First up, a new uComms/ReachTEL seat poll for the Australian Forest Products Association gives the Liberals a 51-49 lead in the north-western Tasmanian seat of Braddon, which Labor’s Justine Keay won by 2.2% in 2016 and 2.3% in the Super Saturday by-election last September. Excluding the 4.5% undecided, the primary votes are Labor 35.1%, Liberal 40.0%, Nationals 3.7%, Greens 6.6% and United Australia Party 5.5%, which sounds consistent enough with the two-party headline. As per ReachTEL’s usual format, there was a forced response follow-up for the undecided – The Mercury reports 23.7% of them favoured Labor and 21.1% Liberal. The poll was conducted Monday night from a sample of 861. The same client and the same pollster produced a 54-46 lead for the Liberals in Bass at the start of the campaign, which most observers would have rated excessive.
Second, please note the post below dedicated to the seat of Gilmore – the first in a series of seat-related posts I will be unrolling every day from now until the big day.
Now to the the state of the betting markets. I can’t claim to be the internet’s best resource on this particular issue, as that title belongs to Mark the Ballot, whose reading of the collective market’s implied probability of a Coalition win leapt from 25.3% to 29.2% in the immediate wake of Monday’s Newspoll. I’m only following Ladbrokes, which had Labor on $1.25 and the Coalition on $3.90 a week ago; moved to Labor $1.35 and Coalition $3.15 after Newspoll; and has since moved back slightly to Labor, at $1.32 to the Coalition’s $3.30.
Ladbrokes’ seat odds (which are listed on the bottom right of each page on the electorate guide) now has Labor as favourites in 85 seats, down from 89 last week, with the Coalition up from 58 to 61. The Coalition are now favourites in Banks ($2.25 to $1.77, with Labor going from $1.62 to $2.00), Capricornia ($2.50 to $1.83, Labor from $1.57 to $1.91), Herbert ($2.50 to $1.65, Labor from $1.57 to $2.20) and Page ($1.90 to $1.80, Labor the other way round). However, independent Kevin Mack is now favoured in Farrer ($2.00 to $1.50, the Nationals from $1.70 to $2.20), making him one of six non-major party candidates to be rated favourites. Not among their number are Kerryn Phelps in Wentworth, who has slipped from $2.30 to $3.25 with the Liberals in from $1.57 to $1.33, or Zali Steggall in Warringah.
The Liberals have also been slashed from $6.50 to $2.80 in Corangamite, with Labor out from $1.10 to $1.40, and the market seems to have noticed the frequency of leaders’ visits to the Northern Territory, with Labor out from $1.18 to $1.50 in Solomon and the Country Liberals in from $4.00 to $2.40. However, Labor’s odds have shortened in Reid ($1.27 to $1.22, Liberals from $3.25 to $4.00) and La Trobe ($1.53 to $1.40, Liberals from $2.40 to $3.00).
PuffyTMD
I always try and check who are the ‘unnamed’ groups – it’s bad enough for anti-vaxxers to call themselves Healthy Australia or whatever, but I hate the groups who don’t even give a name. We had a few in the Victorian Upper House.
That emabarrassing moment when having started numbering (below the line) the entire Senate paper starting from ‘above’ (1,2,3,4 etc) until you run out of people/parties you could tolerate, you then proceed to the other end (knowing in advance exactly how many there are on the ballot paper, say 187, and start with 187, 186, 185 etc etc …. then you get up towards your original ‘endpoint’ – just two more numbers to fill in – and look desperately for those last two gaps on the paper for these ‘in-betweeners’ and you find something like –
Group N – NSAWP
☐ Hitler, A.
☐ Hess, R.
And you are too embarrassed to go and ask for a new ballot. (this sort of incident happened to me!)
“This story leaves me speechless.”
Horrific.
Halving just watched the Shorten interview tonight, I’m left with one question.
What planet is Bushfire Bill on?
“I suppose the problem is you never know who is going to be vying for the last spot – if for example Labor has two Senators and the Greens one and the LNP two after five spots have been done in Victoria, then there is a reasonable probability that the 6th could be a contest between various small parties and I hate the thought of someone slipping through the net – so I will likely number all columns (if I go above the line) and even then it is an eternal struggle as to who to put last, second last, third last etc.”
Well yeah you can always add a bunch of independents and any other left wing or centrist minors after Labor just incase that happens. Can’t hurt.
As a teacher I have had far too many experiences of youth suicide and the thing is, there seems to be very little rhyme or reason behind it. However, in saying that social media and mobile phones are a factor IMHO. When I was a kid there was some terrible bullying, but I could always find escape. When I got home, on weekends playing football with my mates or fishing with my dad. For today’s kids there is no such escape from the insidious influence of social media, as it follows them 24 7. I remember incidents that loomed large in my life as a kid where I was livid, but by the time Monday came around again, time and reflection reduced their significance in my mind. Not today though, because of the instantaneous nature of social media and the need to respond immediately, plus the cowards who pile on from the side lines. I really do feel sorry for kids today in many respects.
“That is me. I wish we had an equal last symbol!”
Yes! We should be able to preference multiple parties as 0 (zero). Putting parties like One Nation, Fred Nile Group, Conservatives, etc… anywhere other than dead last just feels wrong. They all deserve a big 0!
Polling companies hate their last election-week polls being too wrong, and they love the ‘bragging rights’ of being closest. That said, I will enjoy the contortions Newspoll will go through in the event that their somewhat shoddy algorithms prove a total bust like in the Victorian election.
Rational Leftist @ #944 Wednesday, May 1st, 2019 – 11:24 pm
I never found anything of Barry Humphries funny. I have an acute sense of humour but he was boring and his characters did nothing for me. If he was parodying something, it was nothing of my world. Any bloke can get a laugh dressing up as a woman. The humour in that escapes me. Les Patterson was just embarrassing. He took these characters to Britain, in a sort of a cultural cringe, doffs-me-hat way. Strangely, the British were better at producing humour about themselves than we are, in my opinion. We laugh at outrageous parody like Humphries characters, where as the British take their faults and create hilarious characters close to real people. And the British love them. I know as do we.
And Chris Lilley is someone else who does not raise a laugh from me. I think it is the man parodying women scenario. If it is funny when a men acts like a women, then why is it not when a woman acts like a woman? Are women just objects of humour while men are the real deal?
We have some brilliant comedians. But Humphries is not one of them.
Random thoughts.
Firefox says:
Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 12:27 am
Isn’t that just the same as not numbering them?
Is there a predictable timetable for polls from here to the election?
There is not only electing the left and keeping the far right out but also preferencing the centre over the Coalition. In Victoria that means Hinch (there is a reasonable likelihood of a Hinch verses Coalition contest at the end of the count), in SA it means the Centre Alliance and in Tasmania it means Lambie but I haven`t studied the other states to see who the centre are there.
No decent centre options in WA sadly
clem
Last year I happened to accidentally start talking to a guy who turned out to be a school psychologist – I asked him how much the cyberbullying was a problem. He said it was the major component of his work, and that yes unlike us who ‘escaped’ for the most part when we went home, there is now seemingly no escape.
I asked him why don’t kids just ‘turn off’ and he said it was like they just HAD to know what was going on even if it was terrible. One of our kids experienced some of this in early high school and it was pretty awful and that was really before smart-phones, mainly just on the computer so not with them 24/7.
” For today’s kids there is no such escape from the insidious influence of social media, as it follows them 24 7.”
So true. It’s such a delicate issue too. How do you educate kids about the warning signs without giving them ideas that may not otherwise be there?
I just wish I could tell them that nothing is ever that bad and they have so much to look forward to. It just makes you feel so helpless.
I agree Puff.
I found Humphries repetitive and boring.
We’ve had some great comic writers and actors, but to me he wasn’t one of them.
Cud Chewer
I am very hopeful of weekly ones from Newspoll (Sunday nights), Essential (early hours Tuesday mornings) and even Morgan (?Mondays – they poll every week in their broader consumer survey stuff but they don’t publish politics often any more – maybe it is too expensive to analyse/stratify properly)
So I am hopeful we get two more full rounds and then usually there is a Friday/Saturday Newspoll publication of midweek polling in the last week.
As for Ipsos and YouGov/Galaxy – who knows? It would be nice if they both produced at least one more during the campaign.
Good night all – only one thing left to say
Fantastic. Great move. Well done Angus.
“Isn’t that just the same as not numbering them?”
In the Senate yeah but not in the House where you must number them all. Think in 2016 I had 6 choices for the Reps. Greens, AJP, Labor, ok so that’s easy. 1, 2 ,3. Where do you put the Nats, One Nation and I think it might have been either Palmer United or Christian Democrats. I can’t remember which. I think I actually ended up putting the Nats last in that case because I knew they were a chance of winning while the others had no hope.
Regarding the polling frequency, it all comes down to the different media outlets and what they’re prepared to pay for.
“Good night all – only one thing left to say”
Sounds like a plan actually! Night all 🙂
Rocket yeah about what I expect.. too many polls is not enough!
Firefox says:
Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 12:43 am
In the Reps it doesn’t matter.
There are very few three corner contests, so as soon as you’ve numbered one of the two favourites, you’re basically guaranteed your vote will go no further.
“In the Reps it doesn’t matter.
There are very few three corner contests, so as soon as you’ve numbered one of the two favourites, you’re basically guaranteed your vote will go no further.”
***
My electorate of Richmond is a three way race between Greens, Labor and Nats.
Just came back to post this poll I found before I go to bed….
Quote:
LABOR’S Patrick Deegan looks set to score a landslide victory in the seat of Page when voters go to the polls on May 18.
According to a poll conducted by The Northern Star, Deegan is poised to dump Nationals incumbent Kevin Hogan from the seat he has held since 2013.
The online poll asked readers who they would vote for in the federal election – Nationals incumbent Page MP Kevin Hogan, Labor candidate Patrick Deegan, Greens candidate Daniel Reid, Independent Fiona Leviny, United Australia Party candidate John Mudge, Animal Justice Party candidate Alison Waters or Christian Democratic Party candidate Peter Walker.
The results revealed voters would shift significantly in Labor’s favour, with 832 people participating in the poll.
While the The Northern Star recognises there’s a lot of people who didn’t vote in the online poll and the result on May 18 could be different, Deegan looks set to become the next Page MP after he received 70 per cent of the online poll.
Hogan ended up with only 20 per cent of the final vote.
Reid came in third position with 3 per cent, while both Leviny and Mudge tied for fourth place receiving only 1 per cent of the vote each.
Meanwhile, Waters and Walker, who were surprise additions to the candidate list, both received less than 10 votes between them, leaving them both on 0 per cent in the poll.
The poll also revealed that 1 per cent of voters were still undecided on who they’d support on election day.
While Deegan looks set to win the election, it might still be a tighter race than The Northern Star poll is predicting, with an earlier poll showing the two front-runner candidates neck and neck.
The earlier poll, which only featured Hogan, Deegan, Reid, Leviny and Mudge, saw 268 people participate and put Hogan in the lead to retain his seat with 47 per cent of the vote.
Coming in a tight second place was Deegan with 41 per cent, followed by Mr Reid on 5 per cent, with both Leviny and Mudge receiving 2 per cent of the vote each.
Polls by The Northern Star during the State Election correctly predicted the eventual winners of the Lismore and Ballina electorates.
https://www.northernstar.com.au/news/our-election-poll-results-are-in-you-might-be-surp/3716059/
PuffyTMD
says:
I never found anything of Barry Humphries funny. I have an acute sense of humour but he was boring and his characters did nothing for me. If he was parodying something, it was nothing of my world. Any bloke can get a laugh dressing up as a woman. If it is funny when a men acts like a women, then why is it not when a woman acts like a woman? Are women just objects of humour while men are the real deal?
_______________________________
Look, Edna has refuted many times that she is really a man. According to her Barry Humphries is just her manager and she finds the idea of a man dressing up as a woman to be absolutely disgusting. She says she has heard the rumour ‘so many times’ and that it undermines women of achievement like herself.
Firefox says:
Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 1:08 am
Well in your case as soon as you’ve numbered two of those three your vote is guaranteed to go no further.
Essential will be weekly from now to the election.
Thanks William
For those looking for guidance on voting in the Senate, KB has an interesting article
http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2019/04/how-to-make-best-use-of-your-2019.html
Of particulr interest to me was his “tactical voting” section, and the option (when voting below the line) of NOT giving your first vote to the lead candidate of a major party (because they will be elected anyway), but that you could start at #3. The comment about Lisa Singh’s strategy of voting for her #1 below the line may have increased the chances of getting the third Labour candidate up was particularly interesting.
I don’t know how real this suggestion is. Any comments? (including WB?)
I am unsure whether the suggested “dilution of second preference votes for surpluses” is only “apparent”, whereas this is really only caused by averaging across the elected person’s complete vote profile. Comments on a postcard here as well?
Chris Kenny doing so much winning!
Greensborough Growler says:
Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 1:46 am
The rules must have changed. 😆
A follow up to my earlier posting on KB’s suggestions for Senate voting.
I have done some calculations and (if my maths is correct) there can be a small benefit by voting #1 (below tbe line) for the third placed candidate of a major party. I think this is true where some other voters, who voted #1 (below the line) for the the lead candidate, and have subsequently preferenced candidates from other parties and those votes expire rather than return to the major party. A fraction of this “loss” can marginally reduce the total the third placed candidate can have later in the count.
I should restate that this depends on my excel model not having a computational or logic error, and that the benefit can be exceedingly small.
New thread.