The Adelaide Advertiser keeps cranking out those opinion polls, as it did in the lead-up to the state election last March. This time it’s a survey of 662 voters in the north-eastern Adelaide seat of Makin, retained by the Liberals in 2004 by just 0.9 per cent after a backlash against the sitting member, the now-retiring Trish Draper. Despite Liberal candidate Bob Day’s massive self-funded campaign, the poll shows a 54-46 lead for Labor’s Tony Zappia, who holds a primary vote lead of 45 per cent to 38 per cent. Further questions asked in the survey suggest that the loss of Draper’s personal vote has very little to do with the swing, despite recent reports the Liberals were begging her to reverse her decision to retire. The mystery of who actually conducts these Advertiser polls remains, to the best of my knowledge, unsolved.
Amrosi says that he wants death, does he? IMO, we should give him exactly the kind of death he deserves – a long, slow, agonising death.
Darn @ 96:
The issue seems to be fading out here in Sydney. It’s dropped way back in the news bulletins (if it appears at all).
90 Gippslander Says: October 10th, 2007 at 11:26 am
Surely though, the numbers that ended up would be matched up by census figures, so that accurate distributions could be determined?
Do they ask your age when you give the survey? They must, surely, otherwise, how could they report such figures?. If that was the case, wouldn’t the final figures be transformed based upon the distributions as recorded in the census.
So if they phoned up 1000 people, and it turns out 40% of them were over 50, and the census records that only 20% of people in the population are over 50, would the numbers be transformed so that the total transformed distribution would be based upon only half of those people (or more reasonably, each response counts for half as much) toward the total?
Otherwise the numbers would be flying all over the place, all of the time.
I would happy to receive the freebees from Bob Day,
but, make no mistake, I will vote down Howard at the election 🙂
Many on this site discount Morgan primarily because their numbers tend to be higher for the ALP and out of sync with the “other” polls.
However, Morgan is the only regular poll that is not owned, operated and paid for by the major media outlets. While I am sure the exponents of Newspoll, AC Neilsen and Galaxy will execute their polls with professionalism and sobriety, the fact is they are ultimatley beholden to the requirements of their clients.
I believe the MSM is desperately trying to keep the Libs in the game for philosphical and business reasons. You can pick your favourite pro Liberal acolytes to rail against. However, if the election is not close, then people will turn off and stop consuming media products.
Morgan, currently, is not constrained by such nonsense and probably prints the results as they arise. People may want to question the methodology etc and that is fair comment. However, Morgan has been arround for about sixty years and their techniques are well proven.
The one thing that is apparent about all polls this year is that they are well outside the perception of the “Political Insiders” who traditionally serve up our daily political fare. Maybe it is them that is out of touch and not the polls. Maybe Morgan is closer to the true result than the other polls. Only time will tell.
howard’s RAAF electioneering plane has blown a gasket – not surprising since he’s given it quite a workout – so he’s delayed in porking up on the north coast. he sounds like such an old man…”..the RAAF run a very good show”.
I guess the death penalty fracas will mean that parliament will sit again next week. If Howard announces an election now, the air will be completely sucked out of the issue and it will disappear. If they go back to parliament next week then he can try and milk it a bit more.
Plus Friday is the Bali bombing anniversary, so I can’t see him calling it then. It’s either tomorrow (thurs) or the weekend after next. I reckon the latter.
pi, stratified random sampling is the answer.
Mein gott… I never really did look at this…
yikes.
No, no jest – that’s exactly how a lot of people will think about the issue. I can’t remember their names – but the two ‘asian’ kick boxing dudes – no tears will be shed for them.
The ‘no death penalty’ position has been – up to now – an elite consensus, not a popular consensus. There is no value in deceiving ourselves about the dynamics of this issue.
Couldn’t agree more Ashley (98). The way this Howard mob and their media sympathisers play the game, the only way left to beat them is to join them in their cynicism.
Howard actually had the gall today to accuse Rudd of not being willing to take responsibility for anything, when his own government have made an art form out of avoiding responsibility and accountability. Remember their collective amnesia over the AWB affair. It was anyone’s fault but their’s.
Maybe the Advertiser is a reverse Morgan where you have to add five to the actual ALP swing. However, I have a gut feeling that that Makin one is just about right, because from what I have read, it’s one of those perennial marginals with the appropriate demographics which isn’t going to swing much either way.
Mr Howard has reiterated that he will not oppose the death penalty when it involves terrorists.
Speaking on Southern Cross Radio, Mr Howard was asked about the possibility that the Bali bombers will not be executed.
“I think that would be very, very bad, I accept that many people will think it is inconsistent of me to say and I’ve acknowledged this before… I personally don’t support capital punishment in Australia,” he said.
“It follows from that whenever an Australian is sentenced to death overseas I’ll argue for the remission of the sentence.”
Ah William @ #4, you’re so quick.
Is any normal person out there talking about this death penalty thing? I’d be very surprised if they are. I don’t know anyone who’s talking about it. When it comes down to it, what has it actually done? Nothing. A person stated that he is against the use of the death penalty, other people attacked him for that position and Rudd apologised for any offence taken. It’s a nothing issue. Is your life going to change because of it? No.
I think this poll confirms there will be a swing to Labor this election (its hard to imagine there won’t be) and they will reduce the Coalition’s majority. However, I am still of the belief the Coalition will be returned with a reduced, by not insignificant majority for 3 more years of this ghastly nightmare.
sorry @ #5
#108 passthepopcorn Says: October 10th, 2007 at 11:49 am
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/sampprob.php
The ‘weighting’ being the issue I talked about. I’m assuming the weighting would be by comparing the size of the sub-group to the census figures.
I think the adveriser would do some form of balancing regarding demographics, or else yes you would have huge swings, however given the lack of multiple polls in the same area from the advertiser it is hard to tell.
There ability to correctly weight demographics would be alot weaker than the profession polling outfits though.
Crispy (84) – re my 111, I should have acknowledged your insightful comments on this issue too.
Notwithstanding all this interesting discussion about polling figures and Labor’s chances, the reality (from all the polling) seems to be that about 80% of people have made up their minds, about 55% of voters will support Labor as they want a change of government, there will be about a 2% gain by Howard in the campaign, but he can’t win. The only thing that might change all this is a massive stuff up by Rudd (unlikely) or maybe a terrorist attack in Australia before election day. That’s it really.
From the ’04 election guides
For Makin:
On September 24 the Advertiser carried a poll from a big sample of 1,114 that had Trish Draper ahead 52-48 on two-party preferred, with a primary vote lead after distribution of the undecided of 46.5 to 41 per cent. Makin is a strong area for Family First and a weak one for the Democrats and Greens, so the Coalition will not need as big a primary vote lead as usual in order to win. The results marked a reversal of polls showing Labor ahead by 41 to 39 per cent in April and 44 to 33 per cent in June, just after Draper hit her spot of difficulty.
OUTCOME: LP: 50.93% ALP: 49.07%
For Boothby:
The Advertiser carried a poll on September 14 showing the Liberals ahead 56 to 44 per cent, a 1 per cent swing to Labor from 2001.
OUTCOME: LP: 55.37% ALP: 44.63%
As you can see, although the polls very slightly overestimated the results in both seats. Otherwise they were remarkably accurate. A similar position in ’07 could possibly see Makin most definately won for the ALP, a tight result in Sturt, with Boothby looking like being lost for the ALP.
Slightly OT, but was wondering who are your most-liked and most-hated ministers on “the other side”.
Mine:
* most liked: Costello
* most hated: Howard
* most annoying: Downer
CTEP @ 115,
On what basis are you saying that the Coalition will return? Is it just a gut feeling or do you think a particular issue will start to bite Labor?
Ashley –
costello most liked?
Is that a bit like “which would you prefer to deal with a, a tiger snake or a taipan”?
I’d add my beloved local member – Mrs Mirrabella. Every time I open the letterbox she jumps out at me . Very unnerving i can tell you.
The media are the ones with ZERO principles.
They don’t care what the issue is as long at it is controversial and sells plenty of dog food ads.
Most likely to be killed by friendly fire : Tony Abbott.
Swing Lowe, a gut feeling. These seat by seat polls are interesting because they show the size of the task that Labor faces at the election.
On the death penalty issue, but somewhat related to specific seat demographics. My old seat of Cowan was home to a football club that was in Bali at the time of the bombings in which several players lost their lives, including an old classmate of mine. McClelland’s statements would definately not play out well to these voters, as the issue is something very close to them. Of course, it can be taken into account that the people in this area come from some of the most pro-Liberal booths in the electorate, but you can see the potential damage that the statements could’ve made on a seat level.
Ashley (122)
Have come to strongly detest most of them, including ex ministers, except perhaps Nelson. Particularly despise the lying, ideologically driven Howard, the weak, arrogant, Costello and the constantly whinging Downer. The smart alec upstart Pyne doesn’t do much for me either.
Just for the record I voted for that lot in 1996. Just couldn’t stand Keating any more.
What a great game Ashley #122
*most liked:Joe Hockey LOL
*most hated:JWH
*most annoying: Alexander Downer and Chris Pyne
The papers are still carrying related stories on it though that is on-line. Hopefully it will not appear anywhere significant tomorrow.
I still find it hard to believe McClelland could be so politically stupid – simply hand Howard a free wedge when his wedges have been failing all year. Even a child would know to not bring up such things during an election campaign. There must be some pretty angry party people. Maybe he should have gone into the blogs and canvassed the idea first. Is he up to the job?
[simply hand Howard a free wedge when his wedges have been failing all year. Even a child would know to not bring up such things during an election campaign.]
Exactly. It was the sort of speech that a minister for foreign affairs would make at some international conference that wouldn’t even be reported here. It wasn’t the sort of thing you expect an opposition to talk about.
Ashley (122) and my 128
Somehow missed mentioning the bullying attack dog Abbott. A real pleasure to see Gillard and Roxon making mince meat of him every time they debate him.
Yes, Jen, I actually don’t mind Costello. I think the Liberal party today would be quite a different beast if Costello had been in charge the last 10 years or so. I certainly don’t buy into the “I don’t like him because he smirks” angle.
Obviously I don’t really know what he is like, but he at least has two good things going for him:
1. He doesn’t like Howard, and vice versa
2. He has a caring and compassionate brother, Tim Costello
On the basis of these associations, and the bits I’ve seen of him on TV, I’m prepared to hand him my most-liked trophy.
Mind you, it’s not difficult to beat the other ministers I had to choose from. The only other minister I can think of who is half ok is Mal Brough. Most of the rest of them I really dislike… especially Howard, Downer, Andrews, Ruddock and Nelson.
Jen,
Any updates on the photo?
From the Herald just now…
Tinfoil hats off. Thinking caps on please…
Any ideas?
All right, let’s try to do a seat by seat analysis of this whole thing.
In SA, there seem to be 3 certain Labor gains. There’s 2 potentials (Sturt and Boothby), but forget them at the moment.
In Tassie, notwithstanding the pulp mill and the pork barreling, I still see Labor picking up 2 seats (Bass and Braddon). Add 1 in NT as well (which should go to show that lots of government intervention does not necessarily lead to an improvement in their fortunes, but anyway…)
In WA, I’ve got them picking up both Stirling and Hasluck – not because Labor’s doing particularly well out there – it’s just that they’re coming off such a low base, I don’t see them doing any worse than they did in 2004.
In QLD, there’s got to be definite gains in Bonner and Moreton. Practically every bookie has Labor picking up Blair and Labor seems to have the edge in Herbert (so far). It’s also worth noting that Sportingbet has Labor in front in Bowman, but I’m not counting that as a definite, coz it has such a large margin.
In NSW, there’s projected gains in Lindsay, Parramatta, Eden-Monaro and probably Dobell. Other seats like Page, Bennelong and Wentworth are still favouring the Libs at this stage…
And finally, there’s Victoria, where I see Labor picking up at least 1 of Deakin, La Trobe and Corangamite.
So that’s 16 Labor gains all up – a bare majority, but I think I’ve been conservative with my projections (particularly with the seats on the eastern seaboard). Of course, things may change when the election campaign start properly, but most of the above seats seem like virtual “locks” for Labor at the moment.
*most liked:Joe Hockey
*most hated:JWH
*most childish:Alexander Downer
*most annoying:Tony Abbott
*most dumb:Helen Coonan
*most frightening:P. Ruddock
*most incompetent:K. Andrews
*biggest boofhead: Heffernan
Totally agree Kina (130) re McClelland’s inexplicable stupidity.
I don’t think he will be given a ministry and I don’t think he deserves one after that little effort.
Darn — I’m more generous with Costello. I think he has been too patient and wasn’t ruthless enough to try and bring down Howard. You could call that weak. But you could equally interpret that (as I do) as being a bit too much of a nice guy and team player. Plus he’s not stupid… he has never had anywhere near the numbers to topple the PM, except perhaps in the last month or two (and if he challenged and it backfired that would be the end of his political career… he would blamed if/when the Libs lose the election). As for arrogant, well maybe, but Keating was supposedly arrogant too and I liked him.
ABC News, noon. There’s a proposal to raise the pension age from 65 to 67. To save money. Comes from some committee or something. No doubt completely divorced from the Howard Government. This seems to me to be the first shot in the ultimate – the abolition of the age pension. Remember, there was no mention of WorkChoices during the last election campaign.
Today’s Liberals would love that. After all, old people tend to be under-productive in the cot, have long memories and, with wisdom, do not suffer fools gladly. Why encourage them to hang around causing angst by giving them taxpayers’ money?
As a fellow smirker, I don’t think we should hold that against Costello. Costello’s problem was that Howard was seen in such (undeserved) awe by thr party room, Costello couldn’t get the numbers to challenge. However, if he had done a Keating and challenged, lost and gone to the back bench, he would probably be leader today. Changing to Costello even after the APEC fiasco would have made this election a real contest. I can’t stand Howard but could live with a Costello government next provided he got rid of Downer, Abbott, Ruddock and that creepy bloke Erica Abetz.
Kina @ 137:
LOL. Ruddock always reminds me of one of the bad guys (the Emperor?) off Star Wars. I keep expecting to see electricity shooting from his fingers as he levitates Rudd into the air.
I think you are being a bit hard on McClelland. His only crime is poor politics as well as timing. If he had said what he did as a Labor foreign minister, no one would have cared. After all, its probably what the vast majority of ALP supporters think anyway, and it is ALP policy after all. I think Rudd probably did the right thing coming down heavily on him to put the spotfire out, but I don’t honestly think it will affect McClelland’s chances of getting a ministry. I think it just reflects Rudd’s “do whatever it takes to win” philosophy. What happens when the ALP is in government is another thing altogether.
For all those criticising Downer for being annoying, etc: Can I just say for the record that I think Downer is the most amusing and entertaining Minister we’ve had since Al Grasby. He has definitely given us our monies worth and I for one will be sorry to see him go. He’s been a barrel of laughs. He’s impersonation of an expert on International Relations has been Academy Award winning stuff. Jim Carey and Robin Williams eat your hearts out. He’s been pure comedy gold and I hope he gets his own TV comedy sitcom after he leaves Parliament.
Good afternoon
If you folks would stop obsessing about The Australian and read sensible newspapers instead, you might have seen the usually excellent Geoffrey Barker in the AFR on the Senate election.
http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/a/australia/barkersenate.pdf
(Not available online elsewhere – aren’t I considerate?)
Barker says that Labor and/or the Greens need to win three seats from the Coalition, rather than the two most of us have been quoting.
The numbers are currently Coalition 39, Labor 28, Greens 4, Dems 4, FF 1. Thus Coalition+FF = 40, ALP+Greens+Dems = 36. So one ALP gain makes it 39/37, two gains makes it 38/38 and three gains makes it 37/39.
However, at 38/38 Fielding has the balance of power, and Fielding would almost certainly support the current ALP policy on IR, or something like it. So on the central issue of the election two gains would be enough. Even two gains is a big ask – it requires an 8-10% swing in two states, although the concept of “swing” is tricky in the Senate when you have multiple parties in a PR election.
[*most liked:Joe Hockey
*most hated:JWH
*most childish:Alexander Downer
*most annoying:Tony Abbott
*most dumb:Helen Coonan
*most frightening:P. Ruddock
*most incompetent:K. Andrews
*biggest boofhead: Heffernan]
Haha. That reminds me of a Far Side cartoon entitled Ship of Fools/Car of idiots…Ministry of Bozos maybe?
Costello was ridiculed back in 1995 by Keating for not having the guts to challenge for the leadership.
In the 11 years of Howard Costello has had opportunities, even an agreement with Howard, but has not had the guts to do anything except carp behind the scenes. He simply does not have the strength of character of a PM and this lack of courage is disturbing in a potential leader.
I think we over estimate Costello simply because he has had an easy ride on Keating’ economy and no hard battles to fight or hard work to do. He can act in parliament and play that role well but…..?
[As for arrogant, well maybe, but Keating was supposedly arrogant too and I liked him.]
Keating knew that Hawke couldn’t defeat Hewson (when he finally became P.M. in December, the Newspoll was 51 / 36 to the coalition on primary votes), so he challenged, and ultimately won the election.
Costello told journalists that he doesn’t think Howard can win against Rudd, all the polls this year have supported that claim. However, he was too gutless too challenge – even though if he did challenge he would’ve got the support of nearly all the cabinet (according to Peter Hartcher, maybe minus Abbott and Ruddock), and along with it, most of the backbench.
If the coalition loses the election, Costello should take part of the blame for NOT challenging. In fact, his inability to make that tough move may condem him if he is ever leader of the opposition.
Yes Adam, I did read that article this morning with interest.
The only state I can see Labor/Greens picking up 4 senators is Tasmania. The others will be 3-3 or 3-2-1 (Coalition, Labor, Greens). WA and Qld will definately not have less than 3 Coalition senators.
As for the off chance of ACT electing Kerry Tucker, I don’t see it happening.
Definately an interesting Senate contest though, although I see the Coalition only dropping 1 senator at this election.
On a final note, farewell senators Murray, Stott Despoja, Ray and Watson (although strangely the article does not list him, but rather lists Calvert who’s already gone). The absence of these senators will be felt. Couldn’t care less about Patterson or Kemp.
[The numbers are currently Coalition 39, Labor 28, Greens 4, Dems 4, FF 1. Thus Coalition+FF = 40, ALP+Greens+Dems = 36. So one ALP gain makes it 39/37, two gains makes it 38/38 and three gains makes it 37/39. ]
Wouldn’t it be in the interests of the Democrats, Greens, and family first to all put Labor before the libs and nats?
It would seem that Labor are going to get at least the same primary vote in the senate as the Liberals. But the main priority for the minors would be to take seats off the coalition. If that ends up electing an additional Labor senator or two, then that is still better for the minors than leaving the coalition with a senate majority, because it gives the minors a say in whatever legislation is passed, rather than letting the coalition effectively veto everything.