Marginals robo-poll bonanza

A barrage of electorate-level automated phone poll results has emerged over the past day, with horror results for Labor in almost every case.

Before I dive into today’s glut of electorate-level polling and the picture of unmitigated disaster it paints for Labor, mention should be made of today’s declaration of candidates and determination of ballot paper ordering. I’ve finished labouring through the chore of uploading the candidate lists to my election guide, in the course of which I was unavoidably struck by one salient fact: there are far too many candidates at this election. The total comes in at 1188 for the House of Representatives and 529 for the Senate.

The former number is solidly clear of a previous record of 1109 in 1998, amounting to nearly half an extra candidate per electorate, and well clear of the 849 in 2010, a relatively low number thought to have resulted from the election being called three months ahead of time. The Senate number is still more unprecedented, blowing the lid off the previous record of 367 candidates. Remarkably – suspiciously, even – this comes despite a doubling of nomination deposits to $1000 for House of Representatives candidates and $2000 for Senate candidates.

Some might consider a greater array of candidates a boon for democracy, but in my view that’s entirely negated by the obstacle posed to the act of voting, at least under our present system. This is starkly illustrated by the metre-long Senate ballot papers that voters in the larger states will be required to grapple with on September 7, and the magnifying glasses that will be supplied in polling booths to assist in reading the small print crammed on to them. That will no doubt have all but the tiniest handful of voters opting for the above the line option, exacerbating one of the least attractive features of our system – the mass transfer of votes as dictated by preference deals.

As for the lower house, an analysis by the Australian Electoral Commission indicates that each extra candidate causes a 0.2% increase in the informal vote. If partisan advantage is what matters to you, it’s likely that this makes a large number of candidates disadvantageous to Labor. Labor’s surprise defeat in Greenway at the 2004 election may well have been influenced by an 11.8% informal vote, which was in turn influenced by what I believe to have been a then record (at a general election at least) 14 candidates. This time around there are 12 candidates in Corangamite, Deakin and Mallee, 13 in Bendigo and McMillan, and 16 in Melbourne. Notably, all these electorates are in Victoria, which seems to have the largest number of organised micro-parties – perhaps having been inspired by the example of Family First and the Democratic Labour Party in winning Senate seats over the course of the past decade.

So, to these opinion polls. There are 14 automated phone polls in all from three different agencies, with swings ranging from 0% to 15% and averaging 8%. This is enormously out of kilter with the national polling that was coming through before we hit a dry spell at the start of the week, which suggested a swing of more like 2%. So one might variously hypothesise that there has been a huge shift to the Coalition this week; that the polls have targeted areas where Labor is doing particularly badly; that there may have been something about these polls to bias them towards the Coalition, through some combination of their being automated, mid-week and electorate-level polls; that the national polls have been heavily biased to Labor and the automated polls have shown them up. The latter at least I do not think terribly likely, the truth probably involving some combination of the first three.

We have also had more conventional phone poll results from Newspoll, conducted from Monday to Thursday from samples of 504 each, which oddly target Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor’s seats of Lyne and New England. These respectively have the Nationals ahead 59-41 and 66-34, which if anything suggest swings to Labor. The primary votes from Lyne are 26% for Labor, 51% for the Coalition and 7% for the Greens, while from New England it’s 24%, 53% and 5%.

Running through the automated polls:

• Lonergan and JWS Research have both targeted Forde and Lindsay, with very similar results in each case. In Forde, the JWS Research poll of 568 respondents has Liberal National Party member Bert van Manen leading Peter Beattie 54% to 33% on the primary vote and 60-40 on two-party preferred, for a swing of 8.4%. The Lonergan poll, for which The Guardian offers great detail, covered 1160 respondents and showed van Manen’s lead at 56% to 34% and the Greens at just 4%, compared with 12% at the 2010 election. While no two-party preferred figure is provided, it would obviously be very similar to JWS Research’s 60-40. As low as van Manen’s national profile may be, JWS Research gives him a 49% approval rating against 19% disapproval, with Peter Beattie on 35% and 51%. Kevin Rudd’s net approval rating is minus 18% against minus 1% for Tony Abbott. The Lonergan poll has 40% saying Peter Beattie has made them less likely to vote Labor against on 22% for more likely.

• Longergan’s Lindsay poll, conducted on Tuesday night from a sample of 1038, has Liberal candidate Fiona Scott’s primary vote at no less than 60%, up 17% on 2010, with Labor member David Bradbury on 32%, down 13%. The Guardian quotes the pollster saying a question about how respondents voted in 2010 aligned with the actual result – I will assume this took into account the tendency of poll respondents to over-report having voted for the winner. I am a little more puzzled by the claimed margin of error of 3.7%, which should be more like 3% given the published sample size (UPDATE: It transpires that this is because Lonergan has, unusually, done the right thing – calculate an effective margin of error that accounts for the fact that the sample is weighted, and that cohorts within it have been extrapolated from sub-par samples). The JWS Research result has the primary votes at 57% for Liberal and 35% for Labor, with two-party preferred at 60.7-39.3.

• ReachTEL has four polls with samples of around 600 apiece, which have the Liberals leading 65-35 in Bennelong (a swing of about 12%) and 53-47 in McMahon (11%) and 52-48 in Kingsford Smith (7%), with Labor hanging on by 52-48 in Blaxland (10%).

• The other Financial Review/JWS Research results show the Coalition ahead in Brisbane (54.1-45.9 from primaries of 50% LNP, 36% Labor), Macquarie (55.1-44.9, 51% Liberal, 35% Labor), Corangamite (53.3-46.7, 48% Liberal, 36% Labor), Aston (63.4-36.6, Liberal 59%, Labor 29%), and Banks (52.8-47.2, Liberal 50%, Labor 43%). The one ray of sunlight for Labor is their 51-49 lead in Greenway, from primaries of 46% for Liberal and 44% for Labor. A full graphic of the JWS Research results is available from GhostWhoVotes, including some diverting results on personal approval. Bert van Manen in Forde and Alan Tudge in Aston appear to rate as very popular local members, while David Bradbury in Lindsay and Darren Cheeseman in Corangamite do not. And Fiona Scott in Lindsay, fresh from the publicity bestowed upon her by Tony Abbott, is easily the highest rating of the challengers.

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.

1,419 comments on “Marginals robo-poll bonanza”

Comments Page 20 of 29
1 … 19 20 21 … 29

  1. Sean

    Have you got an explanation as to how the approximately 1500 asylum seekers got to Nauru when the boats had been “stopped”?

  2. Haydn
    Posted Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 4:55 pm | PERMALINK
    Meguire Bob,

    With all due respect you are talking nonsense. Pollsters do not ask negative questions about the Government when they ask who you will vote for.

    ———–

    This is a joke right ?

  3. Haydn

    Posted Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

    Ruawake 933

    “The ALP will get KAP and Pup prefs in Qld and put them ahead of the Greens.”

    Just exactly what does this mean?
    ==========================================

    Using Sean reasoning

    Labors in bed with Katter and Palmer

  4. Haydn – I strongly advise you do not try to reason with Sir Bob Meguire Ellis – to do so is the definition of insanity.

  5. Haydn

    The only question what opinion polling companies should asked is

    Who do you intend to vote for on september 7th 2013?

    there should be no if an election was held now

  6. [The move has angered ALP members in Victoria, who fear the deal might also affect how people vote in the lower house seat of Melbourne, which Labor is trying to win back from the Greens.]

    Huh? Why? How? Labor preferenced the Greens second everywhere for the Senate (the only place where it matters) in 2007 and 2010. If there’s a story here at all, it’s that they’re not doing it this time in Queensland. I guess some in the Victorian ALP are upset they they’ve lost their freedom to manoeuvre in making 2004-style deals with the likes of Family First, and aren’t ready to admit that that’s their motivation.

  7. If opinion polling companies do want to ask questions about policies

    They should give the person being polled the details of the governments and alternative versions

  9. [”It’s just a pity it didn’t occur in Queensland too.”]

    The reason it did not happen in Qld is because Katter and Palmers parties will get over 10% of the vote, the Green vote will flow to ALP as usual.

    So the LNP will need close to 50% with Family First on primaries to win.

    Its what happens when Abbott pisses off ever other party.

  10. Compact Crank
    Posted Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 5:02 pm | PERMALINK
    Haydn – I strongly advise you do not try to reason

    ————————-

    I advise the same with the coaliton supporters like compact crank

    who has admitted he is voting for the coalition

  11. Just back from Round 2 of the Saturday errands and I am absolutely convinced that Labor have given up on Deakin altogether. Not a poster to be seen and as yet not an ounce of Labor party political material in the letter box (except the postal vote letter). No visit from Rudd yet either. The Libs have filled our letterbox, there are Michael Sukkar posters everywhere, and Abbott has campaigned here.

  12. rummel
    Posted Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 5:06 pm | PERMALINK
    Kevin can still win…… With the help of the greens lol

    ————————–

    I hope that does happen , more than my prediction

    I want to see newsltd/abbott coalition and thier supporters re-actions

  13. blackburnpseph

    That is because ALP knows Deakin is in the bag, why waste resources. Tony is desperate to reverse the foregone conclusion. 😉

  16. [962
    Meguire Bob
    Posted Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 5:08 pm | PERMALINK
    rummel
    Posted Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 5:06 pm | PERMALINK
    Kevin can still win…… With the help of the greens lol

    ————————–

    I hope that does happen , more than my prediction

    I want to see newsltd/abbott coalition and thier supporters re-actions]

    God help Labor is they win a hung parliament with the help of the greens again……

  17. Of course Abbott wants the ALP to pref the LNP over the GRNs. That would increase his chances of controlling the Senate greatly.

    But what sort of idiot would shoot themselves in the foot by actually doing so? None.

    I can more or less live with the ALPs deal – GRNs get prefs everywhere but QLD. Im cautious about the latter though: I just hope it doesnt result in 3 LNP, 2 ALP and 1 KAT. That wont help us much if Abbott wins.

    Expect it could help a bit with the lower house though. Depends how many ‘winnable’ marginals are up north. Also depends whether its still close enough in those seats to make a difference. Im not sure the KAP will be getting many votes in the Brisbane marginals that matter.

  18. Patchy as my relationship with the Greens is (I agree with them strongly on some issues, disagree strongly on others) I think it was actually poor form on a symbolic level for Abbott to put them even below Rise Up Australia in the Reps. There used to be a bipartisan consensus on putting One Nation and One Nation like right-wing parties at the bottom. I think RUA are worse than One Nation.

    Of course it won’t matter because RUA are no threat whatsoever in the Reps, and it’s a very understandable move politically. I’d just like to see consensus that there is a circle of hell that the Greens, Labor and Liberal, whatever they think of each other, don’t belong in.

  20. August 2012

    “Let’s face it: John Howard is two prime ministers ago, John Howard is three Liberal leaders ago. That was then, this is now,” Mr Abbott told reporters in Mackay today

    How the back flips keep coming. Now Abbott talks about a return to the “glory” days of the Howard Govt.

    Its like he thinks if elected PM that on 8 Sept we will all time travel back and none of the changes in the world will have impacted, things like the GFC, the rise of China, Iraq war, Afghanistan, the over doubling of refugees world wide all will just disappear

  21. bbp @961 – financially cutoff and electorally surrounded the ALP are sand bagging furiously. If your margin is under 5% you get nix.

  22. [ I guess some in the Victorian ALP are upset they they’ve lost their freedom to manoeuvre in making 2004-style deals with the likes of Family First, and aren’t ready to admit that that’s their motivation.]

    Thank %$^# for that too.

  23. It is interesting to see whether the Labor deal with KAP/PUP is actually politically expedient.

    IF, and that’s a very big IFF, Labor think they can win enough seats in Queensland to make the federal picture a contest, they may be prepared to have the Centre-Left sacrifice a Senate seat in order to do so. It’s little use when we are looking at swings away from Labor in Queensland and possibly a two-party preferred of greater than 60 percent in that state as it stands now.

    As it stands, all that’s likely to happen is that it will not help them one iota as their primary vote is so low and all it will achieve is for the Right to get their fourth seat in the Senate, potentially forfeiting Senate control to the Right just like what happened in Victoria with Family First in 2004 (although the Coalition got a clear majority in both houses that time).

    I’m predicting that Labor will only hold Kevin Rudd’s seat in Griffith – and they may even lose that one. Total wipeout in Queensland, and possibly again next time round.

  25. rummel @966 – the only good thing that would come out of that would be the subsequent QLD/NSW style landslide against the ALP at the next election.

  26. confessions

    Posted Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 5:11 pm | Permalink

    Carey M:

    That is good news about the car industry announcement. Hopefully it isn’t just a one-off.
    —————————————————-

    I don’t think anyone in the car industry can start celebrating yet.

    All would be flushed away by Abbott if he is elected.

    Business instability caused by Abbott.

  27. Does anyone get the feeling that Slipper is ready to burst

    [Peter Slipper
    @NormanLater @SummersAnne I haven’t done anything to warrant my marriage being SPECIFICALLY TARGETED by those mentioned in #ashbygate. Nada!]

  28. [Has Palmer said that PUP will preference Labor ahead of LNP? If so, I seem to have missed it.]

    He will next week at his Coolum resort, when all his candidates will be flown to paradise to hear him tell who wanted him to bankroll Ashby.

    Nobody believed me when I said Katter would preference the ALP in Qld remember.

  29. [975
    Compact Crank
    Posted Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 5:16 pm | PERMALINK
    rummel @966 – the only good thing that would come out of that would be the subsequent QLD/NSW style landslide against the ALP at the next election.]

    Agree, Labor would be reduced to a party that could fit in a 8 seat van. Labor need to win in there own right or pass the button to the Libs.

  30. [Total wipeout in Queensland, and possibly again next time round]

    The KAP preferences will save Capricornia, could deliver Herbert to Labor but Hinkler and Flynn are unlikely to change hands.

    Earlier this year, I thought the KAP might be significant but they do not seem to have got their act together at all.

  34. Now here is a question.

    Why is Labor and supporters so supportive of a male mining millionaire running for parliament and not a female mining millionaire running a media organisation?

    Misogyny?

  38. I agree the Adelaide deal is smart politics, which is nice to see after the last week of travails.

    It says “industry policy”, and Australians generallylike that. I expect its no accident the KAP deal is announced at same time.

    Abbott is welcome to his devil-take-the-hindmost ‘let manufacturing go to the wall, while cutting sweet deals for our mates in the media & mining’ approach.

  39. Ru

    I was hopeful you were right about the Katter preferences, and will be re Palmer. Question is why is Palmer willing to do this?

  40. [Why is Labor and supporters so supportive of a male mining millionaire running for parliament and not a female mining millionaire running a media organisation?]

    According to the Labor Brains Trust Palmer was controlling the Coalition Party as well as the QLD LNP sort of like the Eddie Obeid of the Coalition.

    But the Coalition and the LNP told Palmer he wasn’t getting a seat no matter how much money he donated, because the Coalition have morals.

    Palmer than left the party and the Labor supporters have been singing his praises ever since. They sure like these mining Billionaires when it suits them!

  41. [Nobody believed me when I said Katter would preference the ALP in Qld remember]

    Not quite true: I believed you, ruawake. This one was coming for a while.

  42. Meguire Bob 952

    “This is a joke right ?”

    So let me get this right. You are saying that when pollsters ring people for a poll they throw in some negative questions or remarks about the Government and then ask them who they intend to vote for. Is that a fair summation?

  45. [DisplayName
    Posted Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 5:26 pm | PERMALINK
    rummel @ 984

    Entertainment value!]

    I will take that as a valid reason. 🙂

  46. Haydn
    Posted Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 5:26 pm | PERMALINK
    Meguire Bob 952

    “This is a joke right ?”

    So let me get this right. You are saying that when pollsters ring people for a poll they throw in some negative questions or remarks about the Government and then ask them who they intend to vote for. Is that a fair summation?

    —————————–

    yes

    That what happen when i used to get polled by newspoll

  49. [Why is Labor and supporters so supportive of a male mining millionaire running for parliament and not a female mining millionaire running a media organisation?]

    Apples and oranges.

  50. JWS from PB last election.

    [Queensland. Labor to lose Brisbane, Bonner, Petrie, Leichhardt, Forde, Dawson, Flynn and Dickson, but hold Moreton, Longman and Herbert.

    New South Wales. Labor to lose Lindsay, Bennelong, Macarthur and Robertson while gaining Paterson and Cowper; Labor to hold Greenway, Dobell, Page, Eden-Monaro, Gilmore and Macquarie.

    Victoria. Labor to gain McEwen, La Trobe and Dunkley, but lose Corangamite.

    Elsewhere. Labor to gain Boothby, lose Hasluck and Swan, and hold Solomon.]

    Don’t get your hopes up righties. 🙂

Comments Page 20 of 29
1 … 19 20 21 … 29

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *