Nielsen: 53-47 to Labor in Victoria

GhostWhoVotes reports tomorrow’s Age will feature a Nielsen poll showing state Labor with a handsome 53-47 two-party lead, with both parties’ primary votes believed to be in the high thirties. More to follow.

UPDATE: The primary votes are 38 per cent for both Labor and the Coalition and 16 per cent for the Greens. John Brumby’s approval rating is 51 per cent, down a point on the last Nielsen state poll in January, and his disapproval is up four to 41 per cent. Ted Baillieu is up on both approval (three points to 43 per cent) and disapproval (one point to 46 per cent). Brumby holds a 52-37 lead as preferred premier.

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.

368 comments on “Nielsen: 53-47 to Labor in Victoria”

Comments Page 2 of 8
1 2 3 … 8

  1. 50

    The candidate factor is only worth 2% in metro areas and I saw mention of polling that said that Richard Wynne was the most popular candidate.

  3. Yes Tom and in Jane’s case she does not have a local MP vote so it wll be harder for her but I like her therefore hope she wins

  4. [Brumby heads to the November 27 election with a commanding 52 per cent to 37 per cent lead over Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu as preferred premier – but the gap has narrowed slightly over this year.]

    This is about right although we have them slightly less. Again the distribution is not evenly spreed across the state. The pendulum can not be relied on as a good guide. You really need to break the vote down into the eight regions. It is much closer then you think.

  5. Well for a start there are five seats that historically a third term ALP Government do not hold. Prahran, Seymour, Macedon, Ripon, Forest Hill

    so if they all fall and the Liberals pick up Gembrook, Mitcham, Mount Waverley and Monbulk. with the Greens winning Melbourne and Richmond we could have a change of Government.

  6. [Greens put heat on ALP
    Paul Austin
    October 30, 2010

    PREMIER John Brumby goes into next month’s state election campaign with a strong lead over the Coalition but under threat from the surging Greens.

    An Age/Nielsen poll taken this week shows Labor with 53 per cent of the vote after distribution of preferences from the Greens and other minor parties, and the Coalition on 47 per cent.

    This is a swing to the Liberal and National parties of about 1.5 per cent since the November 2006 election – not enough for the Coalition to win, but indicating it could get within striking distance with an effective campaign.
    Advertisement: Story continues below

    The poll suggests Labor will lose seats to both the opposition and the Greens, and will have to rely heavily on Greens preferences to be returned to office.

    Mr Brumby heads to the November 27 election with a commanding 52 per cent to 37 per cent lead over Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu as preferred premier – but the gap has narrowed slightly over this year.

    The Greens are attracting 16 per cent of the primary vote, dramatically up from the 10 per cent they received at the last election.

    In metropolitan Melbourne the Greens are recording a primary vote of 18 per cent, suggesting the minor party could cut a swathe through Labor’s inner-city heartland, potentially winning four seats including two held by cabinet ministers.

    If the poll results were replicated at the election, Labor would also be in danger of losing four seats to the Coalition in the eastern suburbs, including another two held by ministers.

    The Labor seats in danger of falling to the Liberals are: Mount Waverley (held by Women’s Affairs Minister Maxine Morand with a margin of just 0.3 per cent), Gembrook (backbencher Tammy Lobato, 0.7 per cent), Forest Hill (backbencher Kirstie Marshall, 0.8 per cent) and Mitcham (Gaming Minister Tony Robinson, 2 per cent).]

    As you can see it is shaping up to be a marginal seat. The age claims that four inner city seats are under attack by the Greens. This is dependent on the Liberal Party preferencing the Greens as part of a deal that will deliver the Liberal Party seats in the upper house including Southern and Eastern Metro and Western Victoria along with guarantees that the greens will not campaign hard in Hawthorn which is also vulnerable.

  7. LAST TIME I VOTED GREEN – NOT THIS TIME

    [Federal Greens leader Bob Brown has left open the possibility of his party entering into a power-sharing alliance with the Victorian Coalition if the election produces a hung parliament.]

    Kust in case you had any doubt about the Greens backing the Liberal Party. As you can see they are not a party or principle or socialist values.

    Dont risk the possibility of a Liberal Green Coalition – Vote ALP

  8. Hawthorn is the only seat south of the yarra that the Greens might come second but the Liberals will hold that seat by a country mile.

    Before Tom mentions Prahran, I still see that has an ALP v Lib TPP

  9. Independently Thinking

    “Oh dear, it appears Ron has caught D@W’s disease ”

    petal , seeing you did not even suport your throw away 1/2 line comment , you deserve to be ignored

    Fact is Democracy at Work produced a well argued case of Greens slipperyness in secret deels of Greens getting Lib prefs in lower house in xchsnge for Greens pref Libs in upper house,

    and I simply exposed Greens steeling safe inner city Labor seats by stealth using Lib prefs and mentioning specif seats , a point John brumby also stated

    more airing of Greens dirty linen there is , th more public is imformed

  10. mexicanbeemer

    “Ron – You are correct, but after Brumby and the States worked though the opptions the end result was a better policy.”

    Mex , yes i agree

  11. Labor by 4 is the word through various public sector networks. I think Mt. Waverley, Gembrook, Forest Hill, Mitcham and Melb-to Greens will go, possibly frankston and Richmond, and Sth Barwon- Anyone close to the Sth Barwon action? Katos the Greek traitor running for libs-
    Burwood hold, Prahran hold, Mordialloc hold.
    Bizarre is that the safest ALp seat is a thumping 32% while the safest lib is 12.3%

  12. mexican beemer

    [Well for a start there are five seats that historically a third term ALP Government do not hold. Prahran, Seymour, Macedon, Ripon, Forest Hill]

    This kind of silliness puts everything else you say in doubt.

    At least two of these seats – Seymour and Ripon – have never previously, in any government of any complexion, at any time in Victoria’s history, been held by Labor at all, ever. (Both sitting members will telll you that they weren’t predicted to win the seats to start with, and at every election it’s been predicted with absolute certainty that they wouldn’t hold them – they are both very effective local members).

    I’m not sure about the other three, but I’d think Macedon and possibly Forest Hill are in the same boat.

    Given that there have only been seven Labor governments in the history of the State, with only four of those governing for more than a year, I don’t think past history is any guide here.

    Noticed too Antony Green’s comments that the Coalition vote has not moved since last election.

    If he is right, then I’m holding out for basically status quo, with swings in non held seats in regions and an increase in Greens vote for the city.

    If there are swings in the regions – as everything I’ve seen suggests – then, for the Coalition’s primary vote to be basically static, that means there must be compensating swings to Labor elsewhere, which suggests that most Labor held seats are safe and there is a slim possibility that they may pick up a few of the more marginal prospects.

    The Libs cannot win seats unless their primary vote improves. Green preferences won’t do it, because Green voters won’t follow the HTVs.

  13. As I thought:

    Forest Hill, first won by Labor in 2002, never previously held by Labor.

    Macedon (from the VEC info, looks like it was a new creation in 2002), never previously held by Labor (and has an excellent local member who defeated one of Kennett’s most high profile ministers).

    Prahran has shifted around a bit, so it’s the only one of the five that may fit your description.

    As I said, history is no guide to us here. Demographic shifts are. There are many, many seats which Labor won in 1999 which will remain safe Labor into the foreseeable future, regardless of the party in power, because their demographics have changed.

    The failure to take these shifts into account in the past are why Vic elections have been difficult to predict.

  14. [I think that Brunswick is better for the Greens than the Commonwealth Election results show (ALP 0.6%) because it largely overlaps Wills in which the Greens were not putting in special effort to overtake the ALP. The Greens will be putting is said effort to try and take the seat.]

    There is also the matter that there is no Liberal candidate in Brunswick this time around, so talk of Libs preference deals isn’t going to mean much here.

    Just Labor, Greens and Socialist alliance.

  16. Following on from the previous thread, a great many of us seem to be from the Diamond Valley area – is there something (else) in the water?

    I think it would be interesting if people were asked why they would/might/consider voting Green. Options could range from being a true believer, to thinking they have some good ideas that should be discussed more openly, to thinking they will give the two majors a heads up on at least the environment, to even just being sick of the Lab/Lib thing & wanting them to stop taking voters for granted. It’s not like either of the big party options is all that fab.

    And the more the main ones fuss about the Greens, the more attention they’re bringing.

    I emailed dear Danielle Green last week about why my local library now charges $10 a book for Inter Library Loans, and I have been told she’s asked the minister & someone will get back to me. I wonder how long I shall wait…

  17. This talk of preference deals reminds me of someone who said that the day when these Above-The-Line prefs are handed to the VEC (or maybe it was a State Senate ballot and the AEC) is fascinating. There’s a bit of “I’ll show you mine if you show me yours”, and some parties or groups come prepared with different sets of preference cards just in case others renege on deals.

    In these dealings the Liberals really have the whip hand – the Greens have much more to gain/lose in any deal (representation in the Lower House and possibly ministries in a Labor-Green government) than the Liberals (mischief value of Labor-Greens government, a few ministers out) – so the Liberals are the ones who can call the Greens bluff. And if the Greens do renege on any deal, payback in the form of Adam Bandt being a “oncer” should be threat enough.

  19. [I emailed dear Danielle Green last week about why my local library now charges $10 a book for Inter Library Loans, and I have been told she’s asked the minister & someone will get back to me. I wonder how long I shall wait…]

    Longer than necessary, Rod, as libraries are run by local councils not state governments – which means the Minister’s office will have to contact the local council for a response (which may require them contacting whoever has the library contract, as some councils contract this out) before responding to Danielle (dear friend of mine) and she gets to respond to you.

    I suggest you’ll get a quicker response if you go straight to the source!

  21. I would also point out that the fact Danielle’s raised the (relatively minor in the scheme of things) issue with the Minister, rather than just saying it’s none of her business and referring you to your local council, demonstrates the care she takes of her electorate.

  22. I know they are run by the local council.

    But, given the way our local council works, I don’t actually think any of them can read.

    She also seems to have presumed that the govt have something to do with it. I was interested to see that I got a we’ll look into it response, which is more than I have got before.

    And the library’s staff, when asked about the new fee, which is a state-wide one, mentioned state govt funding problems &c. Sometimes not everyone is completely idiotic about who they approach to deal with a problem.

  23. [Federal Greens leader Bob Brown has left open the possibility of his party entering into a power-sharing alliance with the Victorian Coalition if the election produces a hung parliament.]
    I think with the Greens its better to go on past performance than what Brown says. Who do they support federally and in Tassie? Name the last Liberal government they supported.

  24. Wiggins,

    You make a fool of yourself and now you want to compound it.

    Why not speak to your local Councillor who actually has jurisdiction.

    Blaming someone else for alleged woes is not a particularly novel response and seems to be a modus operandi for the Greens.

  25. [DemocracyATwork
    Posted Saturday, October 30, 2010 at 1:30 am | Permalink

    LAST TIME I VOTED GREEN – NOT THIS TIME

    Federal Greens leader Bob Brown has left open the possibility of his party entering into a power-sharing alliance with the Victorian Coalition if the election produces a hung parliament.

    Kust in case you had any doubt about the Greens backing the Liberal Party. As you can see they are not a party or principle or socialist values.

    Dont risk the possibility of a Liberal Green Coalition – Vote ALP]

    You have to laugh. The ALP have zipped of to the right and they are upset they have to negotiate with the greens for the left flank they left behind.

    My own view, the liberals will preference the Greens, the Greens are not one nation ( a blot on our political landscape) and the liberals are about government and government is about keeping Labor out of power, like it or not the greens are still a side show. The Labor party can ask to be preferenced ahead of the greens as much as they like, they won’t get it.

    There is going to be lot of hand wringing but my bet is Brumby will win a majority; that is assuming they don’t pull a stunt as silly as sacking Rudd as PM (in Victoria that would be sacking Brumby).

  27. [I know they are run by the local council.

    But, given the way our local council works, I don’t actually think any of them can read.]

    Actually, this business of inter-library loan fees is pretty common everywhere these days, and there is actually a National code , recommending charging schedules , called the “Australian InterLibrary Resource Sharing Code”.

    Yarra Valley Library isn’t actually run by the “Local Council”. It is run by a board comprised of councillors drawn from each of the local government areas which it serves – Whittlesea, Nillumbik and Banyule. You can find details of the current Board at http://www.yprl.vic.gov.au/about/board.html

    I see that the Board are anticipating pulling in some $30,000 from the inter-libarray loan fees this financial year!

  28. GG

    The chances of me voting Greens other than in the federal senate are about zero ( but increasing as Labor carries on trying to pretend they a the devils spawn).

  29. Gary

    [I think with the Greens its better to go on past performance than what Brown says. Who do they support federally and in Tassie? Name the last Liberal government they supported.]

    Agree. They always say that “we can work with both sides blah blah” just to maximise their vote from disgruntled small l Libs but they wouldn’t actually do it.

  33. Fredn,

    Then the good news for you is that Labor is where it has always been, in the Centre of the political spectrum committed to providing good Government through excellent economic management.

    The ability to provide more teachers, nurses and police as well as improved public transport and other services is a direct consequence of prudent economic stewardship of the Labor Government.

    Governments rule for all not just the noisy inner suburban banshees of bulldust.

    You may think it fashionable to flirt with a bunch of Communist inspired dreamers, but most sensible voters will disagree.

  34. [Fact is Democracy at Work produced a well argued case of Greens slipperyness in secret deels of Greens getting Lib prefs in lower house in xchsnge for Greens pref Libs in upper house]

    I can’t really the see the issue with this deal …

    It’ll do nothing to affect Brumby’s control of the lower house & in case of a hung parliament, the Greens in both upper & lower house will be more likely to side with Labor. Will an additional Lib senator, as a result of this deal, really make it impossible for Brumby to govern ?

    A deal to swap Green lower house preferences from Green to Labor in return for upper house preferences from Labor to Green (as in the Federal election) is the key element for Labor retaining power at the federal level (and possibly also in Victoria, if the opinion polls tighten).

  36. “Making decisions based on principle & integrity” = Happy to spend other people’s money without any compunction or responsibility.

    “Open & honest Government” = Describing sex to a virgin.

  37. [“Open & honest Government” = Describing sex to a virgin.]

    Yeah, GG, and the Greens will make the curtains fade, turn the cow’s milk to kerosene, force you to wear a burka, sell your babies to devil worshippers, blanket the earth with tea bags to keep out the sun’s rays, etc etc etc.

    Where do you get this absurd vitriolic nonsense from? It certainly doesn’t come across as rational. More like the sort of thing you’d expect from a Tea Party nutter convinced that Obama is the love child of Osama Bin Laden!

  41. Now Rocket Rocket you failed to mention this.
    [Labor had the numbers to enter minority government with the Greens, but had refused to do so.]

  42. Also this Rocket
    [The Liberal premier, Ray Groom, who had announced that the Liberals would not govern in minority, was forced to resign and was replaced by Tony Rundle, who reached an informal agreement with the Greens.]
    The Greens had nowhere to go.

  43. Gary

    I just answered the question., because no-one else had.

    Yes, it was a strange situation. Labor felt they had been stabbed in the back, and said they would not govern with the Greens again, and then Ray Groom said HE would not govern with the Greens. I think I even remember him going on the AFL Channel 9 Footy Show and saying this (I think he had played for Melbourne in the past). But it did seem to leave it open as to whether the Liberals (with a different leader) had entirely ruled out governing with Greens support.

    The other amusing sideline to all this is that in that period between 1996 and 1998 the Labor and Liberal Parties got together and reduced the size of the House of Assembly from 35 to 25, basically to make it harder for the Greens to get a quota (it went from 12.5% to 16.7%). This has perhaps backfired spectacularly, as the Greens vote has increased substantially since then such that the bigger quotas are no obstacle, and now their five seats end up wielding more power in a 25 seat Assembly!

  44. [Probably inspired by reading your long, boring, fact challenged monologues extolling the virtues of the Greens.]

    Point me to one, GG. I don’t think I’ve ever written a piece “extolling the virtues of the Greens” anywhere!

    Yes, there are some policy areas, asylum seekers, Indigenous affairs and Afghanistan most notably, where my own views are closer to those of the Greens than they are to mainstream Labor, but even then I don’t think I’ve ever “extolled” their virtues as a party in the process. I usually simply write about the issue, and then get “labelled” by the aparatchiks if the line I take doesn’t fit with “their” parties!

    What I HAVE said on a few occasions is that Labor and the Greens need to learn to live with each other, that I personally occupy a position around the border between the two, and that personally I don’t care whether a party calls itself Greens , Labor, or Calathumpian if its policies reflect my own views.

    Both Labor and The Greens, at their best, have a lot to offer the Australian community. Both have their strengths, both have their faults. Personally I get very bored with cat-calling from people who regard the “other” as the devil incarnate , which ever of the two it may be. all gets a bit like “two legs baaad – four legs goood” and vice versa to me.

  45. [I just answered the question., because no-one else had.

    Yes, it was a strange situation.]
    Fair enough. My point is that the Greens will favour Labor over the Libs given an even playing field. History has shown this. I really can’t see them doing anything else in Vic. Could be wrong but we’ll see.

  46. Gary
    [the Greens will favour Labor over the Libs given an even playing field]
    I agree, they will. Though a part of me wanted to see a Liberal-Green government in Tasmania this year, just so I could use my phrase “blue-green algae government”. It’s a pretty lame reason for wanting a change of government though.

  47. vik
    Posted Saturday, October 30, 2010 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    ‘ Fact is Democracy at Work produced a well argued case of Greens slipperyness in secret deels of Greens getting Lib prefs in lower house in xchsnge for Greens pref Libs in upper house ‘

    “I can’t really the see the issue with this deal … ”

    which shows you do not under stand stable responsble Govt planning long term becuase you used same flawed argument to say electing Brandt was th SAME as electin a Labor MP in Fef Melb seat !!

    there is not a single Labor MP or labor suporter who would agree with your naive coment , there is a lot of diff between having a majoirty Govt needing to negotat with a Greens BOP or Libs BOP VS a minority HoR Govt

    but then youse may like Italian style politcs

  48. Rod Hagen

    you DID made a unqual post saying current Labor’s Fed education and Health polisys was a sell out to traditonal Labor values !

    because i chalenged on that , with detail of what Fed Labor DID do in Rudd/gillard term , and i got no answer from you

    your post was Greensspeek

  49. When people start talking about “Greenspeak” or “ALPspeak” and the like, Ron, they sound more and more like characters out of Animal farm to me, and less and less like people interested in real political debate. Once they start using such terms I start thinking that they are treating politics more like a religious belief system than a political system.

    I certainly didn’t say that “Labor’s Fed education and Health polisys was a sell out to traditonal Labor values”. You said that what I was saying amounted to this.

    What I was actually trying to get across in that thread, from memory, was that one of the reasons that some former Labor supporters had headed towards the greens, especially on the left of the party, was because they had spent a lot of time fighting for things like a universal health scheme that placed greatest emphasis on the public system and an education system that made it possible for people from poorer backgrounds to go to university. They felt that Labor had backed off to some extent from such things.

    You then pointed to a couple of perfectly good examples of things that Rudd and Gillard had done that were good for education and health. But my point never was that the current Labor party are bad at health or education, merely that there were areas where some old time Labor people felt things related to these areas had been given away too easily, or not brought back when the possibility arose to do so. I’ve made it abundantly clear in these forums that I think the Gillard government will be a good government as long as it doesn’t allow itself to get dragged back to the right by trying to soothe some sectors of the electorate through adopting “Howard Lite” policies

    It troubles me, Ron, when people aren’t prepared to actually debate the issues, rather than “play the name game” in these things. Seems to me that sorting out its “balance” on the left, and the manner it is going to work with the Greens, is critically important to its, and Australia’s, future. That is why I respond when people descend to the “bulldoze a greenie loony” type of approach from some Labor supporters. Not only are most of the statements wrong, and silly. In the long run they have the potential to damage the future and credibility of left of centre government in Australia generally. That is really what matters to me.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 2 of 8
1 2 3 … 8