The weekly BludgerTrack update erases the 0.5% edge the Coalition gained in the wake of last week’s Newspoll, and finds Labor the tiniest fraction more likely than the Coalition to win a majority of seats. Labor has made a net gain of two on the seat projection, Queensland again showing its sensitivity with a two-seat shift on the basis of a very small vote change and a second gain projected for Labor in Western Australia (though I’d be a bit careful with the smaller state results at the moment, polling at that level having become leaner recently). This has been counterbalanced by a one seat move to the Coalition in New South Wales, where the Labor score remains on the cusp of 25 and 26.
The primary and two-party vote results are all but identical to the weekend’s Galaxy poll, which is the weightiest of the new data points. Included as always are Morgan, which was unusually soft for Labor this week, and Essential, which retains its slight lean to the Coalition relative to the rest of the field but has perhaps been trending slightly to Labor over the past few weeks. The one very bad new poll for Labor, the weekend’s ReachTEL result showing Labor to lose three of its four Tasmanian seats, has been included in the state relativities calculation. While its inclusion has weakened Labor’s two-party vote projection in the state by nearly 3% in relative terms, the model is not persuaded that Lyons will be joining Bass and Braddon on the casualty list.
The trendlines on the sidebar now paint a picture of monotonous consistency since the Rudd restoration, the so-called “sugar hit” having endured long enough to offer the Coalition real cause for alarm. However, very close observation of the primary votes provides some indication of movement beneath the surface. A poll aggregator like BludgerTrack presumes to have a margin of error of a bit over 1%, and while this is founded on dubious assumptions, it at least gives a rough pointer to the size of movement that should and shouldn’t interest us. One move outside the range concerns the Greens, who opened their account under Rudd at around 9%, sagged nearly a full point by the time of the asylum seeker policy announcement (remembering the margin of error diminishes the further a result gets from 50%), and have now recovered back to the starting point.
The other noteworthy change involves the “others” vote, which started the year at around 10%, increased to 12.5% as Labor bled primary vote support in the last six months under Julia Gillard, snapped back to around 9% when Rudd returned, and has trended downwards over the past four weeks to its present 7.5%. Part of that may have been absorbed by the Coalition in a general trend resulting from the media losing interest in some of the minor players, but it seems intuitively likely that a greater share comes from Labor leaners who have been won over after initial hesitancy by Rudd’s political initiatives. There may have been some deflation in the Rudd honeymoon balloon going on concurrently, with the Coalition primary vote at least holding level and perhaps rising slightly, but Rudd’s evident political successes have at the very least cancelled it out.
SNIP: See article 11 of comment moderation guidelines – The Management.
CC, you seem to be getting a little worried about your team’s chances.
As you should be.
@Mod Lib/3000
Except after 2008 GFC happened, which Libs seem to think never happened.
[You will be won’t you?]
I am holding my fire until a) a local Labor candidate is preselected, and b) to see whether there are any decent indies here.
Last election an indigenous candidate stood as an independent. He has a solid track record in indigenous health, and his wife is a local Kalgoorlie paediatrician. Preferencing him was a no-brainer.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/government-debt-to-gdp
Check out the entire graph from 1989 to 2013.
There appears to be 3 clear phases:
1989 to 1996: dramatic increase
1997 to 2007: dramatic fall
2008 to 2013: dramatic increase
Now…..was there anything that happened in 1996 and continued to 2007 which might explain that dramatic difference in trends over the last quarter century?
….thinking……thinking….. 🙂
@Mod Lib/3005
1. Sold off Telstra amongst others.
2. 2000 Introduced GST 10%.
[Last election an indigenous candidate stood as an independent. He has a solid track record in indigenous health, and his wife is a local Kalgoorlie paediatrician. Preferencing him was a no-brainer.]
Can I ask who that local Kalgoorlie paediatrician was?
Just Me@3002
The tories always get snarky when it looks like they might, just might lose another ‘unloseable’ election.
They don’t like it up em either 🙁
[zoidlord
Posted Friday, August 2, 2013 at 10:19 pm | PERMALINK
@Mod Lib/3005
1. Sold off Telstra amongst others.
2. 2000 Introduced GST 10%.]
Gee, those appear to have been wonderful decisions!
2911
WeWantPaul
[>tories can always dive deeper in the cesspit and stay there longer.
And then make stupid claims that everyone is as bad as them.]
And gleefully pat themselves on the back at their clever acts of bad faith.
You’ll get there if you think hard enough, Mod.
Some here seem to think I am in the Meguire Bob league of poll deniers.
Where have I disputed the polls?
They are what they are and at the moment it’s close but I’m reasonably confident.
[Check out the entire graph from 1989 to 2013.
There appears to be 3 clear phases:
1989 to 1996: dramatic increase
1997 to 2007: dramatic fall
2008 to 2013: dramatic increase
Now…..was there anything that happened in 1996 and continued to 2007 which might explain that dramatic difference in trends over the last quarter century?
….thinking……thinking]
and your point is what exactly? you are clearly not thinking at all. all the graph demonstrates is Aust has a small govt debt as a percentage or GDP and also a slightly smaller debt position at other times. You don’t get it do you so let me repeat Aust has a very small debt position on a global scale. The problem is Aust does not have enough debt and needs more to fund infrastructure. Those are the facts please refer to them in future instead of mindless slogans.
[DisplayName
Posted Friday, August 2, 2013 at 10:22 pm | PERMALINK
You’ll get there if you think hard enough, Mod.]
I know there was something that happened in Australia between 1996 and 2007 which might explain how that period was vastly different to the rest of the last quarter century………..can you give me any hints what it might be??????
[Can I ask who that local Kalgoorlie paediatrician was?]
Is. Christine Jeffries-Stokes.
Her husband who ran in 2010 was Geoff Stokes.
I think slowly, I can give you a hint or two in a decade or so ;).
[ 1996 and 2007 which might explain how that period was vastly different to the rest of the last quarter century………..can you give me any hints what it might be?????? ]
government spent 2 billion on advertising?
Yes I have met her, she might be worth a vote or two!
I can’t imagine what people think they’re trying to achieve by saying Malcolm Turnbull is stupid.
@Mod Lib/3009
No because they wanting to spend more then they need to?
Telstra in 2003/2004 wanted to build FTTH.
[ You don’t get it do you so let me repeat Aust has a very small debt position on a global scale.]
How much are we paying annually in interest repayments on this very small debt position?
This is from when Labor knew how to campaign and wasn’t worried about populism (irony warning)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDHyB0kE5Z0
Mod Lib:
It was Geoff who ran, not Christine.
He is equally as credentialed in public health, just doesn’t have the formal papers to say so.
@Mod Lib/3021
Hypocrisy at best, considering that Liberal states are also having trouble repayments of the very small debt position?
Yes, I have actually met him as well, although I don’t know anything about him.
[William Bowe
Posted Friday, August 2, 2013 at 10:28 pm | Permalink
I can’t imagine what people think they’re trying to achieve by saying Malcolm Turn]bull is stupid.
]
Slow perhaps, Abbott back down on Gonsky first.
[How much are we paying annually in interest repayments on this very small debt position?]
You tell me seeing you are so smart also please advise what % of the budget it is and what percentage of GDP. You see you can quote a big figure in isolation but give it some context and your argument falls away like a house of cards. While you are at it please tell me how many jobs have been saved by going into debt avoiding mass unemployment and all the social wreckage that would entail. Limited stimulus in the US result mass unemployment and recession which they are only coming out of 5 years later. Aust avoided this because KRudd Swan and Treasury had the courage to go into debt. So go ahead and please give me the facts not the mindless slogans.
[They don’t like it up em either]
I believe it depends on who is doing the upping. A buxom middle-aged dominatrix bearing down hard with a range of unusually shaped leather appliances is quite popular.
So I’m told.
😀
rooos
gotta love that, still space in finals when ess love their points
[Mod Lib
Posted Friday, August 2, 2013 at 10:29 pm | Permalink
You don’t get it do you so let me repeat Aust has a very small debt position on a global scale.
How much are we paying annually in interest repayments on this very small debt position?]
Australia’s problem has been one of maintaining a liquid bond market. Australia needs a liguid bond market. That is the reality. On the other hand we get crap like this.
profits lost to the Commonwealth since the sale of Telstra would be over 20 billion by now? Before we know it the lost profit will start adding up to more than the sale price
[This is from when Labor knew how to campaign and wasn’t worried about populism (irony warning)]
A 3 minute advert! Where on earth would that have been aired back in the day?
the spectator:
Oh I see, so if the debt repayment is only, say $8 Billion, that is not such a big deal if you look at it as 8/390 billion dollar budget. That makes is just 2%.
Yes, I see what you mean, that makes it sound much better!
Repost, because Malcolm so deserves it…
https://www.facebook.com/malcolmturnbull/posts/10151851761561579
William Bowe@3019
True.
But UteGate, gretch etc didn’t really show on those occasions he was very smart either.
The Earl of Wentworth – just a different flavour of bad.
The other liability is that his ‘fellows’ hate his guts, but the mystery is if he can deliver government, why does that matter to the libs?
http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2013/07/poll-roundup-and-seat-betting-watch_30.html
I’ve updated my Seat Betting Watch for this week to give some comments on Simon Jackman’s latest seat betting model in the Guardian, which claims that seat betting markets are giving Labor almost no chance (http://www.theguardian.com/world/the-swing/2013/aug/02/betting-markets-labor-chance-winning).
In short I have two major areas of disagreement:
(i) The problem that seat probabilities are not independent of each other; indeed, not even near it.
(ii) The difference between a party being favourite and a party having an implied win probability of below 50% – which in close cases results from inflated odds for longshots.
(ii) leads into the problem that if his method for calculating theoretical probabilities is expanded out you get a parliament clogged with significant numbers of PUP and KAP and GRN and IND and so on in which one would hardly expect an ALP majority. It also results in him deeming two seats as market-expected Coalition pickups when they’re not.
Generally I find Simon’s analyses very useful but this is one article I found I disagreed with much more than agreed with. That’s not to dispute that the betting markets are more cautious about Labor’s chances than the national or state 2PPs – just not that much more cautious.
I suspect it was a movie advert ( yes they really used to do that – i think the last I saw was in 83 but for all I know they might still exist)
Just Me@3028
Naughtie – but I’ll take you’re word on that 🙂
Everyday another Labor F-UP…
[I know there was something that happened in Australia between 1996 and 2007 which might explain how that period was vastly different to the rest of the last quarter century………..can you give me any hints what it might be??????]
The greatest asset sell off in Australia’s history and the largest mining windfall in Australia’s history.
https://www.facebook.com/malcolmturnbull/posts/10151851761561579
Malcom getting a pasting. Not only intellectually dishonest but foolish trying to get away with stunts like that.
@New2This/3039
So was selling Telstra, the biggest F-Up ever.
We now pay $11 billion dollars more+ If Coalition get in.
[The greatest asset sell off in Australia’s history and the largest mining windfall in Australia’s history.]
WOW, the miners suddenly found all them diamonds in 1996 and they all dried up in 2007, eh?
Gosh that is bad luck…
I am so glad the ALP didn’t sell stuff……I assume they didn’t, did they? :devil:
Households run on debt. Businesses run on debt. Every single country in the world runs on debt. The next Liberal government will also run on debt.
[the spectator:
Oh I see, so if the debt repayment is only, say $8 Billion, that is not such a big deal if you look at it as 8/390 billion dollar budget. That makes is just 2%.
Yes, I see what you mean, that makes it sound much better!]
Yes you finally get it you are less of a fool. That is exactly right it is only 2% and off very little consequence only to people economic illiterates like Hockey and Abbott. Guess what the size of the US stimulus was 800bn what is the size of their GDP 15 trillion. so yes percentage matter. The US stimulus whilst appearing large at 800billion dollars was actually too small as a percentage of GDP.
The question is the value of what we’re getting in exchange for that debt.
So are you guys happy that the grieving Tamil mother has been prevented from seeing her dead baby until the DNA testing proves she is the mother?
That kind of nastiness might stop folks getting on boats, so I assume you are all for it, eh?
[Everyday another Labor F-UP…]
Yep, so much left to FIX-UP after every Coalition government.
[FarQU
Posted Friday, August 2, 2013 at 10:46 pm | PERMALINK
Households run on debt. Businesses run on debt. Every single country in the world runs on debt. The next Liberal government will also run on debt.]
Its not that there is a problem with accumulating debt, its just that the ALP is a little too good at it, that’s all!
At some stage you have to pay it back, and that is why we need Liberal governments.
William,
Stupid describes the act of doing something ill advised, foolish, or in this case trying to use the internet to extol the illusory virtues of fraduband.