The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age – or the Herald/Age, to adopt what is evidently Nine Newspapers’ own preferred shorthand for its Sydney and Melbourne papers – have revealed their opinion polling will be put on ice for an indefinite period. They usually do that post-election at the best of times, but evidently things are more serious now, such that we shouldn’t anticipate a resumption of its Ipsos series (which the organisation was no doubt struggling to fund in any case).
This is a shame, because Ipsos pollster Jessica Elgood has been admirably forthright in addressing what went wrong – and, importantly, in identifying the need for pollsters to observe greater transparency, a quality that has been notably lacking from the polling scene in Australia. In particular, Elgood has called for the establishment of a national polling standards body along the lines of the British Polling Council, members of which are required to publish details of their survey and weighting methods. This was echoed in a column in the Financial Review by Labor pollster John Utting, who suggests such a body might be chaired by Professor Ian McAllister of the Australian National University, who oversees the in-depth post-election Australian Election Study survey.
On that point, I may note that I had the following to say in Crikey early last year:
The very reason the British polling industry has felt compelled to observe higher standards of transparency is that it would invite ridicule if it sought to claim, as Galaxy did yesterday, that its “track record speaks for itself”. If ever the sorts of failures seen in Britain at the 2015 general election and 2016 Brexit referendum are replicated here, a day of reckoning may arrive that will shine light on the dark corners of Australian opinion polling.
Strange as it may seem though, not everyone is convinced that Australian polling really put on all that bad a show last weekend. Indeed, no less an authority than Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight has just weighed in with the following:
Polls showed the conservative-led coalition trailing the Australian Labor Party approximately 51-49 in the two-party preferred vote. Instead, the conservatives won 51-49. That’s a relatively small miss: The conservatives trailed by 2 points in the polls, and instead they won by 2, making for a 4-point error. The miss was right in line with the average error from past Australian elections, which has averaged about 5 points. Given that track record, the conservatives had somewhere around a 1 in 3 chance of winning.
So the Australian media took this in stride, right? Of course not. Instead, the election was characterized as a “massive polling failure” and a “shock result”.
When journalists say stuff like that in an election after polls were so close, they’re telling on themselves. They’re revealing, like their American counterparts after 2016, that they aren’t particularly numerate and didn’t really understand what the polls said in the first place.
I’m not quite sure whether to take greater umbrage at Silver’s implication that Antony Green and Kevin Bonham “aren’t particularly numerate”, or that the are – huck, spit – “journalists”. The always prescient Dr Bonham managed a pre-emptive response:
While overseas observers like Nate Silver pour scorn on our little polling failure as a modest example of the genre and blast our media for failing to anticipate it, they do so apparently unfamiliar with just how good our national polling has been compared to polling overseas.
And therein lies the rub – we in Australia have been rather spoiled by the consistently strong performance of Newspoll’s pre-election polls especially, which have encouraged unrealistic expectations. On Saturday though, we saw the polls behaving no better, yet also no worse, than polling does generally.
Indeed, this would appear to be true even in the specifically Australian context, so long as we take a long view. Another stateside observer, Harry Enten, has somehow managed to compare Saturday’s performance with Australian polling going all the way back to 1943 (“I don’t know much about Australian politics”, Enten notes, “but I do know something about downloading spreadsheets of past poll data and calculating error rates”). Enten’s conclusion is that “the average error in the final week of polling between the top two parties in the first round” – which I take to mean the primary vote, applying the terminology of run-off voting of the non-instant variety – “has been about five points”.
@briefly
Honestly the defection of many these voters from Labor to the right-wing populist parties is actually a good thing for Labor. Because these voters are ideologically like Warren Mundine and Mark Latham, enough said.
It is notable that One Nation’s election slogan was “We’ve got the guts to say what you’re thinking!” and these thoughts ain’t nice ones. I know quite a number of traditionally Labor voters who are like this.
zoomster says:
Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 8:54 am
D&M
Like you, I’ve got many friends, colleagues, loved ones who are ‘Greens’ of some description – have voted Green in the past, are Greens members, etc.
There’s another explanation – again, for both sides – which is simply that posts get taken the wrong way sometimes, and what is meant to be debate gets taken as an attack.
I used to get in trouble on this blog for asking simple questions regarding Greens policy on a ‘really want to know’ basis.
———————————————————–
I have had the same experience
As someone who has supported Greens policies and defended them from attacks from the right, I am surprised and disappointed that no Greens supporter has answered the questions I have posed twice about the recent election. NOT ONE.
If none of them are prepared to explain the role of the Greens in the election, then I am reluctantly coming to the conclusion reached by many others here that the Greens exist only as spoilers and will ignore them in the future. And I do that more in sorrow than anger.
Yes. And from QLD. But he did take a 7% hit to his primary in Rankin with only 3% coming back on preferences.
This one perhaps. Although Scotty will be keen to get women into the ministry. I have no idea who they have among the ranks anymore.
Tristo, ON is a front for National Socialism, edited and re-printed for the 21st century. It can hardly be a good thing that working people have lost confidence in the ideals and institutions of social democracy and social justice, and that they are willing to give political support to organs that will gouge them of everything they have.
itsthevibe @ #1674 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 12:54 pm
Out with the tinfoil hats everyone.
Confessions @ #1705 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 1:26 pm
Lucy Wicks, Member for my seat of Robertson, and old Pentecostal and Young Liberal friend of Scott Morrison, should get a guernsey of some type.
Apologies for using ‘Itza’ to refer to “Itsthevibe” – two different posters! The perils of abbreviation.
..oh, sorry. I should have first demanded that Itza provide me with documentary proof that he isn’t actually itsthevibe.
My bad.
Simon² Katich® @ #1704 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 1:25 pm
Because. Queensland, I expect. 😐
KayJay, @10.45
I also have that problem with my high-functioning autistic grandson.
A real concern.
beguiled, the Lib-kin hierarchy will not know whether to laugh or cry. They set out to thwart Labor’s run. They might feel chuffed at their success. And yet, the goals they purport to cherish are now further than ever from realisation. Their victory is especially Pyrrhic.
The way back to Government for Labor is stony indeed. And whatever they might say, the Lib-kin know that cannot succeed in the short-run without Labor. They will be in several minds. The Brown faction will be rejoicing. The others….maybe not so much.
Terri Butler got a swing to her.
😉
@briefly
I know a lot of One Nation voters and supporters, they aren’t Nazis. They are just racists, sexists, homophobes, anti-Muslim bigots etc. Not to say they don’t have actual Neo-Nazis in the party, Fraser Anning’s Conservative Nationals do have a lot Neo-Nazis in their supporter base although.
Oh, and if the owner of this blog;
a) Has even the slightest interest, and
b) Could be bothered checking.
He will see that my I.P. address originates in Queensland, not Victoria.
Although it is entirely plausible that I am in fact Bemused’s new husband and we are currently honeymooning in Port Douglas.
SK:
True, but he wasn’t alone among his colleagues in Qld to get swings against them.
Simon² Katich® @ #1714 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 1:31 pm
Because. Cute. 😉
I think it’s about time someone from tha Nats got given the Environment portfolio.
Someone like Canavan would be much more effective there in meeting their objectives than in Resources¿
Tristo…ON subscribe to the politics of persecution; to National Socialism by another name.
Pauline Hanson is not about to invade Poland, but she sure calls for Lebensraum for the angry.
If a Albanese and Marles team is the answer then labor is asking the wrong question.
Shorten had two attempts. He accepted responsibility and resigned after the second. As he should. He led a united team but fell short. He is now a yesterday man.
Albanese is a yesterday man. Bowen is a yesterday man. Tanya P. is a yesterday woman.
Jim Chalmers is the future and perhaps Catherine King as his deputy.
If labor is relying on a Scomo v Albo “ ocker “ contest to get over the finish line in 2022 then sadly they are way off the mark.
Albanese is not the future and carries too too much baggage. If you accuse Shorten of blowing in the wind over policy then Albanese is right up there with him. In fact, he is way in front and the media will not let labor forget it.
What I find really intriguing about this constant criticism that keeps being directed at me, that I ‘dominate’ this blog, or ‘insert myself forcefully into other people’s conversations’ here, whatever that is supposed to mean in an open blog, is that that is never an accusation stridently leveled at the Right. I mean, Alan Jones can have a radio show, a TV program, appear on the ABC QandA, and ‘insert’ himself into any national conversation he chooses, but that’s ok. Me? frustrated political journalist that I am, gets rounded on for simply commenting on politics a lot on one blog. Sheesh!
C@t:
In all honesty they keep at you because you keep responding to them. If you just ignored their taunts they’d soon turn their attention to someone who gave them the attention they crave.
This is absurd. They are digging up the coal so they can burn it. The only way to ensure that it won’t end up in the atmosphere is to leave it in the ground. The atmosphere cannot afford an Adani’s worth of coal in it. Stop pretending that something so simple is complicated.
Quasar @ #1709 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 1:29 pm
Indeedy ❗ I will continue to offer support to my nephew.
Be kind to yourself.
😲 Astonished at the RW ratbags.
@KayJay
and the election has embolden these RW ratbags too.
BK 1.14 pm
I agree with your point to some extent re missing their opportunity, but also factor in that after Abbott’s victory no one saw Labor as being competitive again until 2022. Although Morrison is obviously a bit of strategic politician he also has an overestimated opinion of both his own talents and miracles.
My concerns with how Labor deals with this include that anyone who is well known to the public is also associated with Shorten who was painted as unpopular and also part of the RGR wars. Not having a very public leadership election with lots of candidates will probably result in lots of barbs about backroom deals and any number of supposed shifty deals.
One of the analysis’s I read alluded to Labor losing the Christian vote. Yes Shorten was a believer but he was also a divorcee who changed religions to remarry. Prior to the election I must have read at least a dozen articles that pointed to the questions around when Bill and Chloe got together. This would not have played well to many religious people. Can Albo counter this.
Yesterday I commented on the silence around Clive buying our democracy for 60 million of anti Labor ads. The responses I got were it’s happened move on. I really hope that Labor can at least get someone to look into this as most educated people do not want our democracy sold to the highest bidder.
Going on recent experience if Labor cannot find a way of countering both UAP and PHON then we will be in opposition for a long time. For that reason also I think we need a younger team to front the party.
I hope that Labor takes the time to really unpick what went wrong with the campaign but also look at some broader areas as to why the disenfranchised including the working poor have given up on Labor.
At this point all I can do is continue to donate and make sure the people I engage with know where to look to understand some of the issues surrounding our current political environment.
Rant over
@Sustainable2050
Europe has started to build world’s largest power plant: 180 GW of offshore wind capacity, dwarfing China’s Three Gorges Dam (22.5 GW)!
13 GW is already in operation and ~50 GW will be completed by 2030.
topsectorenergie.nl/sites/default/…
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7WjKJGXYAIyim8?format=jpg&name=large
I wonder if Joe hockey can be found with all this wind?
Watermelon –
Ok, you brought up supply and demand – I pointed out that you were arguing the wrong side of that – demand is what matters here, not supply because the supply (for the purposes of preventing climate change) is practically unlimited. If demand falls away, the price will fall, but that won’t cause a spike in usage (as a simplistic supply/demand assessment would suggest) … because demand has fallen away.
And now you’ve distilled it down to something that is too simple – having the Adani mine means they will dig it all up, and it will all be burned, just because the Adani mine exists. Well, lots of mines exist, and lots of coal remains to be dug up out of those mines. What will determine if the coal gets burned is whether the demand in the various countries is curtailed through acting to progressively reduce emissions.
What matters is that people stop burning coal – fiddling around with production will not materially change how much is burned. You can call that ‘complicated’, but it is the truth.
The Adani mine going ahead is a big distraction.
ItzaDream says:
Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 12:18 pm
Simon² Katich® @ #1612 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 12:07 pmThe hardwiring indeed. As I’ve been rabbiting on about, they vote how they feel, not how they think. Unwiring is the hard part, a long, barely possible imo, road to reprogram them. Which is where I think your admirable call for cleaning up govt is ideal but not politically the saviour. They know politics is corrupt, they almost expect it, but the better blue suits still seem to win the day, by better obfuscation and lies, and resoldering the hard wiring, all the time.The fact that the MDB, Angus Taylor, the Caymans, et al, got all but no traction during the campaign speaks to me about whether they care that much at all.
———————————————————
Couldn’t agree more. I’ve got a suggestion.
Let’s stop poring over the entrails of the late lamented election. It’s done and dusted. It was arguably one of the worst disunited governments in Australian history facing a unified opposition with constructive ideas. And yet the bad guys got elected, barely. So post-mortems are a waste of time.
Emboldened by last week’s results, the Coalition will carry on governing in the manner we’ve become accustomed to– badly. They will probably be just as bad, but surprisingly they might be better and will steal some of Labor’s policies, which makes our job even harder.
As I’ve suggested, nothing matters over the next three years until the campaign begins.The Coalition will then throw its now familiar bag of dirty tricks, lies and misrepresentation out there to a gullible, greedy electorate. They know it worked for them on May 18 and there is nothing to suggest it will not work again in 2022.
If you are critical of Labor’s campaign, let me know if you believe any DETAIL of Labor’s recent election platform was wrong or not in the best interests of Australians. I’m talking about the proposals themselves, not the political strategy. Can anyone seriously argue that the Coalition had the better policies.
In order to win, we have to start by accepting the fact that the 5 million, half of our fellow Australian voters who chose the Coalition, include a very large number who are either ill-informed, politically illiterate, stubbornly stupid, or greedy. They foolishly fall for all of those Coalition falsehoods and vote against their best interests.
Hillary had it right: we are dealing with a large cohort of deplorables, intellectually or morally. What these people should be saying to themselves, as Pogo put it: “I have seen the enemy, and he is US.”
So how do we deal with their rusted-on stupidity, avarice and lack of interest in the welfare of their less fortunate fellow citizens? How do you re-program uncritical thinking, cupidity and greed. You don’t do it by politely tugging your forelock and saying the people are always right and that’s democracy.
We’re obviously not going to reach all of them. We only need to change 25,000 minds across a small number of electorates to remove the Morrison gang next time. Let’s go after them.
Let me have you thoughts.
This message was authorized by the Committee to Restore Sanity and Good Government to Australia.
I was reading the Sydney trains Facebook today reading about the complaints regarding the new metro trains that has no drivers.
This along with driverless cars/busses will see jobs go up in smoke
A lot of posters on this blog said that they voted for Albanese over Shorten in 2013 but came to the belief that Shorten was the better choice over time. Now you would be hard pressed to find anyone backing Albanese. What has changed since 2013?
I thought Shorten would have made a great PM if only he could get over the line. He failed. Now I think we need to try the choice of the majority of Labor members in 2013. He deserves his chance.
The thought of a fourth term of this Government is horrifying so we need to be looking at 2022. Maybe I am impatient but Labor going through a ‘rebuilding’ phase now is not what I want over the next three years.
NE Qld
Part of it is probably the time factor. A leader who was suitable six years ago may no longer be so. For starters, they’re older than they were then!
I don’t think Albanese & Marles are the answer. I don’t think albanese is in good health, lot of weight around back of neck.
The Labor Party supporters are predominantly in their 50s & 60s
Liberal party supporters are in their 70s 80s
Labor has get to new recruits from people energised by Getup or disaffected Greens
But really, if not in government how can you stop Clive Palmer buying the next election and Murdoch’s wall to wall propaganda. The only path back to government is when enough voters are sick of being lied too or the people rebel against the government
I hope Alanese steps down in 2years time
Right, so, we need an environmentally conscious, cute Queenslander, preferably with lots of money and a background in politics. World famous would help. Maybe someone with LNP pedigree who has turned into an ecological activist?
Today’s PvO.
Anyone else think that Shorten does not Albanese as leader as he will be harder to dislodge if he wins in 2022.
PvO I argue is delusional, since there is a hare breaths difference in ideology between Peter Dutton and Scott Morrison. Indeed Morrison is probably even closer to Tony Abbott on ideology than Dutton is.
Beguiledagain. 2.0o pm
I agree that based on this election it is only necessary to change the mindset of a small number of people, but it will be done in an environment where those who have the upper hand will be trying to increase that number.
Currently we have a situation where 40% of people are for and 40% are against so we need to connect with the 20% sitting on the fence. This 20% represents the squeaky wheel of the old proverb. One of the tactics used is noise, he who speaks most and loudest wins and this is being amply demonstrated by the MSM who are very vocal in their support of the LNP and on Facebook where any discussion supporting the left quickly got drowned out. The only solution is to get the 40% who agree with you to stop being silent, because when you stay silent their opponents run off to the next tea room or blog and breathlessly report that when discussing this yesterday everyone agreed. In fact they didn’t agree they were just silent. It is a form of verbal bullying and it happens everywhere.
In conclusion we need to make sure that we don’t stay silent and get rolled over but verbally stand up for what we believe.
taylormade
We’re looking for a leader who can win in 2022.
Testing
Oh dear, not Molan!
taylormade says:
Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 2:22 pm
…”Anyone else think that Shorten does not Albanese as leader as he will be harder to dislodge if he wins in 2022″…
Yup.
It’s all part of Shorten’s devious plan to sweep to glorious victory and minority government with the help of Pauline Hanson and Clive Palmer sometime in the early 2040’s.
Tristo @ #1737 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 12:23 pm
The Labor voter in me really wishes the anti-Dutton crew hadn’t won out, and Dutton was the Liberal leader after Turnbull was knifed.
lizzie:
This cracked me up.
Not Sure, I don’t need to look at your IP address to work out that you’re not Bemused.
I think Chalmers will be better leadership material after spending time as Treasurer. See how Chalmers does emphasising Labor’s excellent economic record at the same time as exploiting the Coalition’s expected bumbling of the economy over the next three years. Most economists predict a major downturn in the economy is imminent. Comparisons will be made with how the Coalition manage it with how Labor managed the GFC. If they go the austerity route, Labor will be in with a chance.
I really, really hope Molan gets Sinodinos’s vacancy.
…only to be dumped to 4th place on the ticket again in 2022.
That should be Shadow Treasurer obviously!
I was logged out by the blog (happens occasionally) and lost a couple of posts. In one, I assured Not Sure that h/she couldn’t be Bemused as B is more careful of his apostrophes.
beguiledagain
Solution: Simplify all messages. If a policy needs an explanation of more than one short sentence, bin it. The more involved/thoughtful voters will read long articles, but not the average voter.