BludgerTrack: 52.5-47.5 to Coalition

Some musings on Senate prospects for micro-parties, plus a few recent updates to the seat-by-seat election guide.

I’m running the above headline essentially because I have no new poll to trumpet for the following assortment of bits-and-pieces. The latest addition is yesterday’s large-sample ReachTEL poll, which was a relatively good result for Labor taking into account the past lean to the Coalition in this series. Its inclusion caused a 0.6% shift in Labor’s favour without affecting the seat projection, mostly because the improvement was concentrated in Victoria where there are few marginal seats. This isn’t the first time recently that the addition of a ReachTEL result has caused BludgerTrack to move in Labor’s favour, which raises the possibility that the series is not as pro-Coalition as it used to be. If so, the addition of the result with out-of-date bias adjustments attached might be causing the present BludgerTrack numbers to flatter Labor slightly. There has apparently been, for the second evening running, a poll conducted overnight by ReachTEL which will have been unveiled on Seven Sunrise by the time most of you are reading this.

(UPDATE: A less good result today for Labor, and another good one for the Palmer United Party. Labor’s primary vote is down to 32.7% and the Coalition’s up to 43.6%, with the Greens on 10.0% and Palmer on 6.1%. Two-party preferred is 53-47 to the Coalition. ReachTEL also has a very ugly result for Labor from the Tasmanian seat of Bass, courtesy of the Launceston Examiner, with Liberal candidate Andrew Nikolic on 51.8% and Labor member Geoff Lyons on 26.6%.)

Now to those bits and pieces. First, I address what looks to be one of the election’s most significant imponderables: the share of the vote that will go to micro-parties in the Senate. Much hinges on the answer, given the tightness of the preference arrangements between micro-parties and the extremely limited value of polling as a guide to the smaller details of Senate voting patterns. Tim Colebatch of Fairfax has run reports over the past week based based on what Antony Green’s Senate election calcalators come up with when seemingly plausible vote share scenarios are plugged into them, which have been partly inspired by simulations conducted by Poll Bludger commenter Truth Seeker (who details them on his own blog).

One particularly headline-grabbing observation was that Pauline Hanson might succeed in her bid for a New South Wales Senate seat at the expense of Arthur Sinodinos, who has the number three position on the Coalition ticket in New South Wales. Since Labor, the Coalition and the Greens all have Hanson last on their preference order, this can only happen if she and the various parties feeding her preferences collectively amount to more than a quota (14.3%). Colebatch argues that this is highly plausible: “In 2010, 29 micro-parties won 14 per cent of the vote between them. This time there will be 41 of them, and disillusioned Labor supporters could swell their collective vote to 20 per cent – easily enough for a Senate quota.”

This appears to assume that collective vote share of micro-parties will continue to expand as more of them enter the field. Evidence from the last three elections, which provide a common footing in that the Democrats and One Nation had faded from minor to micro-party status, provides some support for this. Excluding the unusual circumstance of South Australia in 2007, when Nick Xenophon polled a full quota in his own right, there are 17 state-level observations for modelling the relationship between the number of Senate groups and the vote share for micro-parties (which I take to mean everyone other than Labor, the Coalition and the Greens). The model I have derived is 0.243+(0.283*A)+(0.681*B), where A is the number of Senate groups and B is the “others” vote in the House of Representatives from the state in question. This has an R-squared of 0.517 and a p-value of 0.006, which is to say that the model explains 51.7% of the variation in these 17 results and has a 99.4% chance of being better than no model at all.

With unprecedented numbers of Senate groups at this election ranging from 23 in Tasmania to 44 in New South Wales, this suggests “others” votes ranging from 12.9% to 20.5% (going off the BludgerTrack projections for the lower house “others” vote), which is well in line with Colebatch’s expectations. However, there’s a considerable theoretical problem with the model in that it presumes the relationship to be perfectly linear. If this were so, the major party vote would disappear altogether if only enough micro-parties took the field. In reality, the rate of increase has to taper off, and the meagre sample of observations available offers no insight as to point at which it does so. My own guess though is that it kicks in fairly sharply before we reach the stage where we can start talking of an aggregate micro-party vote approaching 20%.

To offer some historic guidance as to the sorts of numbers you should be punching into the Senate calcalators, the table below displays the vote for micro-parties of various kinds in each state. “Religious” includes the Democratic Labour Party, although they no doubt occupy something of a grey area. The “right” category is exclusive of the “religious” one. “Left” is defined broadly to incorporate the Democrats and all environmentalist concerns, even ostensibly conservative ones. There were also parties and independents that were deemed not to fall into any of these categories, so the “total” column is not simply an aggregate of the other three.

2010		Relig.	Right	Left	Total
NSW		3.63	5.55	3.37	13.82
Victoria	5.35	3.83	3.28	13.2
Queensland	4.31	7.59	3.61	16.43
WA		3.71	2.66	2.81	9.92
SA		5	2.65	2.55	11.11
Tasmania	1.69	2.24	0.66	5.36
TOTAL		4.16	4.81	3.18	13.13

2007				
NSW		3.83	3.35	2.44	10.17
Victoria	3.77	1.24	3.16	8.72
Queensland	2.76	6.73	3.04	13.08
WA		3.57	1.1	1.84	7.04
SA		3.97	1.68	1.68	22.25
Tasmania	2.67	0.19	0.78	4.38
TOTAL		3.48	2.97	2.57	10.71

2004				
NSW		3.17	3.73	3.88	12.17
Victoria	4.16	1.55	4.18	10.98
Queensland	3.37	9.34	4.09	18.05
WA		2.73	2.82	3.05	9.22
SA		3.98	1.53	3.95	10.02
Tasmania	3.03	0.16	0.82	7.04
TOTAL		3.42	2.93	3.84	12.22

Now to some scattered bits of news for around the traps that I have recently used to supplement the seat-by-seat election guide:

Indi (Liberal 9.0%):Liberals have been telling journalists of serious concerns for Sophie Mirabella’s hold on Indi, where she faces a well-organised challenge from independent Cathy McGowan. The Guardian reports on widespread opinion polling being conducted in the electorate; the Weekly Times reports that Labor are campaigning strongly to boost McGowan; and The Australian reports some in the Liberal Party have been urging Tony Abbott to visit the electorate. The contest is another source of friction between the coalition parties, with former state Nationals MP Ken Jasper among those who are throwing their weight behind McGowan.

Melbourne (Greens 6.0% versus Labor): The Greens have been spruiking a poll of 400 respondents conducted for them by Galaxy showing Adam Bandt’s primary vote up 4% since the 2010 election, with “as many as four in 10” Liberal voters in the seat planning to ignore the direction of their party’s how-to-vote card that voters should favour Labor ahead of the Greens in their preference allocation. This is actually in line with the 35% rate of leakage in inner Melbourne when the Liberals likewise directed preferences against the Greens at the 2010 state election, which nonetheless wasn’t high enough to win them any of the seats they were anticipating. But taken together with the purported primary vote swing, it suggests a very close result.

McMahon (Labor 7.8%): The Liberal candidate for Chris Bowen’s western Sydney seat, Liverpool area police superintendent Ray King, has been defended by a series of police figures and corruption investigators after Labor claimed he had a “close friend” in Roger Rogerson, the notorious detective who was imprisoned in 1990 for perverting the course of justice. The claim has been denied by Rogerson as well as King, with retired assistant commissioner Geoff Schuberg complaining of a “grubby, baseless smear campaign”.

Forde (Liberal National 1.6%):The Australian reports that Forde MP Bert van Manen, who is fighting off a challenge from Peter Beattie, was the half-owner and recently resigned director of a financial planning firm which owed creditors more than $1.5 million when it collapsed last year. The report says administrators KPMG had told creditors of “unreasonable director-related transactions” behind the collapse. A Liberal spokesperson was quoted saying van Manen had personally settled with the main credtior, Westpac, but no comment was offered on $325,000 owed to three further creditors.

Greenway (Labor 0.9%): The Sydney Morning Herald observes a “systemic” silence among Liberal candidates in Sydney, “with multiple examples emerging of candidates pulling out of events or interviews”. The low profile assumed by Greenway MP Jaymes Diaz has been particularly widely noted, after he failed to show for a candidates forum in Blacktown last week.

Herbert (Liberal National 2.2%) and Dawson (Liberal National 2.4%): Sid Maher of The Australian identifies marginal seats on the central Queensland coast as the main targets for the Coalition’s promised curtailing of marine protected areas, a pitch at commercial and recreational fishers. A similar promise before the 2010 election was “credited with delivering the seat of Dawson”, by persons unidentified.

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.

2,149 comments on “BludgerTrack: 52.5-47.5 to Coalition”

Comments Page 38 of 43
1 … 37 38 39 … 43

  1. [“@jonathanvswan: To the conspiracy theorists suggesting Turnbull had a secret plan to filter the net… Please stop. You’re wrong. More on this in morning..”]

    Yeah. Clearly this policy spontaneously appeared out of nowhere.

  3. Didnt watch the Drum first edtion, but the replay is on now, the ALP guy (don’t know him but he appears to be an ALP insider) is saying he agrees with Heather that the ALP is expecting to lose 15 to 20 seats.

  4. [ Rosemour or Less
    Posted Thursday, September 5, 2013 at 10:23 pm | Permalink

    This one’s for Warrior Dave.

    I’m feeling good about Saturday. ]

    No doubt about that.

    You have been kicking Labor in the guts for years and more intently since the campaign started.

    You have bent over backwards to do as much damage to Labor as possible and to destroy morale.

    Uncle tony will no doubt give you a gold star the kick your arse.

    Scum. Utter scum tory.

  7. [Greensborough Growler
    Posted Thursday, September 5, 2013 at 10:27 pm | PERMALINK
    Dave,

    I have never found a Lib policy that Mod Lib supports. Yet, she’s an ardent supporter.]

    Not this election.

    Unlike you, and others, I don’t support the party for genetic reasons, there has to be a reason to vote for them and there is no reason to vote for either side this time around IMO.

    The worst choice ever put before the Australian electorate in my lifetime.

  8. I was a cultural Liberal, I grew up in the party… so it made sense to not think about it and just stay there… then I thought… I really don’t like much of what you’re doing.

  14. guytaur

    Posted Thursday, September 5, 2013 at 10:03 pm | Permalink

    “@ben__fisher: WHO’S INCOMPETENT NOW @TonyAbbottMHR ??? #auspol”
    —————————————————-

    Reading without glasses and I though that read that Abbott had incontinence

  21. Here is a good example of how health bureaucrats fake their figures.

    [Dr Subramaniam said a Northern Adelaide Local Health Network update released recently painted a much rosier picture of Lyell McEwin Hospital than was actually the case.

    It included a rating of four our of six for plastic and reconstructive surgery, and four out of six for vascular surgery. Both are also forecast to rise to a “five” rating.

    “There has not been a plastic surgeon at Lyell McEwin since 2007 yet they are saying it rates a four out of six,” Dr Subramaniam said.

    “Surgeons are alarmed to find this sort of information circulating – it does not reflect reality.]

    So a plastic surgery service which hasn’t had a plastic surgeon at it for six years still rates as four out of six. What would it take to score less than four?

  22. Poor Dave.
    Not coping well.

    He even has to try and score points against Rosemour by mispresenting what Rosmoour says…sort of tory style. Where did’ja learn that sleasy little trick Warrior Dave.

    Or should that be Tory Dave.
    Come on Dave, tell us, how do you really feelwhen you see Tony in his Speedos?

  24. paaptsef@1861


    does anyone have any idea what the Coalition stand for?

    Being in power and enriching their mates, plus preventing their ‘lessers’ from getting anywhere in life.

    Same old same old that rosemour supports.

  25. [Diogenes
    …..
    So a plastic surgery service which hasn’t had a plastic surgeon at it for six years still rates as four out of six. What would it take to score less than four?]

    Plastic surgery service without a plastic surgeon 4/6
    Plastic surgery service with a plastic surgeon 1/6

    Makes sense to me 🙂

  27. [Greensborough Growler
    Posted Thursday, September 5, 2013 at 10:35 pm | PERMALINK
    Mod Lib,

    Is that really the best you can do?]

    …and what, pray tell, are you going to do?

  32. [The worst choice ever put before the Australian electorate in my lifetime.]

    In terms of leaders, yes I agree. In terms of parties, however, the choice is the same as it has always been. The Liberals are the tools of corrupt vested interests, the mining companies, the banks, the tobacco companies, etc. Labor tries, however inadequately, to defend the disadvantaged and uphold the public interest. Even the very worst Labor government is preferable to the cynical parasites who run the Liberal Party on behalf of Murdoch and Rinehart.

  35. POROTI 1589

    When I feel down I know I can count on you to make me smile
    again
    I had just logged back on because sick of baby sean and his stupid pretend clones. so thank you my friend

  36. [Psephos
    Posted Thursday, September 5, 2013 at 10:39 pm | PERMALINK
    Do we think we’ll get a Newspoll tonight? That would complete the set.]

    Dont they release the night before the election?

  38. Lefty e # 1859

    The Tories would of course have defunded Wittgenstein (impractical linguistic research) and Turing (FFS he’s a poof what more need be said)

    And thus, Nazi victory , no digital computer …

    Chr>st I hate the tories : in particular sloppy anti intellectual racist Joe

  39. [Rosemour or Less
    Posted Thursday, September 5, 2013 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

    Poor Dave.
    Not coping well ]

    Your 40 to 50 posts a day over the last 4 weeks putting the boot into Labor demonstrate the that comment applies to you.

    The thing is you never show support for Labor – who you say you support. Sad.

    You are someone people cross the street when they see you coming.

    A Traitor, backstabber. Someone to avoid all contact with at all cost.

  40. “@KJBar: Treasurer Chris Bowen on the Coalition’s withdrawn internet filtering policy: ‘This has been a policy farce.’ #Lateline #AusVotes”

  41. Mod Lib – you do realise that aid spending is not being cut – it is the ALP’s projected massive growth in aid funding that will not be supported.

    So, there will continue to be billions spent on aid funding.

  44. [dave
    …..
    Someone to avoid all contact with at all cost.]

    Apart from attacking every one of their posts, other than that, avoid at all costs, eh?

    :devil:

  47. @CC/1889

    You do realise that we can see through thick glass…

    If there there already, and it’s been taken away, that means it’s there will be less.

  50. [ Rosemour or Less
    Posted Thursday, September 5, 2013 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

    Dave.

    He even has to try and score points against Rosemour by mispresenting what Rosmoour says…sort of tory style ]

    Your own posts here over the last 4 weeks damn you more than what I could ever write.

    Instead of crapping on – go look and read your own crap.

    If you have any honour any integrity you will surely weep.

    You are about as low as a human can go.

    Go you should , but won’t, just to prove the point.

Comments Page 38 of 43
1 … 37 38 39 … 43

Leave a Reply

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