BludgerTrack: 52.7-47.3 to Labor

The gap between Labor and the Coalition widens in this week’s poll aggregate reading, on the strength of similar results from Newspoll and Essential Research.

Bit late with this one due to the distractions of last week, but the latest reading of the BludgerTrack poll aggregate records discernible movement to Labor after a period of stasis, with both Newspoll and Essential Research recording 53-47 leads to Labor. Labor is up three on the seat projection, with gains in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland. Both pollsters produced leadership ratings this week, but they haven’t made much difference to the relevant aggregates.

bt2019-2016-11-09

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.

560 comments on “BludgerTrack: 52.7-47.3 to Labor”

Comments Page 3 of 12
1 2 3 4 … 12

  2. BIS

    There should be more seats in cities or less in country areas. Changes balance towards cities. The formula used at the moment gives the minority in the country areas a majority of seats in the parliament.

    Its just a fact more people live in cities and are the majority. So the majority should not be left out the majority of the time. A change in that formula so there are more chances for the majority view to succeed.

    Thats not saying no say for country areas just that at the moment the balance is wrong.

  3. Clinton like Trump received less than 50% of the vote so more than 50% of voters wanted someone else.

    So you’re saying that neither of them should win? Or that the U.S. should adopt preferential voting?

    Come to think of it, I’d be fine with either (or both) of those.

  5. guytaur @ #202 Monday, November 14, 2016 at 11:21 am

    BIS
    There should be more seats in cities or less in country areas. Changes balance towards cities. The formula used at the moment gives the minority in the country areas a majority of seats in the parliament.
    Its just a fact more people live in cities and are the majority. So the majority should not be left out the majority of the time. A change in that formula so there are more chances for the majority view to succeed.
    Thats not saying no say for country areas just that at the moment the balance is wrong.

    So you’re proposing a City Gerrymander.

  6. Did Pauline Hanson really say that Malcolm Turnbull’s AS deal with the US has betrayed the American people!?!

    She really is a piece of work.

  7. BIS

    Its not a gerrymander when its where the majority live. If we had no seats just a popular vote race the cities would win every time. We have rural regional seats for a reason.

    However too many rural regional seats means the majority view is out voted most of the time by the country regional areas. We know this because without the Nationals in rural areas the LNP would have governed far less.

  8. a r @ #203 Monday, November 14, 2016 at 11:22 am

    Clinton like Trump received less than 50% of the vote so more than 50% of voters wanted someone else.

    So you’re saying that neither of them should win? Or that the U.S. should adopt preferential voting?
    Come to think of it, I’d be fine with either (or both) of those.

    No, I’m suggesting that you can’t argue your case based the number of votes.

    How many here criticised the the result in the last SA election.
    I know I didn’t.

  9. guytaur @ #207 Monday, November 14, 2016 at 11:27 am

    BIS
    Its not a gerrymander when its where the majority live. If we had no seats just a popular vote race the cities would win every time. We have rural regional seats for a reason.
    However too many rural regional seats means the majority view is out voted most of the time by the country regional areas. We know this because without the Nationals in rural areas the LNP would have governed far less.

    To achieve what you are arguing for electorates in the city would have less voters than those in the bush.

    That seems to me to be a clear Gerrymander.

  10. Good morning.

    I’ve just caught up with the fact that Labor agreed to a preference swap with the redneck elephant-killing party in the Orange by-election.

    While it’s a while since I’ve considered myself to be a Labor supporter, I feel rather sick. It’s as if, having been denied the opportunity to keep making Senate preference deals with far-right lunatics, the smart alecs of the Labor Right have decided to look for a new outlet for their idiocy.

    Or perhaps there really is something in the AFR’s seemingly far-fetched claim that Labor wants to develop a Trump-like agenda.

  11. BIS

    No. What I am proposing is that the balance between country cities is wrong. I don’t care too much how it is addressed but it needs to be addressed. The fact is that a few voters in the electorate of Maranoa get more say than a lot of voters in the electorate of Sydney.

    There are more voters in Sydney the electorate. Their vote is per person is worth less than those in the country. This is deliberate. The balance is however wrong as we see the country voters get a government more often than their city cousins.

    Its why we have had more LNP governments elected through country areas. That issue is both the Senate and the HOR. Change HOR more and leave Senate as is. Country cannot be ignored if its got a blocking vote in the Senate. However government should be by the majority of the people and the majority of the people in Australia are urbanised. Its very few that live in country rural areas.

  12. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/us-refugee-swap-the-kind-of-thing-trump-will-nix-on-day-one-says-washington-think-tank-20161113-gsoi51.html

    Like…..just no one could have seen this coming huh?? Turnbull and the anti-midas touch strikes again. Not going to be a good week for the Govt me thinketh, unless FM Julie and her faithful ambassadorial sidekick JoHo step in with their diplomatic superpowers and……………… oh who am i kidding. 🙁

  13. Australian electorates are standardised by population, except NT, so the number of rural electorates is proportional to the relative population.

    Yeah, the electorates are designed to be proportional based on population distribution across a state.
    Just a quick check on how Wikipedia categorises the seats:
    Sydney area: 25
    Greater Sydney: 9
    Rest of NSW: 13
    Total for NSW: 47.

    So there you go. Sydney due to its population already gets more say than the rest of NSW, in fact it gets 1/6 of the whole House!

  15. Mimhoff

    There is your problem. Population of Sydney electorate has a greater population density than the rural areas. Therefore there should be more seats for Sydney Melbourne Adelaide Perth Brisbane etc.

    Less for Townsville to Brisbane. We have states for local areas.

    The balance is wrong which is why we now have a few rwnj’s able to hold the whole nation to ransom. As weak as he is Turnbull would not be opposing Climate Change without that Nationals deal.

    Too much country control. Not enough from population dense cities and the division is going to get worse as the population grows.

  16. It would have been good to see at least some of the AS on Manus and Nauru out of there under a deal with the US.

    But really, as soon as Trump won this deal was dead. Its just a no-brainer for him to cancel it. Makes Obama’s admin look bad, reinforces his “tough on immigration” credentials with his base, and costs him nothing to show that “here is something i am following through on NOW!!” . Its a freebie for Trump and he’ll take it.

    Its not like Trump cares about what the Australian Govt thinks of him at this point or ever. He knows our PM wont complain, will probably grimace and make flattering excuses for him over here even as Trump is twisting the rough end of the pineapple .

  18. BIS

    Another example for you. A small group in Belgium was able to block a Free Trade Deal for the whole of the EU. Too much of a small population having too much say.

  19. Mimhoff

    The balance is wrong. There should be more city seats less country ones.

    Cites have greater populations and should win more often than they do now. Our system is too far biased in favour of country areas.

  22. For the Lower Houses of State and Federal Parliaments there is now no malapportionment (the correct term for what is being discussed). It used to exist but since about 2004 when the Western Australian Legislative Assembly adopted one vote one value it has disappeared. On the other hand Upper Houses in the States are malapportioned in favour of the rural areas. IU am excluding the Senate because it is malapportioned in favour of the smaller populated states as part of the Federal compact.

  27. The Orange preference direction to the Shooters was an interesting call, but are they any worse than the native-vegetation clearing nationals? Aren’t they just peas in a pod? Why not cause the nationals mayhem for tactical advantage?

  29. Australian House of Reps seats are not purely based on population. Square km get votes too.

    I believe there is a certain size over which this is true, so I don’t believe that suburbun voters get more than inner city voters, but country people certainly get a lot more votes than city people.

    Additionally, there’s some distorions around NT and ACT, and the 5 HoR minimum for each state, regardless of population.

  31. Mimhoff

    Maranoa 102,861 

    Sydey 110,322

    See more voters in Sydney than Maranoa. Balance is wrong can be adjusted so figure is exactly the same. The fact there is a difference is the problem.

  32. voice endeavour @ #254 Monday, November 14, 2016 at 12:12 pm

    Australian House of Reps seats are not purely based on population. Square km get votes too.
    I believe there is a certain size over which this is true, so I don’t believe that suburbun voters get more than inner city voters, but country people certainly get a lot more votes than city people.
    Additionally, there’s some distorions around NT and ACT, and the 5 HoR minimum for each state, regardless of population.

    As far as I know there has not been a rural weighting since the Whitlam era. Discrepancies can occur due to demographic changes between redistributions and because the the number of electorates is determined on a state basis. That means that according to the standard formula for all states and territories, other than Tasmania, each state/territory is allocated a certain number of seats according to relative size. This cannot be precise and results in the biggest discrepancies (greater or lesser) in the smaller states. ACT is the big loser here because it falls marginally below an entitlement to three seats.

  34. Maranoa 102,780 Sydney 110.302. The Electoral Act allows for Diuvions to vary by up to 10%. When divisions in a state start to get too far out of kilter there is a redistribution within in the sate and across the country.

  35. How many times has the National Party won votes joined with the Liberals to get a majority?

    How many times does this result in the Country overruling the majority in the Cities?
    Answer most of the time.

    Should we ban party coalitions and have government formed only from the majority of seats they win? Would that fix it?

    This is an issue to that has to be addressed because the truth is that at the moment we have a majority of the time a small number of people in one political party running the country most of the time. At odds to what the majority want.

    Its not an aberration is a norm.

  36. Guytaur.
    Electors in Maranoa: 102,861
    Electors in Wentworth: 102,811
    As per usual, your “facts” and reality have almost nothing in common.
    In this particular case, you are 99.96% WRONG.

  38. BTW

    I am saying yes I am wrong on the part of the numbers of electors per electorate.

    Thanks TPOF for your post about the States that explains it for me.

  39. Bob

    My fact I have presented my argument on is the LNP winning the majority of elections.

    That fact gives country voters more say than the majority in the cities. My guess as to solution was wrong but the fact of the problem I am talking about is correct

  40. Didn’t Howard put in a fix so that the ACT is stuck on two HoR seats? I could be wrong but seem to remember something on those lines. Population is over 300,000.

  41. It’s up to the parties to attempt to appeal to the voters in fairly apportioned electorates. If the Nationals have done that and have a majority when in coalition with the Liberals then that’s just democracy. The voters know they are in coalition so they know what they are voting for.

    The only caveat would be where the seats have the same populations but are apportioned with intent to disadvantage certain parties, by dividing communities that support a given party and distributing them among the neighbouring electorates so as to ensure that they are always the minority.

    Proportional representation is the answer really, although there is something to be said for single member representation for local issues. In the age of party discipline, the local member probably doesn’t matter all that much but it does give a community the opportunity to elect a strong independent, or to put pressure on the party machine through their local member.

  42. Guytaur
    Monday, November 14, 2016 at 12:06 pm
    …”How many people live in Marnoa? How man in the electorate of Sydney?”…

    Wasn’t this the point of your argument, an unfair weighting in favour of rural electors over those from the city?
    Probably should have done a bit of your own research first, huh?

  43. bob mcbob @ #261 Monday, November 14, 2016 at 12:28 pm

    Guytaur.
    Electors in Maranoa: 102,861
    Electors in Wentworth: 102,811
    As per usual, your “facts” and reality have almost nothing in common.
    In this particular case, you are 99.96% WRONG.

    One of the reasons I don’t respond to your posts (and usually scroll past) is that you, (or rather whatever role play you are engaging in) are an offensive git. We can share information and correct misconceptions without tossing abuse in for good measure. You made a ridiculously ignorant and wrong assumption about me sometime back without provocation and without any basis other than your own prejudice, which convinced me your views are not worth anything.

    Enjoy.

  44. laughtong @ #265 Monday, November 14, 2016 at 12:34 pm

    Didn’t Howard put in a fix so that the ACT is stuck on two HoR seats? I could be wrong but seem to remember something on those lines. Population is over 300,000.

    Not that I know of. The senators are stuck at two, but the only fix that Howard put in was at the beginning when he attempted to destroy the Canberra based public service. He failed. The ACT just keeps missing out on getting enough population to earn a third seat.

  45. Heh… Trump now saying “straight to camera” (as he put it) “Stop it!”.

    Referring to racial vilification of Latinos and Afro Americans.

    A bit late for that, I would have thought.

  46. Guytaur
    Monday, November 14, 2016 at 12:30 pm
    …”Bob
    My fact I have presented my argument on is the LNP winning the majority of elections.
    That fact gives country voters more say than the majority in the cities. My guess as to solution was wrong but the fact of the problem I am talking about is correct”…

    Terribly sorry, I am not fluent in whichever language you are now speaking.
    It appears strangely similar to English, but is otherwise incomprehensible.

  47. meher baba @ #210 Monday, November 14, 2016 at 11:37 am

    Good morning.
    I’ve just caught up with the fact that Labor agreed to a preference swap with the redneck elephant-killing party in the Orange by-election.
    While it’s a while since I’ve considered myself to be a Labor supporter, I feel rather sick. It’s as if, having been denied the opportunity to keep making Senate preference deals with far-right lunatics, the smart alecs of the Labor Right have decided to look for a new outlet for their idiocy.
    Or perhaps there really is something in the AFR’s seemingly far-fetched claim that Labor wants to develop a Trump-like agenda.

    Neither. It would be a straight case of ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’. It’s also different in the lower house because it makes no difference to the control of government. And, finally, the Nationals (other than Adrian Piccoli) in NSW are worse than the Shooters and Fishers. When a right wing nutcase murdered an environmental officer in cold blood recently, the Nationals claimed it was because environmental laws were too strict – pretty much sanctioning the murder, Trump style.

  48. Shiftaling

    Proportional voting may be the better answer. Tasmania that I regard as the best though complicated and maximising politicians I do see as the most democratic.

    Tasmanians got the Government they wanted most of the time. The majority of that has been a major party mostly Labor. I like how voters get their say within the party about their local member and not the party machine as much as single member electorates.
    Along with the Robson Ballot of course.

  49. guytaur @ #264 Monday, November 14, 2016 at 12:30 pm

    Bob
    My fact I have presented my argument on is the LNP winning the majority of elections.
    That fact gives country voters more say than the majority in the cities. My guess as to solution was wrong but the fact of the problem I am talking about is correct

    Instead of guesses, why not try things like facts and reality?

  50. TPOF,
    I’ll accept “offensive” but draw the line at “git”.
    And only if you agree to occasional self-contradiction and mild hypocrisy.

Comments Page 3 of 12
1 2 3 4 … 12

Leave a Reply

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