Anyone for Dennis?

With the election safely out of the way, we might have expected the heat to have gone out of the great blogosphere-versus-The Australian opinion poll wars. Turns out Dennis Shanahan has other ideas:

This week’s most eye-catching figures were Kevin Rudd’s 70per cent and Brendan Nelson’s 9per cent on the question of who would make the better prime minister, a Newspoll record high for a prime minister and a new low for an Opposition leader. After The Australian put the story, which I wrote, on the front page, it captured public attention and was reported, commented upon and retold in newspapers, radio, television and blogs. As Possum Comitatus said …: “While records are meant to be broken, this one was obviously meant to be smashed. Brendan Nelson has stormed into the worst preferred prime minister result in the history of Newspoll with an astonishing 9 per cent.” Peter Brent’s Mumble and William Bowe’s Poll Bludger, sites that panned the Newspoll reporting in the past, covered it without personal comment … Yet there was one key point missing from all the commentary that has previously cropped up in analysis of Newspolls: in Possum’s words, Nelson “stormed” to his rating by 2 percentage points. Rudd’s record on preferred PM was also reached by a rise of 2 percentage points. The margin of error for the Newspoll survey on a sample of 1140 is 3 percentage points. The leaders “stormed” to these records with movements of less than the margin of error. In the past, The Australian has been castigated for reporting movements of 2 per cent and placing stories on page one based on “record” lows … Statistical bloggers forever complain about reports of movements of less than 3 per cent and essentially want polls to be banished from newspapers and public debate except during an election. On this occasion, as on previous occasions, the simple news judgment was made in writing the story and placing the story, that a record, however it is attained, is newsworthy. The bloggers thought so, as they trawled the records to find Crean’s lowest reading in Newspoll and talked about the importance of the preferred prime minister figure for leaders. If Nelson’s preferred prime minister rating drops one point to a record low of 8 per cent, is that worthy of page one again? Or do we ignore that as being within the margin of error? Fat chance. Polls interest people, influence politicians and should be treated consistently.

For the record, I personally had very little to say last year about Shanahan’s Newspoll reporting. This was partly because the subject was being done to death elsewhere (not least in my own comments threads), but also because I had more sympathy than some for the idea that Labor’s bloated lead would indeed feel the effects of gravity before polling day. My post on Tuesday’s Newspoll even managed a sarcastic dig at those who paint him as a Coalition stooge.

In other news, the AEC has commenced a redistribution for Tasmania, it having gone the maximum seven years without one. The AEC’s figures respectively put enrolment in Bass, Denison and Lyons at 1.2 per cent, 1.6 per cent and 2.3 per cent below average, with Braddon and Franklin 1.5 per cent and 3.7 per cent above. So the redistribution will presumably involve a transfer of territory from Franklin to Lyons, which is unlikely to make much difference to anyone’s electoral prospects. Changes to the more sensitive Bass and Braddon are likely to be negligible. Uniquely, Tasmanian boundary changes have effect at both federal and state level.

UPDATE: Shanahan’s central contention, that Nelson’s drop from 11 per cent to 9 per cent was within the margin of error, is questioned by David Walsh and Unicorn in comments. The latter tells us that the sampling error depends on the uniformity of the population, so the 3 per cent figure assumes a 50-50 response like you roughly get from a two-party split. Whereas the question of Nelson’s approval or non-approval in fact splits about 10-90, producing a margin of 1.7 per cent.

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.

223 comments on “Anyone for Dennis?”

Comments Page 1 of 5
1 2 … 5

  1. William. Shansie is just beastly and silly.

    I cannot recollect any headline thread in which you came out against Shansy and his Newspoll slant. On the personal level he is stating.

    Assessment of a Newspoll, yes. Shansie, no.

    More of moment, the attack of Pollbludger, Possum, Mumble.

    A clear win for the bloggers.

  2. If Beasley was as bad as Sham- I-AM led us to believe, and Nelson is as bad as Newspoll says, then there can be no place in Federal Leadership for Brendan Nelson. He should have packed up and left by now.

    Defending the indefensible is Sham I Am’s main problem that leads to skewing poll results into Liberal Party acceptable headlines.

  3. Surely it is neither here nor there whether the “real” figure is two or three points above or below.

    It might be true enough to say the movement was within the margin of error. But Possum wasn’t focussing on the movement; he was focussing on the actual number itself.

    The fact that Nelson polled a similar score two weeks ago doesn’t detract from Possum’s point. On the contrary, it bolsters it.

    (P.S. Another point to consider: The standard margin of error presumes a 50/50 breakdown, or at least something in that ballpark. The MoE actually gets smaller when you get a split more towards the extremes, e.g. 90/10, 99/1…)

  4. How any of you bloggers can look Dennis in the face staggers me.
    After all, we know now that he is the King of the Polls, having correctly and consistently predicted that John Howard would win the last election.
    Just because you lot are out of touch with the pulse of Australian life is no reason to take it out on Dennis.
    William, Possum – yes, I’m talking to you – hang your heads in shame.
    I expect to see a personal apology to Mr Shanahan on your websites shortly.

  6. I find it easier to treat Glen’s comments with credibility – at least they’re sometimes grounded in (however misguided) fact, opposed to the fantasy Shanahan peddles. He’s a second rate commentator who can’t cut it as an analyst and I fail to see what he brings to the Australian.

  7. C’mon

    he’s got a point… (heresy?) 😮

    on the up side things have been fairly dull in the blogosphere of late…methinks thats gunna change 🙂

  8. Dennis Shanahan is a quack, who in these new enlightened times will be lucky to keep his job.

    He can’t bring himself to admit for a political commentator he was hopelessly out of touch and unable to even read his own newspolls. Where is his reference to John Howard’s big comeback based on 1 margin of error increase in preferred PM (when he was still down to Rudd). In fact Rudd is still in his honeymoon period, battling bravely pass the budget bounce.

    Shanahan, you are a quack.

  9. Nelson’s problem (the Doctor’s Dilemma), so clearly set out by Possum…
    http://possumcomitatus.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/so-just-how-bad-is-9-for-brendan-nelson/#comments
    is insuperable. He’s got himself in the situation of attracting fire from both opposing camps within the conservative ranks. Makes you wonder who the 9% are.
    Reminds me of this ingenious Lou Costello (I think) sketch which was set during the civil war with both sides shooting at each other from trenches. Lou was somehow trapped in the middle of no-mans-land and needed to get out. He sowed together the right side of a Union uniform with the left side of a Confederate uniform. He put it on and stood up with the Union army in the trench to the right and Confed to the left. Soldiers on each side held their fire, each thinking he was one of theirs, and Lou started to walk to safety. Until…
    He stupidly turned around. Of course both sides then started shooting at him.
    Very funny.
    Like Lou, Nelson needs to re-align himself quickly or he’s a goner.

  12. Wow. Shanahan gives huge exposure to blogs that he has a problem with. I wonder if the sites mentioned will get more traffic as a result…

    Is Dennis really that simple? Why would a professional journalist engage in such a petty, tit-for-tat attack like this, when it will only increase traffic to the sites that he is complaining about and galvanise more bloggers against him?

    It really doesn’t make sense. Well, I guess he has to try and fill up those column inches somehow…

  13. The content of Shanahan’s rant is, as usual, not worth giving the time of day to. What is more interesting is that he is still obviously quite stung by the critcism he received from blogs last year. At least it hit its mark

  14. Why would a professional journalist engage in such a petty, tit-for-tat attack like this, when it will only increase traffic to the sites that he is complaining about and galvanise more bloggers against him?

    Presumably it will also increase hits on his GG article on-line. Maybe his stats were down.

  15. Leaving Mr Shanahan aside for the mo (good idea – boring), and looking at the other part of Peter’s post, the AEC distribution of the five Tasmanian divisions.

    The Tasmanian Electoral Commission has recently proposed changes to the 15 Legislative Council divisions. For those interested (not me) their deliberations and estimations of trends in Tasmania’s population might be relevant.

    See my site here for an overview here:http://tasmanianpolitics.blogspot.com/2008/02/legislative-council-bounsary.html

    The TEC report here: http://www.electoral.tas.gov.au/pages/LegislativeRedistribution.html

  16. The excitement re Nelson’s rating was extraordinary. Mostly it was reported as either an approval rating or a satisfaction rating – even though it was neither.

    Also the previous month’s poll with the Preferred PM figures at Rudd 68 Nelson 11 is, as has been mentioned, effectively the same result.

    What is of some interest, especially to those with polling withdrawals from 2007, is a comparison of satisfaction ratings for both Rudd and Nelson across the two months of polls and a comparison to the polling following the 1996 election.

    First, satisfaction levels:

    Rudd as PM

    January Approve 59 Disapp 11 U/C 30

    February Approve 68 Disapp 13 U/C 19

    It shows a clear jump from uncommitted to approval for Rudd following the “sorry” week.

    Nelson as Opposition Leader

    January Approve 36 Disapp 19 U/C 45

    February Approve 40 Disapp 31 U/C 29

    It shows a clear jump from uncommitted to disapproval for Nelson, although his approval improved a little.

    Second, comparison to 1996:

    Voting intentions

    1996 (March/April) ALP 34.5 L/NP 53.5 TPP 41/59 (projected @ 46% flow to the L/NP = 1996 result)

    2008 (Jan/Feb) ALP 46 L/NP 35.5 TPP 57.5/42.5

    Preferred PM

    1996 (March/April) Howard 55 Beazley 20 U/C 25

    2008 (Jan/Feb) Rudd 69 Nelson 10 U/C 21

    As for satisfaction ratings,

    Across March/April 1996 Howard’s scores were: approval ~ 50, disapproval ~ 15, and uncommitted ~ 35,

    and Beazley: approval ~ 39, disapproval ~ 16, and uncommitted ~ 45,

    Then the Port Arthur tragedy occurred and both leaders ratings improved with the subsequent “guns” debate, although Preferred PM improved slightly more for Howard than Beazley, before returning to their average levels.

    It will be interesting to see how Rudd and Nelson rate, when the “sorry” emotion has washed through.

  18. I am surprised that The Australian keeps publishing his rubbish (and pays him for that). I guess if they keep going with these second rate journos (including JA) The Australian will simply lose whatever credibility they have left. Keep it up guys, at least it is good amusement for many of us.

  21. 9
    bryce

    Bloody hell bryce, I was just thinking of that very scene the other day as poor Horatio Hornet was trying to be all things to all people and was getting massacred! Talk about amazing synchronicity (or perhaps we just share the same B/W TV movie viewing history! LOL).

    By the way, I may be wrong, but I remember it as the wind changing, and suddenly his flag is spun around and he doesn’t notice, but of course the opposing lines of troops do!

    Kind of Horatio’s problem, really.

  22. It won’t surprise too many here, but Shanahan has actually taken Possum’s comments out of context. At no point did Possum suggest that Nelsons PPM rating of 9% was a major change from the previous Newspoll result, which was 11%. That was Shanahan’s invention.

    Possum was actually comparing Nelson’s figures with the worst PPM ratings of previous opposition leaders, including Howard (22%), Downer (21%), and Crean (14%). To have only been in the job for a few months and to never have a PPM rating beyond the teens is a significant point worth commenting on. Indeed, Nelson has “stormed” into the position of opposition leader with the most woeful PPM ratings ever recorded by Newspoll.

    Shanahan’s article is clearly dishonest. I can only guess that he is still suffering from the psychological wounds of having blogger after blogger call him on the ridiculous pro-Howard spin that he put on last year’s Newspoll results. This man has a big chip on his shoulder. Why he is still in charge of reporting Newspoll, I do not know. I can only imagine that it is now about entertainment value for the blogosphere. It certainly isn’t about incisive, accurate, honest, and credible reporting.

  23. I think Denis must have read my post from 2 days ago where I pointed out that if the 3% margin of error applied to Nelson’s 9% PPM, then the true figure could just as easily be either 6% or 12%, neither of which flatter Mr Nelson or his performance as Leader of the Opposition to date.

    [The margin of error for the Newspoll survey on a sample of 1140 is 3 percentage points. The leaders “stormed” to these records with movements of less than the margin of error. ]

    And this here is a quite ridiculous statement without any supporting evidence to back it up.

    [In the past, The Australian has been castigated for reporting movements of 2 per cent and placing stories on page one based on “record” lows … Statistical bloggers forever complain about reports of movements of less than 3 per cent and essentially want polls to be banished from newspapers and public debate except during an election. ]

    All in all, I think Denis was stumped for any favourable comment to make in favour of Nelson and the Coalition’s performance to date and decided to fall back on his old tactic of attacking an opponent that can’t hit back through the MSM.

  24. bryce Says: @ 9,

    [ He put it on and stood up with the Union army in the trench to the right and Confed to the left. Soldiers on each side held their fire, each thinking he was one of theirs, and Lou started to walk to safety. Until…
    He stupidly turned around. Of course both sides then started shooting at him.]

    Mate, this would have to be the best discription of Nelson’s position I have seen to date.

    Well done!

  25. [Wow. Shanahan gives huge exposure to blogs that he has a problem with. I wonder if the sites mentioned will get more traffic as a result…]

    I think Shannahan hopes the reverse is true.

    He may be trying to direct traffic to his own Blog to try and demonstrate that he is still relevant as a commentator.

    With the stand he and his colleagues took throughout the 12 months period leading up to the election, the GG’s readership and standing as an influential player on the political scene, sunk to new depths, similar to Nelson’s PPM rating.

    I would think that Shannahan is desperately trying to regain some standing with his employer in an attempt to save his job. They desperately need traffic on their web version and Blogs to justify advertisers investment with the GG.

    All in all, a very poor attempt at relevance.

  26. I thought Bruce Guthrie said on Jon Faine’s program that Shanahan was going to Washington? The sonner they ship Dennis out and get the Mega man to do Newspoll, the better it will be for everyone.

  28. You make a good point, GP. It must now be called the Opposition Gazette… nah, that just doesn’t have the same ring. Can anyone think of a more appropriate label?

  29. [ He put it on and stood up with the Union army in the trench to the right and Confed to the left. Soldiers on each side held their fire, each thinking he was one of theirs, and Lou started to walk to safety. Until…
    He stupidly turned around. Of course both sides then started shooting at him.]

    An excellent analogy, but rather than Lou Costello, I think it was Red Skelton.

    Though come to think of it, the famous “Who’s on First, What’s on Second” sketch from Abbot and Costello (the orignals, not the mre recent, lesss successful comedy duo) does sound rather like the curent state of the Liberal Party.

  30. Andos

    The Rump Review?

    The Toadstill Tribune?

    p.s. As editor at large does Paul Kelly ever leave his house? I would understand if he didn’t; the risk of a confusing, potentially career-destroying, confrontation with Reality or Empathy is ever present in the Northern suburbs of Sydney. (Just ask Joe Hockey, Tony Abbott and The Majestically Moochy Knight of the Garter.)

  31. it would appear that dennis has little understanding of statistics/margin of error.
    dennis, if you’re listening: you can’t transfer margins of error between polls.

  33. Poor old Dennis sounds jealous that Dr Who? actually HAS an approval rating.

    Shanahan must surely realise that his tenuous hold on relevance stems from the fact that he is nothing more than a punch line.

    While I’m at it, a short memo to Ms Albrechtsen: If a tree falls in a forest…

    Barking like dogs into the wind, the lot of ’em.

  35. i remember this discussion occuring after the election result and maybe just prior….i think the one i liked that came up most was the “opposition orafice”

  36. Who is Dennis Shanahan? I remember we once had a prime minister called John Howards, if my memory serves is correct he came after Keating, is he still alive?

  37. You notice that not much was said by the Oz about the outrageous amount of money wasted on Workchoices propaganda……….100,000 mouse mats… dear oh dear, about as useful as the fridge magnets. I wonder how many bureaucrats were needed to dream up the mouse mat idea.

  39. In Melbourne there are a group of local newspapers (municipal area based) called the (insert name of local area) Leader which are owned by an ex-Australian media owners company the same as owns The Australian.

    Any newspaper called the Liberal Leader would have to be the Brisbane version.

  41. Well Dennis has got time on his hands and both he and the Oz seem to be a bit short of meaty news today. It doesn’t matter what he says about the blogs, so long as he spells the names right. The old number crunchers will just beaver away entering the boring-as-batshit numbers into their spreadsheets for the next 30 months until something interesting emerges from under the woodwork.

  43. It seems that Semoham was having lunch with Dolly Downer yesterday, apparently the topic of discussion was East Timor.

    Expect something grubby soon.

  47. 44
    Frank Calabrese

    I heard Dolly say it was with Greg Sheridan.

    Who’d have lunch with Shamham? (Sounds like something out of Dr Seuss)

  49. I think looking at the perferred PM numbers are a waste of time, the only numbers that matter are the various Parties primary votes and the TPP.

    PM’s seem to always be more popular.

    At the present the ALP is leading about 57-43 and that is way more relavent than 70% – 9%

    I think the most interesting poll numbers is the 68% who supported the Apology

  50. [Frank Calabrese

    I heard Dolly say it was with Greg Sheridan.

    Who’d have lunch with Shamham? (Sounds like something out of Dr Seuss)]

    I stand corrected then.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 1 of 5
1 2 … 5