Newspoll: 52-48 to Labor

The latest result from Newspoll lands slightly at the upper end of the government’s recent form.

Courtesy of The Australian, the latest result from Newspoll records Labor with a two-party lead of 52-48, down from 53-47 in the last poll (which was three weeks ago rather than the usual two, owing to Easter). Labor and the Greens are both down a point on the primary vote, to 35% and 9%, with the Coalition and One Nation steady on 36% and 10%. Malcolm Turnbull is up two on approval to 32% and down two on disapproval to 57%, while Bill Shorten is up one to 33% and down one to 53%. Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister shifts from 41-32 to 42-33.

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.

1,209 comments on “Newspoll: 52-48 to Labor”

Comments Page 3 of 25
1 2 3 4 … 25

  1. Many here seem to have forgotten what moe means. Today’s result means that there is 95% probability that there has been NO movement in the PV figue compared to 3 weeks ago. Making up reasons why there is a 1% change is the practice of charletans and conmen aka media commentators. Why do bludgers fall for it?

  2. Bemused

    I think people are talking the trend not the minutiae of a poll change. I agree with you one poll does not make a trend.

    The serious commentators all look at the trend. Bludgertrack has been slow to move in the downward trajectory but is the substantive measure to assess polls and individual poll results are only valid in indicating a change of a trend may be under way.

    As long as the individual poll comments are borne in mind as being about the influence on the trend line then its fair enough.

  3. voice endeavour @ #100 Monday, April 24, 2017 at 11:43 am

    @ Bemused – if you believe that.
    I will give you $9, and then flip 4 coins and for each that comes up heads, I’ll give you an extra $1.
    In return, you have to give me $10, then flip 4 coins and give me $1 per heads.
    Sounds fair? The numbers agree within MoE.

    Nonsense.

  4. And once again, Malcolm shows his political ineptitude…

    Having drawn the media’s attention to Abbott timing one of his pronouncements to coincide with Newspoll, Mal then makes announcements to coincide with Newspoll…

  5. it’s time @ #101 Monday, April 24, 2017 at 11:43 am

    Many here seem to have forgotten what moe means. Today’s result means that there is 95% probability that there has been NO movement in the PV figue compared to 3 weeks ago. Making up reasons why there is a 1% change is the practice of charletans and conmen aka media commentators. Why do bludgers fall for it?

    Most people don’t understand statistics.
    They feel more comfortable picking through chicken entrails.

  6. P1,

    A mixture of implicit assertion and overblown rhetoric just doesn’t cut it.

    Not once have you acknowledged that battery prices are falling steeply and will continue to do do for several more years at least.

    Unless you do so I’ll treat your pronouncements with the contempt they deserve.

  7. victoria:

    Yes this whole thing has the appearance of a series of spot fires, only not joining up to become the raging wildfire that is always hinted at with Trump and his cronies. Something has to give.

  8. http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/greens-in-bid-to-stymie-malcolm-turnbulls-visa-changes-20170423-gvqkir.html

    Of concern to the government is that lower skilled 457 visa-holders have tended to become a net drain on the budget at the end of their visa period due to Medicare and family welfare entitlements.

    Fairfax Media understands Labor is likely to back an inquiry.

    Ms Hanson Young said the visa crack-down represented knee-jerk politics by a government terrified by the political challenge from Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party.

    “We should be able to improve our foreign worker visa programs, including 457s, without braying ‘Australia First’ and waving the nationalistic flag of isolationism,” she said.

  9. @ It’s time – that is not how MoE works.

    Bemused – you are misinterpreting it as well.

    A 52 result with a MoE of 2, indicates that the result is approximately a normal distribution, being within the range of 50-54% 95% of the time. The 53+/- 2 is between 51-55% 95% of the time.

    Lets simplyfy the normal distribution for the 52 result to
    (Chance of result, result)
    2.5% – 49
    8 – 50
    22 – 51
    35 – 52
    22 – 53
    8% -54
    2.5% 55

    With the distribution being the same for the 53% result, but with each result simply being one higher.

    This then leads to, in my Excel simulation, 61% chance that the result is higher in a 53% (MOE2) result than in a 52% with the same MoE. a 20% chance the results were the same and a 19% chance of the results being lower.

    Formulae, for if you want to repeat it yourself.

    A1- c8 are hardcoded numbers

    0 0
    2.5 2.5 49
    8 10.5 50
    22 32.5 51
    35 67.5 52
    22 89.5 53
    8 97.5 54
    2.5 100 55

  10. Did Donald Trump Commission Russia’s Hack of the US Election Himself?

    Sources linked to the intelligence community say that Donald Trump accepted laundered Russian money which, through shell companies, supported Russian hackers as they attacked America – and then supported Wikileaks and Julian Assange as he published the results of those hacks.

    Donald Trump’s link to the hack on the US election appears to be far more direct than anybody thought – with Russian money, washed into his campaign, paying for Russian hackers who attacked both state voter registration databases and the DNC. Trump also appears to have had direct personal knowledge of the propaganda botnet used by Russia.

    https://patribotics.blog/2017/04/23/did-donald-trump-commission-russias-hack-of-the-us-election-himself/

  12. Another little chasm in VicLib?

    The president of the Victorian Liberal party, Michael Kroger, has failed to give unqualified endorsement to the revenue minister, Kelly O’Dwyer, keeping her seat, saying he doesn’t comment on party preselections.

    Asked on Sky News on Monday whether he was prepared to warn off potential challengers to O’Dwyer, who is now on maternity leave, Kroger declined to do so.

    The Victorian party president said he did not comment on preselections. “That’s a matter for branch members.”
    …
    Last month Kroger was challenged for the party presidency by Peter Reith, who ultimately withdrew owing to illness. During the bitter factional dogfight triggered by the contest, O’Dwyer made it clear she was supporting Reith.

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/apr/24/liberal-boss-declines-to-warn-off-challengers-to-kelly-odwyer

  13. @ It’s time – that is not how MoE works.

    Bemused – you are misinterpreting it as well.

    A 52 result with a MoE of 2, indicates that the result is approximately a normal distribution, being within the range of 50-54% 95% of the time. The 53+/- 2 is between 51-55% 95% of the time.

    Lets simplyfy the normal distribution for the 52 result to
    (Chance of result, result)
    2.5% – 49
    8 – 50
    22 – 51
    35 – 52
    22 – 53
    8% -54
    2.5% 55

    With the distribution being the same for the 53% result, but with each result simply being one higher. This is of course, not a ‘normal distribution’, as a MoE refers to it as. But it is a simpler way to demonstrate my point.

    This then leads to, in my Excel simulation, 61% chance that the result is higher in a 53% (MOE2) result than in a 52% with the same MoE. a 20% chance the results were the same and a 19% chance of the results being lower.

    Formulae, for if you want to repeat it yourself.

    A1- c8 are hardcoded numbers

    0 0
    2.5 2.5 49
    8 10.5 50
    22 32.5 51
    35 67.5 52
    22 89.5 53
    8 97.5 54
    2.5 100 55
    Column D has several thousand rows, each with the forumula
    =RANDBETWEEN(0,100)
    Enter cell E1 as the below, then drag down.
    =INDEX($C$2:$C$8,MATCH(D1,$B$1:$B$7,1))
    Colum F is =RANDBETWEEN(0,100)
    Colum G is =INDEX($C$2:$C$8,MATCH(F1,$B$1:$B$7,1))+1
    Column H is =G3-E3

    Then elsewhere we have

    =COUNTIF(H:H,”>0″)
    =COUNTIF(H:H,”=0″)
    =COUNTIF(H:H,”<0")

    and then convert those into % using
    =K3/SUM($K$3:$K$5)
    =K4/SUM($K$3:$K$5)
    =K5/SUM($K$3:$K$5)

    So, the conclusion is not 'there is a 95% chance that the number is the same'. It is much closer to a 20% chance Coalition 2PP went up this week, a 20% chance it stayed constant, and a 60% chance it went down. As mentioned before, those numbers would change slightly if you applied a normal distribution. That exercise is left to the reader, as I now have things to do.

  14. Aargh, and of course I make a typo right near the end.

    So, the conclusion is not ‘there is a 95% chance that the number is the same’. It is much closer to a 20% chance Coalition 2PP went DOWN this week, a 20% chance it stayed constant, and a 60% chance it went UP. As mentioned before, those numbers would change slightly if you applied a normal distribution. That exercise is left to the reader, as I now have things to do.

  16. Vic:

    The trouble is that it could take years for all to be revealed, years we don’t have if the chaos and dysfunction of Trump’s first 100 days is going to keep carrying on. Something truly disastrous like WW3 could eventuate before all these inquiries and investigations conclude and Republicans get themselves together enough to impeach Trump.

  18. voice endeavour @ #109 Monday, April 24, 2017 at 12:01 pm

    @ It’s time – that is not how MoE works.
    Bemused – you are misinterpreting it as well.
    A 52 result with a MoE of 2, indicates that the result is approximately a normal distribution, being within the range of 50-54% 95% of the time. The 53+/- 2 is between 51-55% 95% of the time.
    Lets simplyfy the normal distribution for the 52 result to
    (Chance of result, result)
    2.5% – 49
    8 – 50
    22 – 51
    35 – 52
    22 – 53
    8% -54
    2.5% 55
    With the distribution being the same for the 53% result, but with each result simply being one higher.
    This then leads to, in my Excel simulation, 61% chance that the result is higher in a 53% (MOE2) result than in a 52% with the same MoE. a 20% chance the results were the same and a 19% chance of the results being lower.
    Formulae, for if you want to repeat it yourself.
    A1- c8 are hardcoded numbers
    0 0
    2.5 2.5 49
    8 10.5 50
    22 32.5 51
    35 67.5 52
    22 89.5 53
    8 97.5 54
    2.5 100 55

    Over analysis.

  19. @ Bemused – you just said

    “Most people don’t understand statistics.
    They feel more comfortable picking through chicken entrails.”

    Then I provide you with an explanation of how the statistics work, and you complain that it it “over analysis”.

    Would you prefer if I picked through chicken entrails instead of using stats? Maybe I’ll pop down to the pub and ask for people’s opinions of whether 52+/-2 is equal to 53+/-2

  21. fess

    I was hoping all along that it could have been all done and dusted by now. it shouldnt take years. i am expecting that Trump will take the option of resigning first. we shall see how this all plays out

  24. this morning I was on previous thread and noticed the discussion about Assange.

    I will stick with my view that I have had about Assange for years is that he is not a friend of the socially progressive. he is a disgusting piece of crap and has done so much damage. cant wait to see the back of him

  25. voice endeavour @ #119 Monday, April 24, 2017 at 12:33 pm

    @ Bemused – you just said
    “Most people don’t understand statistics.
    They feel more comfortable picking through chicken entrails.”
    Then I provide you with an explanation of how the statistics work, and you complain that it it “over analysis”.
    Would you prefer if I picked through chicken entrails instead of using stats? Maybe I’ll pop down to the pub and ask for people’s opinions of whether 52+/-2 is equal to 53+/-2

    I am not going to hyperventilate about a shift that may be as little as 0.1% considering we only see whole numbers.
    The population value may not have shifted in your example, but the values from 2 different samples are different. But not big enough to get excited about and suggest the population value has definitely shifted.

  29. @ Bemused – I was primarily responding to “Today’s result means that there is 95% probability that there has been NO movement in the PV figue compared to 3 weeks ago. “, which is factually incorrect.

    I also added your name in there due to a combination of you seeming to support it’s time’s post, your dismissal as ‘nonsense’ of my preference for 10-14 dollars over 9-13 dollars, and your description of the change in Newspoll as ‘meaningless’, although I recognise that may have not been intended literally, but a punchier way of saying “has a lot less meaning that some people are implying”

  30. How about “has no conclusive meaning”. Any one-off shift of 1% could be due to literally anything. The trend needs to be sustained across multiple polls or of a magnitude that exceeds the margin of error before people can start treating it as significant and attributing it to this, that or the other.

  32. voice endeavour @ #129 Monday, April 24, 2017 at 1:11 pm

    @ Bemused – I was primarily responding to “Today’s result means that there is 95% probability that there has been NO movement in the PV figue compared to 3 weeks ago. “, which is factually incorrect.
    I also added your name in there due to a combination of you seeming to support it’s time’s post, your dismissal as ‘nonsense’ of my preference for 10-14 dollars over 9-13 dollars, and your description of the change in Newspoll as ‘meaningless’, although I recognise that may have not been intended literally, but a punchier way of saying “has a lot less meaning that some people are implying”

    My knowledge of statistics has faded since I studied it several decades ago but I still remember some core lessons.
    One is not to read too much into things which are based on samples. They can only ever provide an estimate of the true value for the population. Hence where 2 different samples produce results that vary slightly, one should not rush to interpret this as having much meaning.

  33. This is getting so boring ….
    “Story about me re-entering the ring is fake news. Utter rubbish. Media should be ashamed of themselves,” Mr Abbott tweeted on Sunday.

    Liberals ( Abbott & Dutton etal ) don’t believe in…
    Facts
    Alternative facts
    Just in bullshit

  34. A 2PP result of 52% in a well conducted poll of about 2,000 respondents means that there is about a 95% chance that the value is between 50 and 54. There’s about a 2/3 chance that it’s between 51 and 53, about 1/6 that it’s above 53, 1/6 that it’s below 51.

    So a shift from 53 to 52 from one poll to the next doesn’t mean anything.

    The same broadly applies to preferred PM, approval/disapproval and major party primaries (where values are in the range of about 30-70). The numbers are a bit tighter for smaller numbers (e.g minor party primaries).

  36. “Hence where 2 different samples produce results that vary slightly, one should not rush to interpret this as having much meaning.”

    I got no problems with that as a statement.

    On a (actually somewhat) related topic.

    Weird to see how radically different UK polls are from each other, when Australian polls are so consistent. Within 2-3 days, polls have had the conservatives on anywhere from 40-50%.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_general_election,_2017

  37. i had mentioned this a few weeks ago. someone else who is thinking the same as me. lol!

    3 replies 80 retweets 194 likes
    Reply 3 Retweet 80
    Like 194
    Louise Mensch Retweeted
    LardOfDorkness‏ @LardFDorkness 44m44 minutes ago
    More
    Replying to @LardFDorkness @CorbieCrow @LouiseMensch
    And Clapper & Comey also visited Australia in March 2016 to view more evidence. Don’t f@@k with the #FVEY

  38. victoria Monday, April 24, 2017 at 12:36 pm

    phoenixRED

    Mensch’s latest is a doozy. Have you noticed the ramping up of those calling her out to be crazy etc?

    *********************************************
    I guess, Victoria, there can only be one of two possibilities – she is either absolutely crazy – or she is getting fed or seeing information that no-one else can keep up with – including the FBI …

    This :

    Louise Mensch Has A List Of Suspected Russian Agents

    Just since Inauguration Day, according to an extensive review of her tweets, the New York–based Mensch has accused at least 210 people and organizations of being under Russian government influence.

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/menschs-list?utm_term=.pf3GaPQBQK#.awzn3GmQmN

  39. bemused

    My grandfather was a pacifist and a Methodist Minister during WWII. His pacifism was considered so appalling that he ended up in Murtoa, which at the time had a very high German population (who didn’t find someone saying we shouldn’t be fighting at all to be too objectionable…)

    My mother remembers girls at her school giving the Hitler salute in the toilets. Ironically, though, the school also raised a record amount for the war effort!

  40. phoenixRed

    agreed! so far John Schindler, Rick Wilson and Claude Taylor are sticking with her all the way and so am I. Only aspect I am differing on with her and others at this moment is Carter Page. Call me crazy, but every time I see him interviewed of late, I get the strong vibe that he is playing a role. tres weird. hence my feeling at present that he is an asset for the US intell. i guess time will tell if I am way off. Lol!

  43. victoria Monday, April 24, 2017 at 1:48 pm

    phoenixRed

    agreed! so far John Schindler, Rick Wilson and Claude Taylor are sticking with her all the way and so am I.

    ***************************************************
    She certainly has been right so far and ahead of anyone else. I feel she has many Intel sources in or out of MI6 and its associated network of past and present operatives ….. I think they would like to have one up on the Americans ….

  44. phoenixRed

    they certainly would. in any case, the UK have a vested in the geopolitical situation not becoming further imbalanced in their neck of the world. Hence why I believe they are heavily invested in this imbroglio.

  46. “Would you prefer if I picked through chicken entrails instead of using stats? Maybe I’ll pop down to the pub and ask for people’s opinions of whether 52+/-2 is equal to 53+/-2”

    The question to ask at the pub is: “Is 53 a significantly different value to 52+/- 2?”
    The null hypothesis is that the current mean has not changed from the previous estimate of 52. 53 is within a 95% confidence interval that there has been no change.

  47. and speaking of the creep Assange………

    John Schindler‏Verified account @20committee 14h14 hours ago
    More
    Putin’s WikiLeaks+Snowdenwald show was all good fun until they enabled the election of Trump.

    Now payback is coming and it won’t be pretty.
    89 replies 696 retweets 2,006 likes
    Reply 89 Retweet 696
    Like 2.0K

  49. @ It’s time, please stop with this 95% thing, it doesn’t mean what you think it means.

    It means that, 3 weeks ago, there was a 95% chance that the result was somewhere in the range of 51-55. Now, there is a 95% chance that the result is in the range 50-54. That does not mean there is a 95% chance that the result now is no lower than it was 3 weeks ago. As I demonstrated, there is roughly a 60% chance it is lower, a 20% chance it is the same, and a 20% chance it is higher.

  50. Thanks for posting the update on Higgins Lizzie.
    I was just about to post the theory that it wasn’t a real challenge at all, just a warning shot to the government as they are preparing the budget. The wealthy backers are livid about the super changes. And so want to send a message to Turnbull and Morrison to not even consider any further revenue measures that hit the wealthy.

    On a similar theme I remember an article by a Chris Kenny writing on the 2014 budget straight from the lockup, saying it was excellent, the only flaw was the high income budget repair levy.
    These people really, really, hate paying taxes, which is one reason why they are so fixated on company tax cuts, so they can incorporate (if not already) and further avoid income tax.

Comments Page 3 of 25
1 2 3 4 … 25

Leave a Reply

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