Morgan has published its latest SMS state polling results, conducted from last Friday through to last night. The results in turn:
New South Wales. The Coalition’s lead is out to 60.5-39.5, up from 57-43 at the last poll in late August. The sample here was 995.
Victoria. Labor’s lead narrows from 57-43 in the late August poll to 55.5-44.5 Sample: 918.
Queensland. The Liberal National Party moves into the lead at 51-49, compared with a 52-48 lead for Labor last time. Sample: 773.
Western Australia. The Liberal-National government opens a 51.5-48.5 lead, following a 50-50 result last time. Sample: 469.
South Australia. The Liberals move into a 51-49 lead, after trailing 50.5-49.5 last time. Sample: 519.
Tasmania. A tiny sample of 228, but for what it’s worth, the Liberals are on 42%, Labor is on 29.5% and the Greens are on 23.5%.
Looks like another Labor failure.
Looks like a collection of polls to be read with a bag of salt.
Lib vote up across the country since Abbott is out of the picture
Another strong Greens showing in Tasmania. This is a pathetically small sample size but mostly consistent with the larger ones. Take a few points off for Green vote inflation and they’re still in 4-5 seat territory.
The new Tasmanian Greens Leader (And popular former Minister) Cassy O’Connor is a real force to be reckoned with, and no doubt responsible for a lot of the resurgence in support.
I hope Kevin Bonham will come on here and explain himself why he still has the Tasmanian Greens on 3 seats following the release of this poll. How much more would the Greens need to poll to get an extra seat?
The only thing that will put a stop to the Green resurgance in Tasmania is Labor changing leader to Rebecca White, and an economic decline.
Meantime the Greens have the trump cards of community angst over perceived inappropriate development as a focus, truth in politics, and heritage and environment policy to use to their advantage. Also agree with Cassy O’Connor leadership strength which overshadows the Premier’s inability to portray confidence and command and Labor’s Bryan Greens problematic political history.
ESJ
It’s cute that you think that. The federal Liberals finally doing something right and removing Abbott is hardly Labor failure.
We assume people can distinguish between federal and state politics but this poll suggests not all do. If correct the Abbott effect cost the Libs two states governments – Qld and not winning in SA. Vic might have gone anyway due to state issues.
It’s Morgan, come on get real.
The Victorian Libs were long gone even before Abbott worked his magic
Coast@5
It’s not how much more, it’s that they’d have to poll it in a reliable poll.
The sample size for Tasmania is only 228 and as far as I’m concerned Morgan’s SMS poll method is unreliable, and has severe house effects in Tasmania. Thus I only weight this sample at 5% in my aggregate of Tasmanian polling, and even that is probably very generous to it.
The result of adding the sample (after house effect adjustments) was that Labor dropped 0.2 points to the Greens, who I now have on 16.1. In what would be the fourth Green seat, Lyons, I currently have Labor on 1.91 quotas, Liberal 2.8, Greens 0.92. But in 2014 fourth-party preferences in Lyons broke 41% Liberal 40% Labor 12% Green 7% exhaust, on which basis Labor would cross two quotas on preferences while the Liberals would very slightly lead the Greens.
Throw in the impact on within-party leakage of the Greens not having an incumbent and the Liberals would be clearly favoured to retain the seat on those numbers.
Kevin Bonham
That is a very clear explanation.
Socrates@8
All this is consistent with what I’ve found looking at the past relationship between government in power at federal and state levels and election results. Since 1969, state governments that were from the same side as the federal government at the time have won 53% of the time while state governments that were from the opposite side have won 82% of the time. (If the federal government is popular then that helps the same party to retain power at state level, but makes no difference to winning from opposition at state level).
Most people probably do distinguish between federal and state politics but it only takes a few percent not to before you get quite a strong effect on state results.
In the case of Queensland while federal drag was a factor, the LNP still wouldn’t have lost had they not been such an abysmal government. They might not even have lost had it been clearer that they were at serious risk of losing.
The high popularity of the NSW Liberals does seem to be counterintuitive to the Abbott Effect meme.
Yes because gaining 3pp in TPP was obviously just a complete coincidence
Are the above polls for federal elections or state elections?
Polling sample sizes are too small in most of the marginal states to take this seriously.
Jacob, state elections.
New Thread Please….
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/dog-days-for-labor-as-coalition-surges-under-malcolm-turnbull-20151018-gkbx59.html
[“Support for Labor has plunged to just 30 per cent as voters flood back to a rejuvenated Coalition government under Malcolm Turnbull’s new leadership style one month after he replaced the unpopular Tony Abbott as Prime Minister.
In what appears to be a clear vindication of that bruising leadership switch, Mr Turnbull has more than tripled Bill Shorten’s popularity as preferred prime minister at 67 per cent to Mr Shorten’s 21 – a dive of 24 points for the Opposition Leader since August, when he was up against Mr Abbott.
The October Fairfax-Ipsos poll has found the Coalition has surged ahead of Labor at 53-47 according to the flow of second preferences as allocated at the 2013 election.”]
30% Primary Vote for Labor… Billys gotta GO