doubt is related to the higher
    level of resources available to MP’s via allowances and public funding. Two
    Labor Federal MP’s who lost their seats at the last Federal elections (from
    redistributions) have told me that they got good swings in the parts of the new
    Division containing their old electorate but not in the new. But some do better
    than others.
    But there is no evidence in NSW to support the idea that a State MP can
    transfer a personal vote to a higher sphere. Most speculation on the point is
    wrong way round. The more relevant question is “what’s Howard’s personal
    vote worth”?
    Next we come to the Wilkie factor. It’s a pretty widespread view that the 2PP
    in Bennelong last time was distorted by the high profile former Australian
    Intelligence Officer, Andrew Wilkie who ran, as a Green candidate, an
    impressive campaign in Bennelong against the Iraq war. He ended up with
    16.4% of the primary vote, more than double the State average for the
    Greens. Moreover, many suggested that the 3.4% swing against Howard,
    despite a small swing of 0.2% in NSW could only be explained by Wilkie’s
    campaign.
    I think Wilkie had almost no impact on the 2PP in Bennelong. For one thing
    the swings against the Liberals were similar in the adjoining seats of Bradfield
    (-2.7%) and North Sydney (-3.2%). Also in those same seats the Green vote
    was much higher than the State average (Bradfield, 11.5%; North Sydney,
    12.3%). Given his profile and the second string on Iraq you’d expect Wilkie to
    do better than his fellow Greens. But his 4.5% extra primary votes on Iraq
    were, in the context of 2004, always going to go back to Labor.
    The special factor in play in Bennelong is that in recent years there has been
    a significant shift in the ethnic mix. This decade Bennelong has seen a rapid
    influx of new, mostly Asian migrants with the suburb of Eastwood transformed
    into a vibrant Korean community.
    According to the 2001 Census, ( see
    http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/2004-05/05RP01.htm#table25 ), and
    based on boundaries in 2003, whereas the Australian average of those born
    in non-English speaking countries is 13.3%, in Bennelong this proportion was
    28.9%. Only 16 Divisions out of 150 had a higher proportion and all were and
    are Labor held. Expect Bennelong to be in the top 10% in the 2006 census.
    Chatswood, (split between the Divisions of Bradfield and North Sydney), is
    another suburb on the North Shore where there has been a concentration of
    new migrants in recent years. In Chatswood these migrants are mostly
    Chinese and Japanese. It’s not the case that the resulting new electors are
    ALP voters—at the last Federal election they broke slightly in favour of the
    Libs, but they have replaced generally, WASPs, who tended to break two to
    one against the ALP.
    I mentioned before that at the 2004 election, despite a swing against the ALP
    of 0.2% in NSW, Bennelong, Bradfield and North Sydney swung towards the
    ALP by 3.4%; 2.7% and 3.2% respectively. In 2001 there was a swing of 3.2%
    to the Libs in NSW. In Bennelong the swing was 2.5% weighed down by the
    fact that in Eastwood, the largest polling place in the seat, and the swing to
    the Libs was only 0.9%.
    Those figures together with John Watkins’s performance in Eastwood give
    credence to the view that the growing Asian in Bennelong is more susceptible
    of voting Labor than those they have replaced. My view is that Howard with
    the status of the Prime Ministership has muted the trend against the Liberals
    caused by the change in the ethnic mix of Bennelong.
    My last question was “Is Bennelong really a marginal seat?” After all, it’s
    been held by the same Party since its creation in 1949, over 23 elections and
    only two members. My answer is that during John Howard’s time, Bennelong
    was never a marginal until very recent years. To explain why, I need to go
    through the history of the seat since Howard became the member.
    On 18th May, 1974 following the retirement of Sir John Cramer, John Howard
    became the second Member for Bennelong since its creation in 1949.
    Although Howard obtained a majority on primaries, his 2PP (two party
    preferred vote) was 54.5% which on paper would make his seat marginal. (A
    marginal is usually defined in Australia as a Division with a 2PP of 6% or
    less). However, Howard knew as would any other experienced judge of these
    things that his seat was only a ‘paper marginal’. It was in fact a safe Liberal
    seat. For in 1974 Labor’s 2PP in NSW was 54.9% a result that has since not
    been bettered. (Keating in 1993 came closest when Labor got 54.4% 2PP in
    NSW ).
    In 1974 Bennelong was a seat centred on Lane Cove Council and which
    included significant sections of Willoughby and North Sydney Councils, all of
    Hunters Hill Council and part of Ryde Council. The suburb of Ryde itself was
    locked up in Lowe, held by former Prime Minister Bill McMahon. (From 1955-
    77 Lowe straddled both sides of the Parramatta River and incorporated Ryde
    and Strathfield. Incidentally, for those who dismiss the importance of
    redistributions, the 1955 Commissioners decision to allow Lowe to jump the
    Parramatta River eventually cost Labor the 1961 election when both Lowe
    and Bennelong were held by margins of less than 1% thereby allowing
    Menzies to scrap back by a two seat majority. But for the slash of the
    Commissioners’ pen Arthur Calwell might have died a happy man!)
    Thirty and one half years later Howard was elected for the 13th consecutive
    time as MP for Bennelong. This time his vote was 54.3% 2PP, nearly the
    same as in 1974 but with the difference that the ALP 2PP for NSW of 48.1%
    was 6.8% below that which it got in 1974. Against this, the cumulative effect of
    the 1984, 1991 and 1999 redistributions was a weakening of Bennelong of
    4.5%, (now 4.7% with the 2006 proposed boundaries). Boundary changes
    weren’t enough by themselves to make Bennelong marginal. The extra came
    with the changing ethnic mix in the seat. Combining the results of the last two
    elections we see a swing to the Liberals in NSW of 3.4% and a swing against
    in Bennelong of -0.9%.
    Directly across the River Lowe became a Labor seat with an earlier begun
    change in its ethnic mix. Might the electoral impact of such changes have
    stopped in Bennelong? I don’t know, but doubt it. What’s clear though is that
    Bennelong has only since 2004 become a truly marginal seat, only likely to be
    held if the Government is re-elected. Factoring in the continuing impact of the
    change in the ethnic mix within its current boundaries my best guess is that a
    swing of say 3% to Labor in NSW and not 4.2% as the pendulum suggests
    would be enough for Labor to win Bennelong in 2007. Of the 10 elections from
    1980, half won by Labor, the other half by the Coalition, the ALP has an
    average 2PP in NSW of 51.0% which is 2.9% greater than what it got in NSW
    in 2004. That is, should Labor in NSW achieve its historical average NSW
    vote then Howard is in serious trouble in a seat which is trending to Labor.
    Shane Easson
    5th July, 2006

  49. Just thought I’d mention somthing that struck me last night. Labor’s current position has been compared on numerous occasions to early 2001 .. when thy were ahead in the polls (and the betting) by a similar margin. The “lesson from history” then being that Howard ended up losing that early battle but ultimately winning the war.

    Have people forgotton what happened a scant 8 weeks before that Novemer election? 2 planes? New York?

    That was an event (just cast your mind back) that shook the world .. and would obviously have swung a great many people to the incumbent government.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 5 of 7
1 … 4 5 6 7