ReachTEL: 52-48 to Labor

Little change on voting intention in a ReachTEL poll that also covers Section 44, the burqa, drug testing of welfare recipients, and likelihood of participation in the same-sex marriage survey.

Sky News reports its latest monthly ReachTEL poll has Labor with a 52-48 lead on respondent-allocated preferences, up from 51-49 a month ago. The primary votes provided do not exclude the undecided, the number of which isn’t specified, but the numbers we have to work with for now are Coalition 32% (down one), Labor 34% (steady), Greens 9% (up one) and One Nation 10% (down one). There will have been a further forced response question for the undecided, but the numbers for this have been a bit elusive lately – I will hopefully be able to get hold of them tomorrow, which will then allow me to report definitive primary votes excluding the undecided, and also a two-party preferred result based on previous election preferences, which will be stronger for Labor than the headline result. The poll also records Malcolm Turnbull with a slender 52-48 lead over Bill Shorten as preferred prime minister.

Among the other questions posed were likelihood of participation in the same-sex marriage plebiscite-survey, which recorded results of 79% likely, 10% somewhat likely, 4% somewhat unlikely and 7% very unlikely, with the oldest cohort apparently the least likely to participate. Contrary to YouGov, the poll did not find strong support for those embroiled in the Section 44 saga standing down, with 39% saying they should and 50% saying they should not. A question on whether the burqa should be banned found 44% strong support, 13% support, 12% opposition and 19% strong opposition. For drug testing of welfare recipients, the results were 53% strong support, 15% support, 9% opposition and 11% strong opposition.

The poll was conducted yesterday, presumably from a sample of around 2300 (UPDATE: Make that 2832).

UPDATE: As related by GhostWhoVotes, the primary votes after exclusion of the undecided are Coalition 34.5% (down 2.7%), Labor 36.7% (up 1.6%), Greens 10.3% (up 1.5%) and One Nation 10.4% (down 1.3%). That would actually transfer into a blowout Labor lead of 54.5-45.5, based on 2016 preference flows. However, taken together with the YouGov results noted in the previous post, it does seem respondent-allocated preferences are proving considerably more favourable to the Coalition. This may suggest that a 50-50 split of One Nation preferences, as per the 2016 election, is unduly flattering to Labor, as most of the support One Nation has gained since the election has come from former Coalition voters.

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.

699 comments on “ReachTEL: 52-48 to Labor”

  1. The KATICH says it’s clear that in 2009 Malcolm Turnbull tried to bring down a sitting PM using forged documents, and he should now prove that he is not a complete and utter incompetent scumbag.

  2. Bemused
    “Simple fact: You get the votes, you win the seats.”

    It’s a fact, but not so simple. It’s not much good if the votes bolster Labor in its safest seats, or cut the margins in blue-ribbon Lib seats. Beazley got more votes than Howard in 1998 (2PP), but too many votes landed in the wrong seats.

  3. citizen

    

    Turnbull still attacking Shorten – does the man ever do what he was elected to do?

    “‘Produce citizenship evidence’
    JOE KELLY
    The PM says it’s clear Bill Shorten inherited UK citizenship, and he should prove that he has renounced it.”

    ——————-
    I though Turnbull said that he was sure the HC would find that inherited citizenship did not disqualify an MP. So by his own reasoning Shorten shouldn’t have to renounce let alone show documentation that he has renounced that citizenship..

  4. I agree kevjonno, Shorten could helpfully assist the HC and say he interpreted the constitution to include inherited citizenship and so he renounced it.

  5. kakuru @ #503 Friday, August 25th, 2017 – 4:25 pm

    Bemused
    “Simple fact: You get the votes, you win the seats.”

    It’s a fact, but not so simple. It’s not much good if the votes bolster Labor in its safest seats, or cut the margins in blue-ribbon Lib seats. Beazley got more votes than Howard in 1998 (2PP), but too many votes landed in the wrong seats.

    Sorry, it is a fact.
    The distributional issue is secondary and easily swamped by a strong result. Just like the ‘sophomore effect’.

    It is also irrefutable that the number of seats you have to win means zilch, zero, zip, nada, if you get the votes. e.g. WA State Election.

  6. I strongly expect that the High Court will rule that Citizenship by immediate decent from someone born in the country the foreign citizenship is from is a disqualification. Most countries, including Australia, have provision for citizenship by decent. In some countries it is automatic and in some (such as Australia) it is by application. In many countries citizenship by decent, rather than by birth, is the main form of obtaining citizenship. This attitude that citizenship by decent is some aberrant strange foreign obscure thing in only a handful of foreign countries and thus will not be counted for the purposes of 44i by the High Court is ridiculous.

    Citizenship decent where your parent was not born in the country where you get citizenship is less common but it is not unheard of and the High Court is not unlikely to rule it still counts for section 44i.

  7. I cant wait to watch that episode of The House. My two favourite people, Annabel and Anthony, chewing the cud… reminiscing. I am going all warm and fuzzy and yellow just thinking about it.

    It will be up there with the time Annabel went to Mal and Lucys little house in the country for dinner. Please, someone pinch me.

  8. Simon Katich @ #521 Friday, August 25th, 2017 – 5:06 pm

    I cant wait to watch that episode of The House. My two favourite people, Annabel and Anthony, chewing the cud… reminiscing. I am going all warm and fuzzy and yellow just thinking about it.

    It will be up there with the time Annabel went to Mal and Lucys little house in the country for dinner. Please, someone pinch me.

    all jolly hockey sticks what

  9. When I was a lad, to “bork” (WAFL) was to stand on the mark and attempt to upset a kicker for goal by making ridiculous movements.

  10. Simon Katich @ #521 Friday, August 25th, 2017 – 5:06 pm

    I cant wait to watch that episode of The House. My two favourite people, Annabel and Anthony, chewing the cud… reminiscing. I am going all warm and fuzzy and yellow just thinking about it.

    It will be up there with the time Annabel went to Mal and Lucys little house in the country for dinner. Please, someone pinch me.

    Annabel – what a perfect name for the person who inhabits it.

    I can’t wait neiver. As satire it rivals Mad as Hell.

  11. Glad to see Kiwis have a sense of humour.

    There has been a surge of support for Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister to be named the New Zealand’s best Kiwi, with Mr Joyce receiving the second-most nominations for the prestigious award – after nominations opened in July.

    Barnaby Joyce, who earlier this month revealed he was a dual Australia-New Zealand citizen by descent, has received 62 nominations for the award.

    He trails behind New Zealand’s former Greens Co-Leader Metiria Turei, who has received 209 nominations.

  12. Oh dear!

    nzherald @nzherald
    ·
    2h
    An Aussie politician has been named among the frontrunners for the 2018 New Zealander of the Year Awards

  13. Will Margie be at home with Tony and Annabelle, or has she returned home to her native New Zealand now that Kiwi’s are persona non grata in Australian political circles?

    Which raises another question, has Tony acquired NZ citizenship by marriage?

    These are questions which must be resolved immediately in the interests of political stability.

  14. Kevin Bonham
    Respondent-allocated preferences are volatile like this because the number of respondents giving preferences in each poll is small.

    Yes, and no doubt part of the reason you and WB prefer last election prefs.

    In WA the L-NP managed 60% of PHON prefs. That came after the Trump boost that bumped PHON to about 10%. Newspoll does show a dip in L-NP support about the time, but then we have the preference deal as well. So it’s hard to know which delivered the rise in prefs.

    IF PHON are polling 10% AND there is another deal at the federal poll perhaps we can assume a 0.606 flow of PHON to L-NP? OR perhaps a scale that assumes the higher their vote the more their prefs will lean L-NP from 0.505 to 0,606?

    The problem with that is the PHON vote is probably overestimated anyway.

    The 0.505 flow from the last election is as good as anything.

  15. Kevin Bonham
    Those expecting enormous Labor wins at the next election should keep in mind that in 2007 Labor led by 55-45 or more (at times over 60-40) continually for most of the election year and still only won 83 seats.

    Yes, we all miss Morgan 😥

  16. Question @ #536 Friday, August 25th, 2017 – 5:29 pm

    IF PHON are polling 10% AND there is another deal at the federal poll perhaps we can assume a 0.606 flow of PHON to L-NP?

    I’d think not because presumably the announcement of a Federal preference deal would have a follow-through effect on polling that would likely see the Coalition primaries drop a bit (and not because of more people voting for PHON). Kind of like what happened in the WA election.

  17. a r,

    Yes the pref deal cost both parties, but you would expect the polls to show that. The PHON pref flows at the WA election were 60%.

  18. There’s a humungous hurricane bearing down on the coast of Texas currently. I wonder whether Trump might cancel golf this weekend

Comments are closed.