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”.
A shocker from David Rowe!
Tristo @ #1924 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 6:02 pm
Speaking of May, I’ve just discovered UK columnist, Catherine Bennett’s cutting prose.
Here’s one on buying a catch up with Theresa:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/04/girls-night-out-with-the-prime-minster-and-her-posse-for-135000-pounds-bargain
And a chilling one on Alabama:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/18/from-alabama-to-armagh-women-are-on-the-front-line-in-the-war-on-abortion
Hours after criminalising abortion, Ivey ruled that the life of a convicted murderer, Michael Samra, was not sufficiently precious for her to feel like saving it. He was killed by lethal injection, with witnesses to testify that this particular sacred gift from God had been returned dead, with the governor’s compliments.
(edit: Theresa gets her aitch back, unlike me and those few minutes of my life)
@confessions
Palmer’s United Australia Party fielding candidates in all 151 electorates was a bit fishy.
Confessions @ #1947 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 6:43 pm
Alex Hawke: Pentecostal
Anne Ruston: I’m imagining is some sort of Fundamentalist Christian, after this move in the Senate:
During 2017, when Cory Bernardi moved a motion to ban abortion on gender grounds, Ruston was one of the ten senators who voted in favour. The motion was defeated by a vote of 10 – 36.
Amanda Stoker: Queensland Senator, is a Conservative Catholic (I think):
Amanda is a Christian and a conservative, and is making a great impact in Canberra after only a few months. Amanda is a champion of life and spoke at pro-life rally outside Parliament House in Brisbane earlier this year.
Steve Irons: Son of a Christian Minister
Ian Goodenough: Pentecostal
Andrew Hastie: Pentecostal
There are probably more.
Tristo @ #1953 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 6:53 pm
It just allowed him to spread his message Australia wide in the election. Even though they had no hope of winning.
I forgot, Tim Wilson: Pentecostal
C@tmomma @ #1954 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 6:54 pm
Glad I’m not doing Hansard when they all get babbling.
Yeah, but it’s a good way to leech primary votes off of Labor and transfer them to the Coalition as preferences. Given that Palmer didn’t get a single candidate up, that was probably the idea.
C@t:
Wow I had no idea there were so many of them. And Tim Wilson is gay, how in hell does he reconcile his religious identification with the outright homophobia and bigotry expressed by the people of his faith? Including his own Prime Minister who couldn’t bring himself to be present in the chamber when the SSM vote was going through the HoR?
Tristo @ #1955 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 4:53 pm
Esp when you consider the UAP candidate here was all but invisible. He had a banner on a prominent roundabout in town, but I couldn’t tell you his name, even though I drove past the bloody thing umpteen times during the campaign. The candidates who repeatedly appeared in local media were the Liberals, Nationals, Labor and the PHON candidate. I’m sure Clive’s candidate could’ve made more of his candidature, esp given his party’s local media blitz.
It seems a bit strange that Wilson would be accepted by the happy clappers. He has certainly made no secret of his sexuality.
On the other hand, he ardently preaches the prosperity gospel (at least for selected members of the community).
ItzaDream @ #1920 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 3:56 pm
If we had a progressive government, that would actually make sense.
That doesn’t sound right, and Wikipedia says no.
Confessions @ #1959 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 7:04 pm
There are actually quite a lot of gays of faith. I don’t get it either. I wouldn’t be surprised if Senator Dean Smith from WA was another.
I’ve just been reading about the Alabama Abortion ban and how women of faith aid and abet the men who want to control women’s bodies:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/18/from-alabama-to-armagh-women-are-on-the-front-line-in-the-war-on-abortion
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/20/alabama-abortion-ban-law-womens-voices-newspaper
It bloody depresses me that we could be in line for a similar push from the Conservative Christians now in power here.
Marles isn’t the right choice for deputy, he will be haunted by his comments about coal markets. The ALP had five clear choices Tanya P, O’Neill, Chalmbers, Wong or KK. Then there are people like Mike Kelly, Anna Aly or Deb O`Neill and Ged were other sound options.
Oh the irony!
Jackol @ #1963 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 7:19 pm
Really?
Wikipedia makes no mention of Wilson being religious. For what that’s worth.
Ugh.
I like Sammy
https://iview.abc.net.au/show/sammy-j/series/2/video/LE1806V014S00
Marles is the wrong choice for so many reasons.
Haven’t seen sprocket since the election either. He must be truly gutted.
Genuine Question
How do you think the electorate in general would respond if they knew that the parliament is being taken over by happy clappers. Young people in general aren’t into religion
C@tmomma @ #1964 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 7:19 pm
It’s very worrying. And as in Alabama, not shortage of god fearing women to help things along.
I can’t defend the ALP credibly when confronting “thought” leaders of the right.
I don’t feel like there’s much help from ALP supporters either.
I think that’s because there’s many critiques the nutters have that are valid and indefensible.
I can only fight the right credibly if I’m divorced from the ALP establishment view.
Otherwise, I’m part of the corruption, despite them supporting corruption also.
Keating has signalled a path to go down, but I don’t think there’s the courage to support his position on distancing ourselves from US foreign policy. How so many in the ALP could think Clinton is on their side depresses me.
The establishment left (who I don’t consider left except on social issues) are a dead weight, and I feel it’s purposeful. They’ve also infested the Greens to a noticeable extent, so well done to the money bags for blinding so many on the left as to how we are perceived by the hoi polloi.
I’ve already said that I sense an exasperation with the well to do right, they don’t like the regressive conservative nutters. I think more of them would’ve voted left, had it not been for the franking credits. It looked unfair to me, although I kept my reservations to myself.
Ash G made a good point on twitter how franking credit values are directly connected with the corporate tax rate, so if CT is increased, so are franking credits.
What I think needs to be done to win over these people (well to do moderates) is to define differences in asset classes and develop plans to deal with these classes differently for the purpose of serving small and moderate savers better by limiting investment in “safe” asset classes, like real estate.
This would encourage those with more to invest to start lending more speculatively (we need more venture capital from private and public sources) and at the same time, leaving more opportunity for small savers to invest their small nest eggs into safer and less speculative assets.
I would suggest that this type of approach is also compatible with the aforementioned hoi polloi – they’re not idiots but highly territorial (note – not necessarily racist).
The right wing nutters can be defeated, but the ALP needs to distance itself from the US establishment left that is undeniably not left.
If this is done, the left will overwhelm the hate spreading nutters. While ever they are unchallenged, they will recruit more. Please stop making it hard to bring the argument to them, perhaps even start to confront them rather than commenting here so much. I don’t think this blog risks tumbleweeds.
Genuine Question
How do you think the electorate in general would respond if they knew that the parliament is being taken over by happy clappers. Young people in general aren’t into religion.
_____
Particularly that strange brand. Positively barmy!
C@t:
I can’t even get near the Alabama abortion laws for fear my blood will boil. WTF America?! Seriously!
And yes there are plenty of religious folk who are gay. One of my favourite writers on the subject is conservative Andrew Sullivan, who has written extensively and compellingly about how religion really should own the marriage equality debate, and should have from day one.
But Sully is catholic and they at least have some substantive history on which to draw conclusions and interpretations. The Hillsong mob are johnny come lately’s when it comes to religious history.
Read somewhere that the Alabama lawmakers were expecting the law to be blocked by the supreme court as part of a wider strategy to overturn roe v wade.
Marles is a great choice. Calm and articulate.
Tory Queen is an expression.
A lifelong rightwing hack with a shonky real-estate agent vibe. Pretty much the embodiment of the modern party, great choice indeed.
Like an ambit claim? Hoping the decision against it has arguments to be used in the next less draconian test?
BK says:
Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 7:30 pm
Genuine Question
How do you think the electorate in general would respond if they knew that the parliament is being taken over by happy clappers. Young people in general aren’t into religion.
Don’t think anyone cares. The left seem to think its a big deal though.
I’ve sequed from Alabama through Kurt Weill to Marianne Faithfull and ended up here.
Great song from someone who knows a thing or two
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0NxhFn0szc
#slownightonPB
I don’t know what the context of that photo is, but this is a quote from Wilson from 2017:
https://www.biblesociety.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/BSA_KeepingItLight_Transcript_Final.pdf
BK
Barny and with many beliefs that are plain offensive. So for them no effiing “respect a Parson’s deeply held beliefs” . No more than we respect your local bigot or racist’s ‘beliefs’.
And with that back to ‘beering” in the Top End 🙂
Sorry BK, the original question was from Assantdj
I don’t think they care, and I don’t think Labor would have any hope of winning the next election if they think making an issue out of the PM’s religion is a good strategy. Hopefully they find something better to run on.
Our democracy doesn’t mean much if we start judging politicians based on their religious beliefs.
Labor is better off focusing on attending to policy issues first than religous ones.
Morrison inviting the cameras into his church during the campaign was a very powerful campaign statement.
You get what it says on the label.
What’s happening Melbourne?
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-26/courtney-herron-bashed-to-death-royal-park-parkville-melbourne/11150612
Davidwh @ #1991 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 6:02 pm
How about when those religious beliefs start having an anti-secular influence on govt policy?
Why is Morrison still in full campaign mode… double dissolution election next year !
I don’t particularly care what anyone’s beliefs are. I do care deeply if it influences our politics which is why the large number of a particular subset of one faith with quite backward looking views on women and women’s rights and a disregard for science is of interest.
C@tmomma
“venal ratfuckers”
Can I use that? I’ll attribute it if you want.
Andrew Hastie attends an Anglican church, he was raised in the Presbyterian Church of Victoria (his father is a minister in that denomination). I have no doubt he is a young earth creationist, maybe Scott Morrison as well.
Among the Pentecostal (and other Conservative Evangelical) Christians I am guessing there would be a lot of enthusiasm for Scott Morrison. Because one of their own has become Prime Minister.
Tristo @ #1908 Sunday, May 26th, 2019 – 5:44 pm
Well, to give my personal analysis to my findings:
I think that comparing the results of the 2019 election to the 2016 election and trying to draw conclusions from it misses one big thing: One Nation didn’t run in the lower house in 2016. Rather, I think it would best to compare this election to the 2017 Queensland State election.
In that election, One Nation competed for a bunch of seats in North Queensland, which they hadn’t done in 20 years by that point.
The three I’m interested are the electorates of Rockhampton, Keppel, and Mirani, because these three seats collectively make the bulk of the federal seat of Capricornia.
ON managed to get:
– A 21.4% primary vote and a TPP of 44.8 in Rockhampton
– A 25.5% primary vote and a TPP of 46.9 in Keppel
– A 32.0% primary vote and the seat of Mirani
https://results.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/state/State2017/results/district73.html
https://results.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/state/State2017/results/district41.html
https://results.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/state/State2017/results/district55.html
So why wasn’t Labor worried about the threat from One Nation? Well, it was because at that election, One Nation took the majority of its votes from the LNP and Palmer United (which didn’t run in that election) and the Labor primary only went down a couple of percentage points. The exception to this was in Rockhampton, where reasonably well-liked Mayor Margaret Strelow was running as an independent and split the Labor vote, only to be overtaken by ON and have her preferences elect the Labor candidate.
In fact, once you put One Nation’s performance at the 2019 federal election in the context of their performance at the 2017 state election, it’s actually an underperformance.
To show you what I mean, take the booth of Emu Park, which had a similar number of votes at both elections and a bellwether of Capricornia.
In that state election, ON got ~27% at that booth, while it only got 17% at the federal.
For the Greens, it’s ~7% and 6% respectively.
Crucially, the LNP increased its vote from 21% to 39%; while Labor’s went down from 45% to 26%.
https://results.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/state/State2017/results/booth41.html
https://tallyroom.aec.gov.au/HousePollingPlaceFirstPrefs-24310-5231.htm
If this is the case across Capricornia, it suggests what ajm had hypothesized: that a chunk of Labor voters voted for the LNP and, at the same time, the more right wing of the LNP voter base has changed to ON and UAP, with some ON voters moving back to the LNP with the accession of Morrison.
(P.S. Apologies for taking 2 hours to make a response ajm, c@t and tristo. I had to completely rewrite my conclusions because so that it more accurately reflected the data I had. :p
And no mention from the ABC of Morrison’s broken promise about Melissa Price. Just the doublespeak about a “new challenge”.
lizzie says:
Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 6:07 pm
frednk
I saw Bob Brown on The Drum, trying to defend the Stop Adani convoy. He sounded out of touch. I used to admire him, but I think he is now yesterday’s man.
He got a Liberal Government; did he own it?