A solid move on BludgerTrack this week, as the Labor primary vote spikes 0.9% at the expense of the Coalition and “others”. This translates to a 0.7% lift on two-party preferred and a gain of three on the seat projection, including one each from New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania, counterbalanced by a loss in Queensland (NOTE: This post originally gave Labor an extra 0.4% two-party preferred as well as an extra seat; this was based on an error which has now been fixed). Picking that apart:
• The model does not presently grant any weight to Ipsos, except in calculating the state totals and the leadership ratings, as it’s only with the publication of a second result that the model will have something to benchmark it against. This has the unfortunate effect of depriving the current BludgerTrack reading of what’s probably a strong result for the Coalition, perhaps causing it to lean a little more Labor than it should. That’s unless a Coalition lean proves to be a consistent feature of Ipsos, in which case it will be bias-adjusted accordingly. However, this certainly wasn’t evident in its Victorian state poll.
• Poll watchers have been looking askance at Newspoll’s two-party numbers recently, which have consistently been putting Labor a percentage point ahead of what the primary vote numbers would lead you to expect. Since BludgerTrack dispenses with pollsters’ two-party preferred calculations and determines its own after generating the primary vote numbers, Labor’s strong Newspoll showing has been making a less of an impression than some might expect.
• Morgan reverted to type in its latest fortnightly result after successive polls showed the Coalition in its strongest position since February, producing strong Coalition data points after the bias adjustment was applied. This time out, it’s back in the middle somewhere. A re-evaluation of Morgan’s performance this term caused me to very slightly amend its bias adjustment about 0.2% to Labor’s advantage.
• Essential Research has been a little counter-cyclical, nudging Labor downwards slightly where elsewhere they have edged up. Its bias adjustments, which had been factoring in a lean to Labor, are progressively moderating to accommodate the trend.
Ipsos provides a welcome new addition to the leadership ratings game, and early indications are that it has inherited Nielsen’s peculiarly low uncommitted ratings. The BludgerTrack aggregates eliminate such distinctions, and Ipsos combined with the Newspoll result causes Tony Abbott’s preferred prime minister lead to all but disappear, down from 3.1% to 0.7%. Abbott is also down 1.8% on net approval to minus 12.2%, while Bill Shorten is unchanged at minus 4.7%.
In other news, local council elections closed today in SA. And the count begins tomorrow. Participation was just below a third of eligible voters (although, apparently, it’s the highest amount of total voters.)
Conservatives (including local news media hacks) are already congratulating themselves on getting conservatives elected and knocking out progressive mayors/councillors. (They’re basing their assumption on low turnouts.)
Carey
[Conservatives (including local news media hacks) are already congratulating themselves on getting conservatives elected and knocking out progressive …]
What, in the Australian context is a “progressive”, as distinct from a socialist?
I assume a “progressive” is a right-wing capitalist who has a few rich “buddies” who are poofters; as distinct from right wing capitalists who do not like poofters.?
Big bloody thrill!!!
How Meaningless-ish; how Obama-ish
Swamprat, it’s not my problem you don’t know what words mean.
Is it me, or has Stephen Yarwood kinds run dead throughout this campaign? Travelling through the CBD I see a whole heap of corflutes for Martin Haese and Mark Hamilton, but not a single one for Yarwood that I can recall. Then I cast my mind back to a radio interview in which he briefly allowed himself to ponder why he bothered to continue in such a frequently unrewarding job, and I have to wonder…
Greens lead in Richmond and Melbourne seats says poll
____________________________
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victoria-state-election-2014/victorian-state-election-greens-lead-in-inne
Yarwood had banked on a grassroots campaign. A big mistake IMO.
FWIW, I don’t think he will win re-election because many also see him as abrasive (he’s very skilled but he can seem a bit condescending at times.)
It will probably come down to Haese and Henningsen. Although Yarwood might have enough of a backing to make it to the 2CP
Problem with SA Council voting is nobody really cares. I don’t think the prospect of voting for who is in charge of managing bin collection and footpath paving inspires many people to vote.
In fact, in the LG area I live in, the Mayor just got re-elected. Not because he is universally loved but because nobody cares enough.
Obviously voluntary voting is to blame as well but it would be higher if people here saw some value in local governments.
655
That link has already been posted on the most recent Victorian thread.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/11/04/victorian-election-guide-2/#comments
Carey
I was not blaming you about my ignorance.
I was asking what is a “progressive”?
[In fact, in the LG area I live in, the Mayor just got re-elected. Not because he is universally loved but because nobody cares enough.]
Sorry, I meant he was re-elected, unopposed.
657
Compulsory voting would help, I think. As might attendance voting, so that voters can see which candidates have enough support to get HTVCs distributed.
Allowing party names on ballot paters may also help, by giving many voters a better idea who they are voting for.
The lack of media attention to local government is not helpful either.
A progressive, to me, is somebody who accepts change is inevitable and works to make sure that change is positive. I realise it’s subjective and, to some, it means a capitalist who will lay concrete down to build many highrises.
But what I meant is mayors who realise that a city (or suburb) needs to be culturally vibrant and welcome to new ideas and cultures etc.
I apologise for the ambiguity.
Tom 661
All great points!
I honestly have no idea what “progressive” means in political terms.
I assume it is not a socialist, therefore it is a type of capitalist.
Being “progressive”, I assume you mean it is a socially ‘tolerant” capitalist.
And this is really good, how?
660
Unopposed re-election is not a good thing. Voters should have choice.
Proportional representation helps reduce unopposed candidature. Directly elected mayors are also probably not the best for that or executive accountability between elections.
Carey
[A progressive, to me, is somebody who accepts change is inevitable and works to make sure that change is positive. I realise it’s subjective and, to some, it means a capitalist who will lay concrete down to build many highrises.
But what I meant is mayors who realise that a city (or suburb) needs to be culturally vibrant and welcome to new ideas and cultures etc.]
For god sake, “progressive” is just a switched on media hip capitalist.
I do not understand why you are not a Liberal.
Although I realise why, if you are a Labour/Labor member, the ALP is a dying useless careerist piece of right wing garbage.
Yep, I’d rather token opposition than no opposition at all. Besides, sometimes you learn that more people want change than you initially thought, when you give them a choice.
Jesus Christ, Swamprat. What is your problem?!
But thanks for making an extensive profile about me based on a couple of sentences. You’re completely wrong about me but I don’t think anything I say is going to change your view.
Traditionally the ALP and LNP had a “gentleman” agreement to support the cosy duopoly.
Recently the LNP has been extreme in their outrageous attacks on the previous ALP government.
But luckliy for the LNP the ALP is still the same pro-market, weak, clueless, media-unable, bunch of neo-liberal numpties.
Carey
My problem is that the ALP has become a useless piece of right-wing shit (and assumes because it is a micron to the left of the LNP, it is not so bad). haha ha
Keating, then Howard, now Abbott have moved all community infrastructure for private profit.
Apart from careers for a few union secretaries, what does the ALP actually stand for?
[Apart from careers for a few union secretaries, what does the ALP actually stand for?]
Probably a lot more than some miserable old Trot who spends all of his time posting tirades on the internet!
Get off the turps, Mr Prat, or stop posting.
Carey,
I don’t think you should suggest swamprat is a miserable old trot. I have seen no evidence that he is old.
[I don’t think you should suggest swamprat is a miserable old trot. I have seen no evidence that he is old.]
Apologies to our older members. I got carried away and don’t mean to be ageist.
Swamprat, I wish you had a little more self-awareness about the chasm that separate your actual intelligence and the amount you credit yourself with.
No, it’s perfectly obvious that Swamprat is about 20.
Fulvio Sammut
I will stop posting 🙂
Though why you all don’t join the LNP-USA is beyond me.
It would save a lot of expensive pretend nonsense about democarcy and independence.
Would serve the careers of the ALP MP troughers.
Carey
I think that your description of a progressive would easily include Menzies, Fraser, probably Billy McMahon and Harold Holt and certainly Turnbull, Nelson and even Joe Hockey.
I think a progressive MUST at least seek dome form of economic equality or leveling of disadvantage
[I think a progressive MUST at least seek dome form of economic equality or leveling of disadvantage]
On a federal or even a state level, I’d agree. But, when we’re talking about local governments, it’s hard for anybody to really have policies that reflect those values.
Carey
I am not sure I agree even at local government level. Public access to libraries, parks, planning issues, arts events, rate scales can each be used to promote equity.
[676
William Bowe
No, it’s perfectly obvious that Swamprat is about 20.]
I have no idea of S’s age, but his politics are at least 90 years out of date. I reckon they date from the 1920’s, much like Tony Abbott’s. Not content to spar over contemporary issues, they both seem more comfortable with the politics of the obsolete.
[636
Nicholas
At the Poll Bludger level, however, it is healthy to air grievances, craft invective, and make constructive criticisms.]
….that is, to invent new ways to be patronising and supercilious in order to re-certify the high opinion you have of yourself….
Good Morning.
Barbara: Alan Jones’ talkback caller ‘revealed’
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/barbara-alan-jones-talkback-caller-revealed-20141107-11iwd7.html
[405
tielec
guytar,
I would agree that Labor are MORE progressive than LNP, just as the Greens are more progressive than Labor.
Don’t forget Joe Bullock was a Labor candidate.
Excuse me if I get all Freudian on you but I think that you might be mistaking your affinity with Labor as a mutual feeling. Many in Labor consider the Greens more crazy than the LNP. Indeed I think that Labor would like to have 50% of it’s membership or more that would prefer to vote LNP than Green as this would indicate it is occupying the election-winning middle ground.]
You clearly don’t understand how much Labor and the LNP detest each other. The LNP and its antecedents have been trying to destroy Labor for over a century. They continue to try to dismantle every achievement of successive Labor governments and to oppose Labor wherever they assemble.
The Greens, on the other hand, have only had a few of decades in which to recruit support from Labor’s disparate ranks. In this it’s helpful for the Greens to cast Labor and the LNP as being much alike. It’s not true, but helps the Greens in their ceaseless campaign to acquire a political fortune.
Democracy is a zero-sum game. If one party gains a vote, another must necessarily lose. They all understand that. It’s a rolling 3-cornered scrap in which Labor has to contend with predators on all sides.
New thread.