Galaxy: 52-48 to Coalition; ReachTEL Victorian marginals polling

The first substantial national-level poll in nearly week gives the Coalition an election-winning lead, but fails to corroborate the bloodbath that yesterday’s automated polls were pointing to.

At last, an actual national poll – and it’s not quite the train wreck for Labor that yesterday’s marginals polling might have had them bracing for. The Coalition has an election-winning lead, the outer edge of the error margin notwithstanding, but it’s of the relatively modest order of 52-48, compared with 51-49 in last week’s poll. Labor is down two points on the primary vote to 36%, with the Coalition steady on 45%. The poll also gauges opinion on the Coalition’s plan to abolish the school kids’ bonus, and which party has the better parental leave scheme. Both results are consistent with the usual pattern of poll respondents supporting spending and opposing taxing (company levies evidently notwithstanding), with 47% opposing the school kids’ bonus abolition against 38% supporting, and the more extravagant Coalition parental leave scheme favoured over Labor’s 44% to 36%.

GhostWhoVotes also relays a series of electorate-level ReachTEL results from well-chosen Victorian seats, which I presume have been commissioned by the Sunday Herald Sun. In turn:

• The Liberals lead in Labor’s two most marginal seats in the state, by 53-47 in Deakin and 56-44 in Corangamite. In the most marginal Liberal seat of Aston, the Liberals are found to be well ahead at 63.4-36.6.

• A long-overdue result for Melbourne suggests Adam Bandt’s primary vote will not be high enough to survive the looming flood of Liberal preferences to Labor. Bandt is on 33.5% against 33.8% for Labor candidate Cath Bowtell.

• A result for Indi suggests Sophie Mirabella indeed has a fight on her hands from independent Cathy McGowan, as media chatter has increasingly indicated. Mirabella leads McGowan 43.5% to 23.3% on the primary vote, but McGowan would presumably benefit from a very tight flow of Labor and Greens preferences. (UPDATE: It turns out this doesn’t exclude 7.1% decided, so it should be more like 47% Mirabella to 25% McGowan, which would get Mirabella home).

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.

1,633 comments on “Galaxy: 52-48 to Coalition; ReachTEL Victorian marginals polling”

Comments Page 27 of 33
1 … 26 27 28 … 33

  4. zoidlord

    I thought there was a bit of both Cth/State funding.

    Strange add – comes across as an admission of fault which I have not seen the likes of before

  5. [Caz @CareysEvilTwin
    Interesting. Champion ended his closing by urging people to not vote Liberal rather than to vote for him #wakefielddebate]

    *Sigh*

  6. Fran Barlow @ 1281: Thanks for that elaboration. If I understand you correctly, it would under your system be possible for two or even three candidates in a seat to be elected, for different parties. But since the size of the House of Representatives is fixed, that would imply that there must be other seats where no candidate is elected. And if the seats with multiple successful candidates and no successful candidates were in different states, that would as of now be unconstitutional, since those states would then not have the number of members in the House to which they were constitutionally entitled. And it’s also arguably constitutionally doubtful whether you can even base a system on national vote totals, since in effect that creates a system with at least one constituency made up of parts from multiple states, which is prohibited.

  8. THE LIBERAL party has banned candidates from speaking at events in multi-cultural communities across the country in the wake of Jaymes Diaz’s gaffe about asylum seeker policy.

    This is hilarious. Liberal Party don’t trust their own candidates but want us to want for them……why should we trust them???

  9. Darn — Agreed. That would work a treat. I think voters are looking for something to really care about beyond the flim-flam of the moment. We’ve reached a stage in our digital evolution where a critical mass of people understand – or can be easily educated – on just how absolutely critical it is to get the infrastructure right at this stage.

  10. [Whenever these Oz idiots play with Newspoll tidbits it’s bad news for us idiots]

    Talking up their organisations poll, who can blame them? It like a journo saying watch Channel 27 News for exclusive, it turns out to be pap.

  11. Fairly easy to get pre selected for the LNP, you just need a little history of being bent and you are in like Flynn

    Abbot won’t sack him now nominations are closed so if he wins he will probably go straight to the front bench.

    [The sister of controversial former policeman Roger Rogerson is working on the election campaign of Ray King, the Liberal Party candidate for the western Sydney seat of McMahon.
    Mr King is under pressure after Fairfax Media revealed on Friday that he had been called to front the 1996 Wood royal commission on police corruption.
    He admitted to being one of a group of Fairfield detectives who provided informal security services to the Italian community Marconi Club in exchange for free meals and alcohol.
    Advertisement
    He was also the subject of an internal affairs investigation over his association with Cabramatta brothel owner Salvatore ”Sammy” Lapa. The pair were seen drinking together at the Marconi Club.]

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/rogerson-a-friend-of-libs-king-20130816-2s28m.html#ixzz2cJVqAlqO

  12. Gaffhook

    All this stuff on the W Sydney Liberal preselections has been in the public domain for months, I guess it is better late than never but why have OUR media ignored it?

  13. [I saw quite a few of Simon Sheikh corflutes today.]

    The Greens were very quick off the mark to decorate the main roads the day after the election was announced. The Simon Sheikh corflutes alternate with ones saying “Abbott proof the Senate”. We have been door knocked by Simon and, separately, their no. 2 Senate candidate. The Greens are certainly a lot more noticeable than any other party in the ACT at this time.

  14. Sean Tisme@1291

    By my calculations a Conservative controlled senate should be a shoe-in… assuming you consider the Democratic Labor PArty and Nick Xenophon as Conservatives.

    The Coalition need 38 Votes in the Senate. In the 2010 Election they won 18 seats for the 6 year term. Assuming they do as well this election(pretty much a given) they will have a total of 36 Senate Seats. Xenophon will probably win his seat and then you have the DLP Candidate continuing their senate term.

    So 38 Senate Votes. Now consider the Coalition pick up an extra senate seat in Tassie(likely) that gives Coalition 37 seats just by themselves.

    Perhaps there is a seat to pick up elsewhere and we have Coalition Senate Majority fun.

    No, this is wrong. The Coalition did win 18 seats last time but 2 of those were in the Territories and the Territory seats come up for re-election every time. They are only retaining 16.

    Coalition winning 3 in every state (inc SA and Tas) gets them to 36 which with Xenephon and Madigan added means they can block stuff but not pass it.

  15. [AussieAchmed
    Posted Sunday, August 18, 2013 at 8:04 pm | Permalink
    THE LIBERAL party has banned candidates from speaking at events in multi-cultural communities across the country in the wake of Jaymes Diaz’s gaffe about asylum seeker policy.

    This is hilarious. Liberal Party don’t trust their own candidates but want us to want for them……why should we trust them???]

    As far as I am aware, the last political leader who put a media ban on his troops ended up losing the unlosable election – Jeff Kennett, Victoria, 1999.

  16. I love the Sunshine Coast, no signs allowed on public land. The LNP seem to have signs on developers land though.

    Slipper has last elections corflutes with the LNP bottom bit chopped off in a few front yards.

  17. Simon 1299

    I never said the GFC was only caused by corporate law breaking. There were multiple causes, including ratings agencies, regulators, accounting practices, monetary policy and delusional investors.

    But yes, there was widespread and large scale fraud and braking of financial laws. I can only urge you to read the references I have already posted. Former US AAG made a deliberate decision on this, that has been described as one of the largest cases of moral hazard in financial history.

    To quote again:
    [And here, the record is murky, because the Justice Department has no obligation to make public declinations. Lanny Breuer, the Justice Department’s former chief corporate crime law enforcement official, is now back at Covington & Burling, taking down a reported $4 million defending accused corporate criminals.

    While in office, Breuer was the target of two broadcast newsmagazine pieces — one by 60 Minutes titled “Prosecuting Wall Street” and one by PBS’s Frontline titled “The Untouchables.” These brought into sharp focus arguably his most important decisions, in which he chose to not criminally prosecute any big Wall Street banks or high-level executives for the 2008 financial meltdown.]
    http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/04/30/the-failure-to-prosecute-corporate-crime-undermines-u-s-justice/

    You are entitled to a different opinion if you think this is OK or not corruption. But to pretend it is not a crime, when the regulator acknowledged it was, but made a deliberate decision not to prosecute, is inconsistent with the known facts. US financial regualtion is a joke among people who study it from a justice viewpoint. The right wing economists try

  18. [On Labor’s latest ad.

    Having watched both now, he does have a point.]

    I hope the kids don’t get sick from the mum having the roast chook sitting on the bench all day.

  24. Regarding Kennett losing the unloseable election when he gagged his candidates from speaking to the media:

    It certainly helped that the Herald-Sun (from memory) had the good news sense to feature a frontpage story, well into the campaign, showing several Liberal candidates with big crosses over the lips and the word “Gagged” in a blazing headline.

  25. Rummel

    [I hope the kids don’t get sick from the mum having the roast chook sitting on the bench all day.]

    As long as they go outside to die all will be fine from the ‘Liberal’ perspective.

  26. Socrates – It depends how you interpret the regulations at the time, but the fact that the US has had to reform its financial regulations shows it was clearly not clear cut. Essentially the GFC was caused by banks lending too much to low income households who could not afford to repay, with the support of government, ie incompetence not criminal activity. You can try and nitpick, but that was the root cause of the crisis, hence its title, the ‘credit crunch’

  29. Socrates

    Posted Sunday, August 18, 2013 at 8:13 pm | Permalink

    Simon 1299

    I never said the GFC was only caused by corporate law breaking. There were multiple causes, including ratings agencies, regulators, accounting practices, monetary policy and delusional investors.
    ———————————————————-

    You sure??

    Didn’t Sean say it was Unions and corrupt Union officials?

  30. [CTar1
    Posted Sunday, August 18, 2013 at 8:20 pm | PERMALINK
    Rummel

    I hope the kids don’t get sick from the mum having the roast chook sitting on the bench all day.

    As long as they go outside to die all will be fine from the ‘Liberal’ perspective.]

    Thats unfair CTAR1.

  31. speculating.
    mumble tweet about betting movements may suggest a reasonable movement either way. 50/50 or 54libs/46
    I hope the former.

  35. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDRYYSy0PRU]

    Watch the kids lol. Even they are fed up with the Ad and there getting paid.

  36. [Boerwar
    Posted Sunday, August 18, 2013 at 8:32 pm | PERMALINK
    Is it true that Liberal candidates have been banned from talking to themselves?]

    Yes, and they have a six point plan to enforce it too!

  37. Pedant:

    [If I understand you correctly, it would under your system be possible for two or even three candidates in a seat to be elected, for different parties.]

    Hmm … I’m not sure how you got that.

    Ok, let’s take Melbourne as it stands. One poll has Adam Bandt getting 48% on primaries. From memory (ready to stand corrected here) There were only about 20 seats in the country in 2010 where the candidate secured more than about 48%. If Bandt did that well he’d probably get the seat in the general allocation since he’d probably be the 21st allocated, unless of course Cath Bowtell beat him on primaries in which case she’d get it.

    The Bandt campaign workers would probably be stunned at the collapse of the Lib primary that this would entail (and in practice of course if the Libs plus others got less than 4% the situation for them nationally would be pretty dire. There would not be an LNP-led regime) Yet the Bandt workers could console themselves that the Green votes were not wasted. Those 48,000 primaries would help a Green in some other part of the country beat two rivals (probably an ALP and Lib stalwart) who outpolled him or her by a fair margin in their seat. Once you get 3% nastionally — 48,000 votes is a bit more than half a seat quota in a 150 seat parliament.

  38. Simon 1326

    You once again obfuscate by trying to argue that banking fraud was not the cause of the GFC. Once again I never said that. Your post at 1248 tried to claim that US enforcement of corporate law was “tough”. That is simply nonsense.

    I am not “nit-picking”. It was the offocial policy of the US AG office not to prosecute these crimes. Former US AAG Lanny Breuer was explicit on this, when he tried to defend it at the US Bat Association:
    [Tonight, I want to focus on one aspect of our white collar criminal enforcement in particular: the use of deferred prosecution agreements, or DPAs. Over the past three-and-a-half years, the Department of Justice has entered into dozens of DPAs, and non-prosecution agreements, or NPAs. I’ve heard people criticize them and I’ve heard people praise them. What I’m here to tell you, is that, along with the other tools we have, DPAs have had a truly transformative effect on particular companies and, more generally, on corporate culture across the globe.

    Though the U.S. Supreme Court blessed the concept of corporate criminal liability over 100 years ago – in New York Central Railroad Company v. United States – until roughly 20 years ago, we had only the blunt instrument of criminal indictment with which to attack corporate crime. Prosecutors faced a stark choice when they encountered a corporation that had engaged in misconduct – either indict, or walk away. In the 1990s, however, the government began doing something new: agreeing to defer prosecution against the corporation in exchange for an admission of wrongdoing, cooperation with the government’s investigation, including against individual employees, payment of monetary penalties, and concrete steps to improve the company’s behavior. And, over the last decade, DPAs have become a mainstay of white collar criminal law enforcement. ]
    http://www.justice.gov/criminal/pr/speeches/2012/crm-speech-1209131.html

    You are wrong. They rarely lead anyone from a bank away in cuffs any more. As I said, you can say you think it is OK, and argue that the best way to prevent another GFC is not to jail any of the guilty parties. But please do not pretend that no crmes were committed. I note you cite no evdence or sources for your generalisations, for obvious reasons.

    Night all.

  40. [Only a significant move in polling would create a betting shift. It’s a 50-50 or a blowout 54-46 or worse]

    Yep, one of these two.

    That said, if goes +/- 2 points outside Galaxy, Ill be somewhat suss on it.

  42. [Only a significant move in polling would create a betting shift. It’s a 50-50 or a blowout 54-46 or worse]

    A blowout in a Federal election is 52.5%.

  46. Umm, I think you will find that we’ve already had a significant move in the betting.

    We are charting a course for Abbott to be say $1.05 and Rudd $12 on election day.

  47. Socrates – Well Madoff was jailed wasn’t he! Because the DPA is pushing more fines rather than jail time is to do with the type of punishment it employs, it is a totally different argument to the causes of the GFC which were incompetence, not lawbreaking

  49. alias,

    [I think Labor should go huge, in terms of its advertising budget, on the NBN issue. It really does cut through, and this really is a pivotal moment in the nation’s history in this regard.]

    Agreed. Despite the Libs dishonest attempts to attack the NBN, the case is pretty clear.

    Labor is building a future proof fibre network and its cost to the government is $30.6B. That’s a network that will sever our needs for 50 years or more.

    Liberals want to do almost the same thing, borrow $29.6B and in the process tell NBNco to start over, building a network out of copper, that will have to be retired at the end of the decade.

    That simple value proposition is what should be on every ad break.

  50. davidwh

    Remember when it was $1.40 and $3.00.

    Look at the prices now?

    The betting has already had its significant move. 😎

Comments Page 27 of 33
1 … 26 27 28 … 33

Leave a Reply

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