The final week of the New South Wales campaign has been marked by a turn in the media narrative, with a barrage of negative headlines for Michael Daley dispelling an earlier consensus that “momentum” rested with Labor. This morning’s reports mostly relate to stumbles over education policy during the Sky News leaders forum in Penrith last night, which ended with 50 of the assembled “undecided voters” (one of whom turns out to have been an Australian Conservatives election candidate) rating themselves more likely to vote Coalition, compared with 25 for Labor and 25 uncommitted.
However, the main headline spinner over the past few days has been the emergence of video of Daley addressing a forum in the Blue Mountains last September, in which he expressed concern about the impact of Asian immigration on the employment and housing markets. To identify where this is most likely to cause Labor trouble, the table below shows the top ten electorates for Chinese ancestry, as identified in the 2016 census. The only seat here that might be described as a Labor target is Oatley, although it has not much featured in discussion of seats that are likely to fall its way. However, Labor appears to have been thrown on the defensive in Kogarah, held by widely touted leadership prospect Chris Minns, and Strathfield, which Jodi McKay narrowly succeeded in gaining for Labor in 2015.
| Chinese ancestry | Margin | |
|---|---|---|
| Kogarah | 32.8% | Labor 6.9% |
| Ryde | 28.2% | Liberal 11.5% |
| Epping | 26.4% | Liberal 16.2% |
| Strathfield | 25.8% | Labor 1.8% |
| Heffron | 22.6% | Labor 14.1% |
| Auburn | 20.6% | Labor 5.9% |
| Willoughby | 20.2% | Liberal 23.8% |
| Parramatta | 19.3% | Liberal 12.9% |
| Oatley | 19.2% | Liberal 6.6% |
| Baulkham Hills | 18.3% | Liberal 21.8% |
Minns took to Chinese social media forum WeChat on Tuesday to distance himself from Daley’s comments, as the Liberals turned the screws by spruiking internal polling with his primary vote at 32.4%, dangerously down on the 45.4% he recorded in 2015. Multiple reports have said the poll showed a 7% swing away from Labor, although there is some confusion as to whether this is from the base of the 2015 election result, in which case the seat would go down to the wire, or if it reflects the immediate effect of the story breaking. The polling is said to have been conducted on Tuesday evening from a sample of 400, with a margin of error of 5%. The Liberals have followed this today by telling the Daily Telegraph that further polling shows it with a primary vote lead of 42.6% to 34.3% in Strathfield.
Not all the party polling chatter over the past 24 hours has been bad for Labor: a Liberal source acknowledged to the Daily Telegraph yesterday that the party still did not expect to win Kogarah; Nine News reported last night that the furore had had no impact in “marginal seats Mr Daley needs to win”; and Seven News reported the Coalition had “grown more worried about the seat of Goulburn following a steady decline in polling numbers”. Andrew Clennell of The Australian today offers that the Liberals could be looking at four losses on top of five for the Nationals, sufficient to cost the government its majority. However, the ship is said to have been steadied in Heathcote, which the Liberals have targeted with intensive campaigning after being spooked by the results of polling conducted last week.
Before the turn in the media mood had fully unfolded, I took part in a podcast with Ben Raue of The Tally Room on Monday, together with social researcher Rebecca Huntley, which you can hear below.
It feels like there are two separate elections here, one in Sydney and another in the rest of NSW. Even in Sydney, it sounds like the LNP risks are on the fringes (Penrith, Heathcote) rather than the core of the city. A regression of swing versus distance from the Sydney CBD after the election would be interesting! I can’t see any chance at all of an ALP majority government, and it still seems quite possible the LNP will survive with a narrow majority. It’s going to be absolutely crucial for the ALP to take Coogee and East Hills and have zero losses in Sydney, if they don’t achieve that it’s all over.
Once again a thorough review and update of pre-election goings 0n William. Listened to your podcast yesterday with keen interest. The election junkies of Australia salute you.
As you noted, the Daley stumble at the last hurdle of the debate last night was, lets be frank, pretty woeful despite my choice to ignore the 50/25/25 pro Gladys peoples choice award. Your lament about people directing comments at other folks instead of debating the issues will go unheeded after Daley had a brain freeze (says the worst-in-show man) but it won’t come from me. Daley had a stumble, most humans do.
Michael Daley’s debate stumbles and controversial take on immigration give the Liberals an opening,
—————————————
I am surprise those who follow the media claim Labor makes stumbles to give the Liberal an opening , still are not awake to this is likely a Labor’s tactic that these stumbles are political deliberate to keep the focus on the federal Libs/nats and state libs/nats hypocrisy .
Annastacia Palaszczuk did it when she was opposition leader against Newman , Annastacia Palaszczuk made a stumble on the GST , the media and LNP went into a frenzy only days before the election thought Labor lost the election , in fact what it did reminded voters that the Libs/nats brought the GST in.
Andrews did it in Victoria stumbled on a federal issue the media went into a frenzy days before the election all it did was reminded people that the federal Libs/nats and the state libs/nats were the one who introduce the issue which people did not want
Interesting thought Scott, if you look at Daley’s ‘stumbles’ last night:
– education funding, how much is NSW contributing to Gonski?
– TAFE costing, how much is it?
– stadium refurbishment, how much is it?
Each of these needs to be ‘clarified’ made the topic of conversation eg the front page of the SMH today. And each and every doorstop, interview, social media ad will need to ‘clarify’ these ‘stumbles’
Thanks for this,William.
Labor should never again participate in SkyNews hosted debates. They can’t be trusted.
Stacking the audience is little different from releasing private polling which ‘proves’ Labor is losing support in a seat. This then becomes “news”.
Seriously?
As for Labor losing this week’s narrative because of that video…..
No.
Every time I saw a report with the context (that it was part of a cost of living in Sydney discussion), comments (if they were allowed) reflected understanding.
Problem is Costello’s SMH, Murdoch’s rags, and the TV stations have run the reports context free. Manipulation much?
I hope Shorten introduces truth in media legislation, calls Murdoch’s media “associated entities” and runs him out of the country.
Scott,
Daley isn’t that Machiavellian, or that smart. He stuffed up, it’s ok to admit it. No one knows the extent, if any, of the damage it will have on Labor’s chances. These single seat polls are notoriously scatter-gun.
so the debate
50 for the libs/nats 25 for Labor and 25 could be 50/50 to libs/nats ,Labor or other parties /Ind
that is not convincing for the pro coalition media or libs/nats
sprocket_ @ #2 Thursday, March 21st, 2019 – 6:56 am
—
Hey Sprocket did you notice the clothing colour match last night – Labor strategists must have decided it was better to run a Daley v Gladys subliminal message instead of Red v Blue. I bet he had a few jackets in the car waiting to see what she was wearing. I hope the SMH gets read outside Sydney.
Burgey says:
Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 7:06 am
Scott,
Daley isn’t that Machiavellian, or that smart. He stuffed up, it’s ok to admit it. No one knows the extent, if any, of the damage it will have on Labor’s chances. These single seat polls are notoriously scatter-gun.
————
Those who went to the debate no one knows if they already voted , or whether they were paid to be at the debate .
looking at the result , if Daley was as bad as you think
50/25/25 after all the so so called stuff ups , is not that good for the pro coalition media or libs/nats
50/50
Scott, I’m not disagreeing with any of that, but as I understand it his performance was cod ordinary. When you have a leaders’ debate and catch up with it afterwards on Twitter and there are no ALP supporters trumpeting Daley’s triumph, you know it was a bad effort. And I say that as one of the usual trumpeters.
Interesting the SMH has dropped that report on the stadium. Keeps it front and centre as an issue, which can only be a good thing for Labor.
Daley did screw up in the debate. Partly i blame whoever (failed to) prepare him adequately. He must just plough on with the themes and prinicples that got him in a winning position. Voters like him for his sincerity and values. Stick to that. He never claimed to be an economic genius. Neither is Gladys.
The NSW state election is genius-free.
What needs to be remembered is that 25-30% of votes have already been cast – which will muffle the impact of any of this weeks events on the final result
The current NSW election reminds me a bit of 1999 Victorian State election. In that election the swings to Labor outside Melbourne were pretty big, in Melbourne the swing to Labor was very little.
Daley is too smart to have forgotten those numbers given they were his three biggest policies. If it was strategic (and for his sake I hope it was), it could just be a master stroke. He has just completely realigned the media narrative away from the Chinese and back onto Stadiums and Tafe. He can push those points as they are front and centre and ignore the whole debacle that the last week had been for Labor
Public stumbles and bumbles as strategy. That’s new to me.
I remember that the media, including the Guardian, were pushing that Guy was a chance two days out from the Victorian election, ignoring polls and feedback on the ground. The poll day results never supported the media narrative. NSW might be similar, although I don’t expect Andrews’ 57%+ for Daley.
Sounds like Strathfield is likely to come down to the wire is there’s a swing against Labor on in Kogarah.
@Sohar
I followed the Victorian election closely and I seriously believed that the racist dog-whistling that the Coalition engaged in, was a one of factors I argue was behind the big loss. It was notable at the biggest swings happened to Labor in electorates with high percentages of people who aren’t of a European Background.
JJ says:
Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 8:43 am
“Sounds like Strathfield is likely to come down to the wire is there’s a swing against Labor on in Kogarah.”
Based on what, exactly?
Conor says:
Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 8:25 am
“Daley is too smart to have forgotten those numbers given they were his three biggest policies. If it was strategic (and for his sake I hope it was), it could just be a master stroke. He has just completely realigned the media narrative away from the Chinese and back onto Stadiums and Tafe. He can push those points as they are front and centre and ignore the whole debacle that the last week had been for Labor”
Well, intended or not, that appears to be the outcome.
Crikey, Guardian and SMH are all leading with “the Labor leader stumbled on the costing of some of his policies.” (or wtte ).
They are like dogs with a bone, who are just thrown a fresher, juicier, bone.
So predictable.
https://www.smh.com.au/nsw-election-2019/stadium-could-have-been-refurbished-for-18-million-secret-report-shows-20190320-p515xo.html
From the no shit Sherlock files. I posted here a few days ago that any halfway competent multi disciplinary engineering firm could come up with a plan to upgrade to code for well under $100m. And it seems that’s exactly what happened a couple of years ago.
Vanity project is precisely the correct term.
Steve777 @ #17 Thursday, March 21st, 2019 – 8:32 am
—
He messed up. The end. I doubt it will make much difference anyway Steve.
Steve777 @ #13 Thursday, March 21st, 2019 – 8:11 am
—
**applauds**
The NSW state election is genius-free.
Correct weight.
I do think there’s a lot of hoo ha at the moment that is exciting the excitable but won’t register with the vast majority.
The biggest issues coming into the election were the Federal government, infrastructure issues such as the light rail problems and stadiums, an 8 year old government on its third and least popular leader looking for another 4 years, balanced by the remnant memories of the last Labor government.
I doubt much has happened to change that underlying reality.
Sounds like Daley has done one of those classic Labor last minute swan dives into oblivion.
Opposition Leader Michael Daley blamed Wednesday night’s televised stumbles over his signature election policies on the “pressure of debate”.
If the kitchen is too hot … get out.
Daley should take a cruise.. now.. before he does irreparable damage.
Shambolic!
Ben Raue: NSW 2019 – will we see “Just Vote 1” on Saturday?
http://www.tallyroom.com.au/38022
In this post I will run through the history of this campaigning and how it might play out in NSW.
I think the Chinese debacle will have the opposite effect everyone thinks. In my mind people who strongly identify as Chinese are more likely to be voting Liberal already, so there aren’t so many votes to lose there. However there has been a lot of racist sentiment against the Chinese in the last year or so, and a lot of those people might agree with his comments, especially in the electorates with a large Chinese community.
Is Daley really the best NSW Labor have to offer ?… It’s reminding me of the year I voted for Latham in federal election.. I’m still having nightmares over it.
Sceptic @ #28 Thursday, March 21st, 2019 – 9:38 am
Glad that your concentrating on things that matter, not like the cronyism, lying, mismanagement of the environment, and deliberate destruction of public assets that have been the hallmark of this putrid government.
Alex Greenwich – Sydney (58.1% v Lib 41.9%) – is getting a bit worried.
I can only hope Scott Morrison will say something truly woeful today or tomorrow.
Voters aren’t that good an separating state and federal issues.
A state opposition leader fails to recall a few rubbery figures in a debate and a state premier is prepared to ensure contracts worth rubbery billions to build stadiums goes ahead.
The pro LNP press is in full misinformation mode and some gullibles are jumping in headfirst.
The beat up about the Chinese community is hypocrisy being displayed by the MSM to rein in NSW Labor’s momentum but alas the LNP’s neo-liberal agenda has been stripped bare.
A change will occur. The question is how big a change.
Tristo
says:
Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 8:44 am
@Sohar
I followed the Victorian election closely and I seriously believed that the racist dog-whistling that the Coalition engaged in, was a one of factors I argue was behind the big loss. It was notable at the biggest swings happened to Labor in electorates with high percentages of people who aren’t of a European Background.
_______________________________
Could Daley’s comments on the Chinese negatively effect the ALP’s attempt to take back the Greens inner city seats? They may not have massive amounts of people from a Chinese background but might have lots of people who wouldn’t be impressed by the comments.
William, the Chinese and other immigrants are pragmatic people, not very easy to swing on the ground of silly media manipulation. They already know what’s on offer with the Libs/Nats, if they are unhappy and want what the ALP is offering, nothing will stop them from voting ALP1….. Nothing!
“He never claimed to be an economic genius. Neither is Gladys.”….
What really matters at this NSW election is that Gladys and the Coalition are offering the same Neoliberal crap as usual, for a third term!… Daley and the ALP are offering an economic Social Democratic program.
BIG difference!
“Could Daley’s comments on the Chinese negatively effect the ALP’s attempt to take back the Greens inner city seats?”… Unfortunately the NSW Greens are engaged in an ideological and personal Civil War, same with the Libs/Nats… The ALP isn’t!… BIG Advantage for the ALP.
“I can only hope Scott Morrison will say something truly woeful today or tomorrow.”… He better shuts up, because if he speaks too much and too loudly this is what’s coming his way:
The Waleed Ali saga….
ScaMo, tell the truth (for once). This is what you said, according to senior sources within the Liberal party about using anti-Muslim sentiments for electoral purposes:
From: Lenore Taylor, 17 February 2011, “Morrison sees votes in anti-Muslim strategy”, The Sydney Morning Herald.
“THE opposition immigration spokesman, Scott Morrison, urged the shadow cabinet to capitalise on the electorate’s growing concerns about “Muslim immigration”, “Muslims in Australia” and the “inability” of Muslim migrants to integrate.
Mr Morrison’s suggestion was made at a meeting in December at which shadow ministers were asked to bring three ideas for issues on which the Coalition should concentrate its political attack during this parliamentary term.
The Herald has learnt several colleagues, including the deputy leader, Julie Bishop, and the former immigration minister Philip Ruddock, strongly disagreed with the suggestion, pointing out that the Coalition had long supported a non-discriminatory immigration policy and saying it was not an issue that should be pursued.
But after Mr Morrison’s comments this week on the cost of asylum-seeker funerals and his role in the controversial decision to cut a Howard government program to fund schools in Indonesia, colleagues are privately questioning whether he is trying to pursue an anti-Muslim political strategy unilaterally.
Even though the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, initially backed his stance on the cost of the funerals, Mr Morrison apologised yesterday for the “timing” of his comments, saying it was “inappropriate” and “insensitive” to make the remarks on the day the funerals were taking place.
Sources say Mr Morrison told the shadow cabinet meeting on December 1 at the Ryde Civic Centre that the Coalition should ramp up its questioning of “multiculturalism” and appeal to deep voter concerns about Muslim immigration and “inability” to integrate.
The sources say Mr Ruddock, the shadow cabinet secretary, was particularly “blunt” in his rejection of the suggestion, saying a well-run and non-discriminatory immigration policy was essential for nation building.
Others said they had picked up on strong anti-Muslim sentiment in their electorates but thought running a campaign against Muslim immigration could be “misconstrued”.
Mr Morrison declined to comment on the discussion.
Speaking about the furore over the cost of the funerals, Mr Morrison told Sydney radio: “There is a time and a place … if you step over the mark I think you have got to say so, and I’m prepared to do so, but the government should not take that as a leave pass.
“Timing in terms of comments is very important … the timing of my comments was insensitive and inappropriate.”
And Mr Abbott thanked Mr Morrison for admitting that “perhaps we went a little bit too far”.
The comments sparked a backlash from Liberal moderates, with the shadow treasurer, Joe Hockey, calling for compassion and the backbenchers Judith Troeth and Russell Broadbent distancing themselves from Mr Morrison’s stance.
This week the Liberal backbencher Gary Humphries tabled a petition, signed by three people, calling for a 10-year moratorium on “Muslim immigration”.”
https://www.smh.com.au/national/morrison-sees-votes-in-anti-muslim-strategy-20110216-1awmo.html
ScaMo: Publicly apologise to Waleed Aly…. NOW!!”
One thing which occurred to me this morning is, you usually don’t hear about the “internal polling” of Parties whcih are doing well. They’re usually leaked by the side wanting to set up a narrative because things aren’t going all that well for them.
make of that what you will, I suppose.
Does any one know how internal polling is tracking? The media reports are all about what they want you to believe.
My intel is that both sides think they’ll lose.
My intel is that both sides think they’ll lose.
Yeah, I’d be surprised if anyone really had any idea what’s going to happen. Plenty will pretend they knew all along on Sunday, but today nfi is the honest truth.
When you don’t have any solid evidence you’re going to win, assuming you won’t is safest to go.
The number of people who watched last night’s debate and will actually change their vote because of it is equal to the number of empathy cells that Scott Morrison has.
The number of Poll Bludgers who obsess over last night’s debate as if the entire voting population of NSW watched every millisecond and over-analysed every pause, breath, nuance, pronunciation of every syllable is equal to the number of racism cells that Peter Dutton has.
Meanwhile the betting markets barely give a stuff, giving the debate the due credit it deserves.
Cha Ching – best comment of the day and on the money!
Burgey, too true, said the same thing myself yesterday on PB.
I voted pre-poll just now. It would have been easier to walk to the local public school on Saturday and queue up but I will be out of Sydney on polling day. Once I navigated the traffic, the roadworks, found a parking stop and walked a few hundred metres in the rain, the pre-poll centre was very quiet. There were far more people outside handing out how to vote slips, including the local Liberal member, than voters inside. As with the local demographics in this blue ribbon Liberal seat, Liberal party members outside greatly outnumbered the small Labor contingent, with one Green and a lady handing out HTVs for an Independent.
For those interested there are several arbitrage opportunities opening up (at the time of writing) between several betting sites offering odds on individual seats.
Overall it’s still looking like a hung parliament however the odds for that have shifted dramatically over at Sportsbet. I’ll be keeping an eye on that as, frankly, I still reckon the hung parliament is still the most certain option, barring some major shift in a public opinion poll. I’m assuming one will be published either tonight for tomorrow’s paper(s) or tomorrow night for Saturday’s paper(s).
But quite a few odds have moved in the past few days, whether they are ‘accurate’ moves or not, time will tell but they certainly offer some profit opportunities should anyone be interested.
Who here has ever changed their vote based on a leaders’ debate during an election campaign? I wonder if they can accurately recall:
1) why they were going to vote for party X before they saw or read about the debate; and
2) what about the debate made them reject those reasons in (1) and instead vote for party Y.
There seems to be a lot of fear/hope that significant number of voters will switch their vote after last night’s debate. I am curious what thought processes underpin such switches, if they occur.