BludgerTrack: 50-50

Essential Research corroborates Newspoll in recording Labor retaining its 51-49 lead, but there’s nothing in it so far as the BludgerTrack poll aggregate is concerned.

The addition of Newspoll and yesterday’s Essential Research result to BludgerTrack leave nothing between the two parties to the first decimal place. Observers of BludgerTrack’s form will know that actually translates into a small Coalition majority on the seat projection, which has the Coalition up one on the seat projection in New South Wales and down one in Queensland. I haven’t updated it with Newspoll’s leadership ratings yet, but will get around to doing so tomorrow. I haven’t yet covered the Essential Research result, which was once again unchanged in having Labor leading 51-49 on two-party preferred. On the primary vote, both parties were down a point – the Coalition to 41%, Labor to 37% – while the Greens and Nick Xenophon Team steady on 9% and 3%.

bludgertrack-2016-05-25

The Australian has also been treating us to a series of supplementary results from the weekend Newspoll over the past few days that echo the further questions posed by Essential Research this week, to wit:

• The latest in Essential’s occasional series on leadership attributes finds Malcolm Turnbull deteriorating between five and seven points over the past three weeks on “out of touch”, “arrogant” and “understands the problems facing Australia”, without suffering much change with respect to capacities such as “intelligent” and “good in a crisis” (although “hard-working” is down five). Bill Shorten’s numbers are little changed, leaving him rated lower than Turnbull on most attributes, with the singular exception of being out of touch with ordinary people, which is the largest point of difference between the two. Similarly, The Australian today has Turnbull ahead on a series of measures, but with Shorten leading on “cares for people” and “in touch with voters”, while Turnbull has lost all but two points of a ten-point lead on “understands the major issues” from February.

• There has been a whole bunch of “best party to handle” results in the past few days. Amid an overall predictable set of results, Essential Research finds Labor increasing leads from 4% to 11% on health, 6% to 13% on protecting local jobs and industries, and 4% to 10% on housing affordability, the latter of which has only recently emerged as an area of Labor advantage. The Seven Network last night had further results from Friday’s ReachTEL poll showing the Coalition favoured 55-45 on economic management, Labor favoured 61-39 on health. Newspoll framed the questions in terms of the leaders rather than the parties, and had Malcolm Turnbull favoured 55-29 over Bill Shorten on the economy, 48-25 on asylum seekers and 43-38 on the cost of living, 46-33 on tax reform, 50-27 on interest rates and 42-38 on unemployment, while Shorten led 47-40 on health, 47-41 on education and 41-36 on climate change.

• When it asked if respondents expected Labor to keep or change the government’s asylum seeker policies, Essential Research found 28% opting for keep, 38% for change, and 34% for don’t know.

• As recorded in the chart below, the three betting agencies have been consistent in offering odds on the Coalition to form government that imply a probability of between 70% and 80%, although the one most immediately responsive to the actions of punters, Betfair, seems to have recorded a bit of a dip over the past few days.

2016-05-25-betting-markets

• In further horse race news, Phillip Coorey of the Financial Review reports Labor is having trouble landing the swing where it needs it, with Labor margins that were cut fine in western Sydney over the past two elections set to blow out again. Coorey had earlier reported one Liberal strategist saying the election was “genuinely close, but at this stage, the retention of the government is more likely”, while a Labor counterpart concedes they were behind, but concluded: “We haven’t put our cue in the rack.”

Local matters:

• Labor is scrambling for a new Senate candidate in the Northern Territory after Nova Peris today confirmed she would not be seeking re-election, with widespread reports she is to take up the position of senior adviser for indigenous and multicultural affairs with the Australian Football League. Trish Crossin, whom Julia Gillard forced out of the seat to make way for Peris at the 2013 election, told ABC Radio yesterday that Peris had presented Labor with a “selfish distraction”, and called on Gillard to admit she made a mistake. There are as yet no indications as to who Labor might preselect to replace her.

• Both major parties have now lost their first choice candidates for the seat of Fremantle, after Sherry Sufi resigned as Liberal candidate, after local newspaper the Fremantle Herald reported he had been recorded in 2013 doing an unflattering and profanity-laden impersonation of his then boss, state Mount Lawley MP Michael Sutherland. There had been news reports in the preceding days about articles Sufi had written in opposition to same-sex marriage and an apology to the stolen generations, which had actually been in the public domain for some time, and rather technical allegations he had provided an inaccurate account of his employment record on his candidate nomination form. The Liberals have rushed to endorse previously unsuccessful preselection candidate Pierette Kelly, an electorate officer to Senator Chris Back.

• Pauline Hanson’s prospects for a Senate seat is the topic of the hour, having been canvassed by me in Crikey last week, Jamie Walker in The Australian on Saturday and a Courier-Mail front page yesterday. Antony Green told ABC Radio’s World Today program yesterday had “some realistic chance”. Kevin Bonham is a little more skeptical, but doesn’t rule it out.

• Phillip Hudson of The Australian reported on Monday that Labor is seeking to exploit talk of a preference deal between the Liberals and the Greens in Victoria to shore up working class support in two low-income regional seats: Bass in northern Tasmania, and Dawson in northern Queensland.

• Matthew Denholm of The Australian reports that Jacqui Lambie is advocating that her voters give their second preference to the Nick Xenophon Team, and put Labor ahead of the Liberals.

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.

1,123 comments on “BludgerTrack: 50-50”

Comments Page 19 of 23
1 … 18 19 20 … 23

  1. @Lizzie
    Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 3:22 pm
    Best post I’ve read on PB. Thank you for sharing.
    …
    Personally like most Greens I will always preference Labor ahead of LNP federally and Bill Shorten has certainly surprised me with his professional and energetic campaign to date. Seems to have a solid team approach and good experienced people with him with the odd Feeney exception.
    My concern is that Greens who don’t believe in a 2 party duopoly won’t include Labor in the Senate preferences if the spat gets too vicious. Hopefully the lefties can unite and bring about a change in government for everyone’s benefit.
    Re bookies. It may just mean they have a lot of money in already for Liberal and are trying to get money in on Labor to balance the risk. (Liberal backers might be trying to get their money back soon).

  2. When 7.30 asked Mr Di Natale about the conflict, he said it was a matter for the NSW party and he knew nothing about it.

    Can understand this Greens NSW are a separate party in all but name.

  3. ‘As recently as March, the Liberals, Nationals and Greens together thwarted the ALP’s attempts to legislate reforms to the political donation system…’

    Context is everything….a cynical political tactic by Labor during the marathon senate voting reforms debate…
    March 2016: http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/twentyhour-debate-comes-to-inevitable-conclusion-as-government-and-greens-use-numbers/news-story/49a7af3785fb555ea2fc3d495838eae1

    THE Senate today finally bowed to the glaringly inevitable and backed voting reform after the longest parliamentary tussle since passage of Native Title laws in 1993.

    The “Sleepless in the Senate” ordeal took up more than 20 hours of debate and tomfoolery. About 33 divisions were called — all of them going the same way.
    :::
    The government accused Labor of filibustering — speaking at length on distractions — although Senator Collins called this “quite inaccurate in my view”.

    However, it was Labor that, towards the end, introduced unheralded amendments to change political donation laws, a move that could have prolonged the debate even further. This was aimed at embarrassing the Greens, who have demanded separate legislation to reduce donations.

    “There is one reason and one reason only why Labor is moving these [donations] amendments,” Senator Cormann said.

    “They are trying to make things as uncomfortable as possible for the Australian Greens to support this historic and this very important reform of the Senate electoral system.

    “Some people in the Labor Party are desperate to ensure that the power to trade and direct preferences remains with backroom operators in political parties.

  5. I’d guess it’s the assumption of a drift towards the incumbent during the campaign.

    I’m not sure that drift is a proven fact over time.

    I’ve always wondered if there might always be more bets on the coalition because coalition voters have, well, more money.

    I’m pretty confident that betting money isn’t biased towards the Libs. People who place large bets bet based on information, not who they are drawn towards.

    A 50/50 uniform result in the election returns the government.

    It’s not SA where you lose with 53% of the vote. In Federal, if you get the votes, you almost always win (although I accept Textor has got the Libs running a marginal seat only campaign and some are arguing Labor needs 52% to win).

  7. Oh dear ..trubble at t’mill..

    “The New South Wales Greens party has broken out into civil war in the middle of the election campaign following Carole Medcalf’s ousting as the party’s executive officer.
    The party’s long-term treasurer, Chris Harris, has resigned over Ms Medcalf’s treatment, and in an email to members he has accused the party of acting like a major bank trying “to shaft their customers”.

    When 7.30 asked Mr Di Natale about the conflict, he said it was a matter for the NSW party and he knew nothing about it.

    Mr Greenland and Greens senator Lee Rhiannon were both contacted but declined to comment.”

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-26/nsw-greens-internal-war-over-party-control/7447340

  10. Diogenes – that may be true in general, but in *this* election, a uniform swing to 50/50 gives the Coalition 81 seats, a narrow majority.

    Of course the swing won’t be uniform, and that will decide the election one way or t’other. Either way, gamblers seem content that a very close vote share means the LNP returns, and it’s their money that moves the market.

  13. BK Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 4:47 pm
    There are many adjectives to describe this guy.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-26/canning-mp-andrew-hastie-rejects-adf-calls-over-defence-uniform/7448530

    **************************************************

    I bet Neil James – a liberal mouthpiece/stooge – won’t object to Hastie but – he sure complained when Labor’s candidate for the seat of Brisbane, Pat O’Neill, was asked by him to take down photographs of himself in uniform

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-23/brisbane-labor-candidate-asked-to-remove-army-uniform-billboards/7436770

  15. icancu @ #901 Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 4:29 pm

    The biggest problem with climate change is not merely the destruction of theBGR, disastrous as that will be. The biggest calamity will be economic – the irrevocable and widespread damage that will be done to the economy – to our ability to sustain ourselves without further damaging the global ecosystem.

  17. The bookies had Campbell Newman raving hot favourite to win, he didn’t. From memory they had him favourite to win his seat, he didn’t.

  18. Diogs,

    Polling markets are notorioussly thin and the odds set re usually through gut feel and assessments by professional bookies. However, because the pools are not large a realtively large bet will affeet the odds significantly. This is due to weight of money.

    For example the pool for Batman might have been only a couple of hundred dollars and someone comes long and plonks a thousand on the Greens. That will significantly alter the odds on offer.

    The bookies use these pollie markets for publicity also.

    Paying out early on a result is a ploy to churn the money.

  19. ICanCU:
    All true – I certainly hope that a leftie split doesn’t give Turnbott a full term in his own right, far less a compliant Senate!
    But it’s incumbent on both sides to unite – both the “Greens and Libs are both our enemies!” Laborites (some of whom are here on PB) and the “Both major parties are the same!” Greenies.
    Acrimony aside, if a seat is filled by a non-Labor politician, they’re going to be better off nearly 100% of the time (the “Malaysia Solution” being a prominent exception and not the rule) if that non-Labor politician is a Green. And while Labor can be disappointing at times, only under a Labor government will any of the Greens’ core policies (environmentalism, social justice, conditions of refugees) ever be addressed!

  21. I have relatives who work with the gambling industry. Early betting is for mugs and is based on an attempt to get a big payout when the form is unknown.

    The pools for the betting will be very small and the initial odds will have been framed by a single person (supposed expert) taking a stab in the dark based on what they ‘think’ might be the case – that is how betting markets begin.

    Do not bother looking at betting markets for an indication until a week out (and even then, favorites only win 2 out of 5 races). Using betting markets to get the ‘vibe’ now is like looking at a very small sample opinion poll that can be very skewed because unlike opinion polls, there is no attempt to get any kind of spread of demographic in a betting market.

  22. GG
    Betfair has $500K in the fed election pool so far so it gives a reasonable sample. I don’t know about Sportsbet etc. I’m sure a lot more money will come in over the next few weeks.

  23. Diogenes Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 5:07 pm
    GG
    Betfair has $500K in the fed election pool so far so it gives a reasonable sample. I don’t know about Sportsbet etc. I’m sure a lot more money will come in over the next few weeks.
    ***************************************************

    Old gamblers rule : The probability of winning is inversely proportional to the amount of the wager.

  24. http://mysunshinecoast.com.au/news/news-display/greens-release-democracy-for-sale-report,43433

    The office of Senator Lee Rhiannon have commenced a research project into political donations and the current disclosure regime, as part of their ongoing Democracy for Sale project..

    The report shows that since 2010, $8 million in donations to political parties has been reported by donors as ‘donations’ but not by the political parties. The amount might not have been disclosed at all, or more commonly it was disclosed as an ‘other receipt’ payment. Payments not classified as donations by parties will not appear in a party donations search on the Australian Electoral Commission’s database.

    “The current $12, 800 disclosure threshold allows many big donors and political parties to avoid scrutiny. In theory a donor could donate nearly $1.9 million to a political party and its candidates, spreading the money evenly around, without anyone having to declare anything.

    “The Greens have two bills before parliament to reform our political donations system, as well as legislation for a national corruption watchdog to help clean up politics.

    “We will continue to campaign hard on this issue up until and beyond the federal election,” Senator Rhiannon said.

  25. Dio,

    Even if there were 5000 people in the betting market, it still is no indication. We are talking 150 individual races, spread evenly (which it won’t be and we have no way of knowing how it is spread) that half mill would even out at 3,300 per electorate.

    The other thing we must recognise that few people bet objectively (emotion plays a very big role esp. in elections).

  27. Diogs,
    The current bookie markets have the LNPs as having a 77% chance of winning and Labor 29%.
    Punters just need to assess whether they are reasonable odds.

  30. 19 February 2016: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-19/$1.7m-of-political-donations-missing-from-party-disclosures/7178228

    An analysis of Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) data by ABC TV’s The Weekly with Charlie Pickering shows parties have failed to declare donations from a developer, law firms and business interests.
    ::::
    The donations missed by the Liberal Party total $50,960, while the Labor Party failed to declare $202,809 worth of gifts.

    Individuals and companies failed to declare about $1.3 million in donations.
    ::::
    A significant amount of the money was funnelled through associated entities — clubs, companies or unions — set up to benefit particular parties or politicians.

    Associated entities blur the money trail between donors and politicians because the entities do not legally have to declare where much of their funds come from.

    For example, the Labor Party’s fundraising arm, Progressive Business, declared the source of about $320,000, which works out to be a fifth of the $1.6 million it raised last financial year.

    While 18 clubs linked to the Liberal Party’s Victorian Branch raised $2.4 million, the clubs only revealed the source of 4 per cent of that money in official returns to the AEC.

    Includes lists of

    1. Largest donations not declared by parties – All involve the Coalition and Labor.

    2. Largest donations not declared by donors: – All involve the Coalition and Labor + 2 involve Senator X

  31. Greensborough Growler Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 5:14 pm
    Diogs,
    The current bookie markets have the LNPs as having a 77% chance of winning and Labor 29%.
    Punters just need to assess whether they are reasonable odds.
    **************************************************************

    I well remember a very detailed article written by Andrew Robb about how each sides daily internal polling in every seat told exactly how the end result would happen well in advance of election day …

    Other published polling by newspapers was just an emotively fraudulent way to keep readership guessing ….. and buying their newspaper ……

  32. “Other published polling by newspapers was just an emotively fraudulent way to keep readership guessing ….. and buying their newspaper ……”

    Say it isn’t so….

  33. adrian Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 5:26 pm
    “Other published polling by newspapers was just an emotively fraudulent way to keep readership guessing ….. and buying their newspaper ……”
    Say it isn’t so….

    ****************************************************

    If you knew the end result NOW ( as political parties do ) …… would you be still interested Adrian ????? ( smile )

  34. ru

    Poll has an interesting disclaimer —

    ‘No candidate names for the electorate were read out alongside party affiliation which favours the major parties.’

    Renders the whole thing basically useless, I would have thought.

  35. Well PR, the last Australian movie I saw had a more interesting beginning, and less predictable ending. However the middle may be not as easy to differentiate.
    And it didn’t feel quite as long.

  36. The LNP ads should come with a disclaimer:

    ‘No brain cells were harmed or otherwise utilised in the production of this advertisement.’

  37. Progressive Business’ declaration to the AEC.

    Progressive Business Association Inc
    Suite 1, Level 2 190 Queen Street MELBOURNE VIC 3000

    Declared Totals Value
    Total Receipts: $1,596,771.00
    Total Payments: $1,404,014.00

    Cut and paste that where the sun don’t shine Peg.

  39. diogenes @ #905 Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 4:39 pm

    I’d guess it’s the assumption of a drift towards the incumbent during the campaign.

    I’m not sure that drift is a proven fact over time.

    I’ve always wondered if there might always be more bets on the coalition because coalition voters have, well, more money.

    I’m pretty confident that betting money isn’t biased towards the Libs. People who place large bets bet based on information, not who they are drawn towards.

    A 50/50 uniform result in the election returns the government.

    It’s not SA where you lose with 53% of the vote. In Federal, if you get the votes, you almost always win (although I accept Textor has got the Libs running a marginal seat only campaign and some are arguing Labor needs 52% to win).

    My estimate is Labor needs 50.9 for a 50% chance.

    Of the last 12 cases in which federal Oppositions won the 2PP, they have only actually won the election 7 times. Admittedly some of these were pre one-vote-one-value but even more recent elections are consistent with Oppositions typically needing to be around 51-ish to win.

  40. phoenixred @ #931 Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 5:23 pm

    Greensborough Growler Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 5:14 pm
    Diogs,
    The current bookie markets have the LNPs as having a 77% chance of winning and Labor 29%.
    Punters just need to assess whether they are reasonable odds.
    **************************************************************
    I well remember a very detailed article written by Andrew Robb about how each sides daily internal polling in every seat told exactly how the end result would happen well in advance of election day …
    Other published polling by newspapers was just an emotively fraudulent way to keep readership guessing ….. and buying their newspaper ……

    Of course the parties will often say they knew what was happening all along. But since they didn’t release their data at the time, or arrange any way for it to be verified later, such claims should not be taken seriously.

    Individual seats have frequently bucked the insider spin based on internal polling from both parties.

  42. adrian Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 5:35 pm
    Well PR, the last Australian movie I saw had a more interesting beginning, and less predictable ending. However the middle may be not as easy to differentiate.
    And it didn’t feel quite as long.

    **********************************************************

    Well I truly support ALL your comments on the BIAS of specifically the ABC political journalists ….but Australian political journalists in general

    In fact the Australian Bureau Of Statistics have found out that their IQ and the life expectancy of average Australians recently passed each other going in opposite directions.

    But Rupert has to sell newspapers …… so we wait with baited breath for each newspoll – which tells us honestly nothing in truism – but we hope for each decimal point uplift in our favour …..

  43. I well remember a very detailed article written by Andrew Robb about how each sides daily internal polling in every seat told exactly how the end result would happen well in advance of election day …

    Does that explain why the Libs are appearing to be frightened and still in omnishambolic clusterwark mode??

  44. Congrats 2 @andrewprobyn @latingle @ellenwhinnett who quizzing @TurnbullMalcolm & @billshortenmp at Sunday’s leaders’ debate

  45. imacca Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 5:50 pm
    “ I well remember a very detailed article written by Andrew Robb about how each sides daily internal polling in every seat told exactly how the end result would happen well in advance of election day … ”
    Does that explain why the Libs are appearing to be frightened and still in omnishambolic clusterwark mode?
    **************************************************

    Appearances are NOTHING …….. its what our born to rule emperors have determined is best for us …… you get what they decide ….

  46. Z,
    I’m also suspicious because it does not have the usual caveat that no live animals were used in it’s compilation.

  50. imacca @ #943 Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 5:50 pm

    I well remember a very detailed article written by Andrew Robb about how each sides daily internal polling in every seat told exactly how the end result would happen well in advance of election day …

    Does that explain why the Libs are appearing to be frightened and still in omnishambolic clusterwark mode??

    Ah. Predestination as applied to politics.

Comments Page 19 of 23
1 … 18 19 20 … 23

Leave a Reply

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