We’re still yet to have a new poll of federal voting intention after the election, for whatever that may still be worth, but I would imagine Newspoll will be breaking its drought to mark next week’s resumption of parliament. We do, however, have one of the Lowy Institute’s occasional surveys on attitudes to foreign affairs, the results of which are attractively presented on the organisation’s website.
The headline topic of the poll is Sino-American relations, and the results point to a sharp decline in trust towards China, which a clear majority of respondents rated the “world’s leading economic power”. Even clearer majorities, of around three-quarters, believed China was pursuing regional domination, and that Australia should do more to resist its military activities even if it affected our too-close economic relationship.
However, the poll also finds a further decline in trust in the United States, to add to the body-blow it took when Donald Trump was elected. Of particular interest here are the age breakdowns. Whereas there was little to distinguish the age cohorts in their positive view of the US on Obama’s watch, respondents in their youth and early middle-age now take a substantially more negative view than older ones.
Relatedly, the highly negative and worsening view of Trump personally, while evident across all age cohorts, is most pronounced among the young. This carries through to a head-to-head question on whether respondents should prioritise strong relations with the United States or China, with a majority of those aged 18-30 favouring China, and a large majority of the 60-plus cohort favouring the United States.
Beyond that, the survey offers no end of interesting material:
• Respondents were asked about their satisfaction with democracy – which, one often reads, is in freefall throughout the western world, particularly among the young. However, the Lowy Institute’s yearly tracking of this question going back to 2012 doesn’t show any such thing. If anything, there seems to be a slight trend in favour of the response that “democracy is preferable to any other kind of government”, which is up three on last year at 65%. While the young are less sold on this notion than the old, there has been a solid improving trend among the 18-to-30 cohort, with this year’s result up six on last year’s to 55%, a new high over the course of the series.
• Evaluations were sought on a limited sample of foreign leaders, specifically concerning whether they could be trusted in world affairs. Donald Trump ranked down alongside Vladimir Putin, while Jacinda Ardern recorded near-unanimous acclaim, with 88% expressing either a lot of or some confidence. New Zealand was rated “Australia’s best friend” out of six available options by 59%, up from six since 2017.
• Brexit was rated a bad thing for the United Kingdom by 62%, a bad thing for the European Union by 70%, and a bad thing for the West in general by 58%. The UK’s rating on a “feelings thermometer” fell six points, to 76.
• Concern about climate change maintained an upward trajectory, with 61% favouring action “even if this involves significant costs”. The long-range trend on this question going back to 2006 suggests climate change is less of a problem when Labor are in office.
• Views on immigration were less negative than last year, after a significant hardening of opinion between 2014 and 2018. However, the immigration rate was still held to be too high by 48% of all respondents, and a very large majority of older ones.
The survey was conducted online and by telephone from March 12 to 25 from a sample of 2130.
The second part of today’s lesson relates to Senate preference flows, from which we can obtain no end of information thanks to the Australian Electoral Commission’s publication of the data files containing the preference order for every single ballot paper. By contrast, we’re still waiting on the two-party preference splits the AEC eventually publishes for each party in the House of Representatives. There will be a lot of analysis of this information here over the coming weeks, but for starters I offer the following:
This shows, from left to right, the rate of voters’ adherence to their favoured party’s how-to-vote-card; the rate at which minor party voters’ preference orders favoured Labor over the Coalition or vice-versa, or neither in the event that they did not number either party (“two-party”); and a similar three-way measure that throws the Greens into the mix (“three-party”).
This shows that United Australia Party voters heavily favoured the Coalition over Labor, but not because they were following the party’s how-to-vote cards, a course followed by around 0.1% of the total electorate. One Nation preferences were only slightly less favourable to the Coalition, and even fewer of the party’s voters followed the card. Since One Nation’s preferences in the lower house split almost evenly in 2016, out of the 15 seats where they ran, it seems safe to assume a shift in One Nation preferences accounted for a substantial chunk of the two-party swing to the Coalition. I will calculate Senate preference flows from 2016 for comparison over the next few days.
As someone who spends an inordinate time bludging on this blog and chatting about politics when I could be doing more productive activities such as tidying cupboards or scrubbing walls, I think the name is very apt. I vote to keep it.
So far as I know, no one except First Dog was predicting a Coalition victory. For my own part, I believed the run of 51-49 to Labor when most others here were predicting 55-45 and the like. I am however a natural pessimist and feared the worst. The vibe for a change wasn’t there, like it was in 2013, 2007, 1996, 1983, 1975 and 1972.
But everyone feels different vibes. The advantage of being a pessimist is that things mostly work out better than you think, but as it turned out, not this time.
William and others commented on the suspicious constancy of the polls and suggested that herding was taking place. There were also uncertainties regarding the preferences for Palmer and One Nation parties, both reinvigorated since 2016. That plus the difficulty in pollsters actually reaching people in the new Comms environment – getting people to answer their phones. Things were a bit fluid. In fact many, including me, thought that young people were being missed and just possibly the Progressive vote was underestimated.
As it turns out, the polls were out by about 2.5%.
And no analysis will be better than the available data.
And no analysis will be better than the available data.
_____________________________
IDK. anywhere near 50/50 for QLD looked like bullshit to me.
Steve777:
From memory Mumble was one commentator openly sceptical about Qld and WA. But otherwise, well said.
nath
The point is, no matter how right you were in retrospect, it is bad psephology to go by your gut, or what people are saying in the supermarket, etc etc.
Every campaign I’ll have some candidate look at me sadly and say, “I don’t understand the result, it wasn’t the vibe I was getting on the street…”
How about, The Whine Bar? You can come here for a whine any time. 🙂
I don’t know what Mr Denmore thinks he might contribute to the discourse but it is as nothing compared to the data, the commentary and the Public Open Space provided by William, without whom life would be far poorer.
This is a forum for remarkably free expression. It is not contrived. Nearly all the input here is raised in the first place by those who post rather than by a meme-machine. There is no click bait. There is plenty of argument. A lot of original thought is ventilated. Mr D should ask himself what he has ever done that has served a better purpose.
Poll Dancing? 😀
Pollitics?
Here all night. 😀
zoomster
says:
Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 9:18 pm
nath
The point is, no matter how right you were in retrospect, it is bad psephology to go by your gut, or what people are saying in the supermarket, etc etc.
______________________________
Oh I don’t pretend to know anything about psephology. I just knew that Morrison would play better than Turnbull up there and that a swing to the LNP was likely. Individual seats, I had no idea obviously.
And, remember, all that mocking of Morrison’s bus tour of QLD. Looking at Sprocket here. It might have been a masterstroke. IDK.
Poll bludger is good. Gives another topic, hanging shit on polls. I have set up my dart board with numbers between 48 and 52 so i too can report random numbers.
Stop sucking up Briefly. Both William and myself find it nauseating.
And now for something completely different. Did you know that you can now have Jesus watch you take a dump?
Mr D writes a lot of good stuff. Not someone to be dismissed.
Thank you for the further encouragement nath. I don’t need reasons to post, but if I did your discomfort would be something to bear in mind.
Well I’m off to Netflix and Chill. 🙂 Good night.
C@tmomma says:
Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 9:27 pm
And now for something completely different. Did you know that you can now have Jesus watch you take a dump?
__________________________
Your all class as always!
What next your going to post a link of your own video doing it?
Were the polls out by 2.5 points on the Two-Party Preferred vote for the entire three years from the 2016 election?
Nicholas says:
Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 9:31 pm
Were the polls out by 2.5 points on the Two-Party Preferred vote for the entire three years from the 2016 election?
The polls have turned out to be wrong in WA, Victoria, NSW and federally. They really lack nuance. They can hardly get the PV right, let alone the 2PP.
The Lib polling was probably far better than Labor’s, in retrospect, they seem to have had a better read of the electorate. Labor used Galaxy (I think), who were just wrong.
lizzie says:
Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 5:25 pm
Does this solve the problem?
If his wife is still a beneficiary, he still benefits through her.
Barney in Makassar says:
Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 9:37 pm
lizzie says:
Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 5:25 pm
Denise Shrivell@deniseshrivell
2m2 minutes ago
Ten News reporting that Dutton has quit his family trust – the day before the writs are open. We’re so broken
Does this solve the problem?
If his wife is still a beneficiary, so he still benefits through her.
_______________________________________
Because women are the chattels of men?
Polls being wrong in 2019 doesn’t mean they will always be wrong. Humans are pretty good at improving their methods. It would take a very dim person to think polls will be irrelevant for ever.
The problems with polling have been traversed. It’s very difficult to get a large and randomised sample from a population that does not want to be sampled or which cannot be found (because they won’t take calls on their mobiles).
The Liberals seem to have found a way to compensate for this. Maybe they use more extensive and better qualitative research. The qualitative work done for Labor in Perth was remarkably accurate and informative. It’s a pity no-one in the Campaign took any notice of it.
Briefly, I’m not knocking William’s efforts. He’s remarkably diligent and focused on the facts. But that’s the point. The facts don’t appear to matter anymore. You can be as scientific and psephological as you like. But Australia, like other democracies, appears to have moved beyond reason. People aren’t interested in facts or in what is in their interests. They are voting according to their tribal prejudices and will deny the truth to reinforce their pre-determined, media-derived convictions. Australians, by and large, are a stupid populace ruined by prosperity and governed by morons.
Dio:
That said, looking forward to seeing how News Ltd spins their first Newspoll.
We were saying the same thing 10 years ago, and likely 20 years ago and beyond.
‘Always back the horse named self interest’ isn’t a phrase that has popped into the vernacular in the last 6 months after all.
There’s no doubt at all that the Liberals are very effective at campaigning to their mob and at hurting Labor with their materials.
They also have a huge budget, despite letting everyone think they’re broke. They know how to reach into the hopes and fears of voters. Blue-ants. They are not to be underestimated.
Mr Denmore says:
Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 9:44 pm
Briefly, I’m not knocking William’s efforts. He’s remarkably diligent and focused on the facts. But that’s the point. The facts don’t appear to matter anymore. You can be as scientific and psephological as you like. But Australia, like other democracies, appears to have moved beyond reason. People aren’t interested in facts or in what is in their interests. They are voting according to their tribal prejudices and will deny the truth to reinforce their pre-determined, media-derived convictions. Australians, by and large, are a stupid populace ruined by prosperity and governed by morons.
Mr Denmore, the Liberals have always been very good at getting people to vote against their own best interests. They have won dozens of elections on the strength of it.
I think the qualitative research showed that some voters moved to Labor and a greater number moved to the Liberals. Those who moved to the Liberals were animated by very specific factors – jobs, incomes, security of incomes. They were more likely to think the Liberals could deliver better results and the Liberal campaign reinforced these perceptions. The more prominent these factors were in the minds of voters, the more likely they were to swing to the Liberals. The Liberals clearly nailed it with these voters. It would be mistaken to say this was a ‘tribal’ vote or a stupid vote.
The voters of Queensland did not become more or less stupid/intelligent at this election than at any other. They voted their anxieties and their lived experiences and expectancies. They were moved by the campaigns. I met a lot of angry voters in the northern suburbs of Perth, in Pearce, Moore and Cowan. I met some very sweet voters in Stirling. The results did not surprise me at all. Labor completely failed to reach them. We effectively campaigned against ourselves to many of these voters while at the same time the anti-Labor campaigns resonated in ways that harmed Labor support.
The Liberals are not loved. But nor is Labor. I think the Liberals really get this. They know how to leverage discontent. We got utterly smashed by them and their many clones. Labor forgot how hard it is to defeat the Liberals. There seems to be a view that Labor ‘deserved’ to win. It’s never like this. There is no such thing as deserving to win. There is only winning and losing.
fess
Exactly. Anyone with the remotest knowledge of history or indeed science would know that self interest or at least perceived self interest is the driving force in humanity and all species. Every generation bemoans how things used to be better.
Lars Von Trier @ #575 Thursday, June 27th, 2019 – 9:31 pm
Did you purse your lips and clutch your pearls as you wrote that?
What a humourless individual you are. And always on the make to take a potshot at me. Which makes you boring and predictable as well.
The Liberals actually do not expect to be loved. They really do not mind being hated. They are focused on one thing – power. They are single-minded in this. Labor really have to learn from them in this respect.
Labor are motivated by a whole host of other things. These are the pulse for Labor. But without power they are just heartache. We have to learn again how to get power.
And as soon as a Labor leader looks like they are hungry for power the headlines start appearing…’Power Hungry’. 😐
Don’t be obtuse, Lars.
You know damn well that marriage is a form of legal contract, where assests are generally divided 50-50. When wills are made, both ensure that if one died, the other gains control of all the assets. I would be very surprised if their situation was any different.
In other words, if she died, he would inherit any asset she owned, even if it was just in her name. And so the S44 problem remains until he then divests himself of any interest.
In the meantime, if the value of said assets go through the roof as a result of favourable decisions made by the government, he makes a very nice windfall, thank you very much.
THAT is why it’s a problem.
And, for the record, I would (and have) argued the same for any MP and their spouse, regardless of gender.
Let the fawning begin:
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/he-didn-t-surprise-me-trump-lavishes-praise-on-morrison-over-pm-s-election-win-20190627-p521ti.html
Briefly
“jobs, incomes, security of incomes”
And to beat the next person, the first to have the bigger truck, the first to have the biggest house, the first to have the most luck, the most successful children, the biggest birthday party, the highest wages, the most lucrative scam …………… but we’re still battlers and don’t tax us, particularly less than those others, and we just want to win and fuck everyone and everything else.
The Liberals do this wonderfully well.
It’s why so many bloggers, Labor voters, greenies and thinkers are so despondent after an election to re-elect the shonks and spivs that occupy the majority of seats.
A government with no other agenda than to appeal to the venal, the craven and the “i want ” brigade.
It manifests itself on this wonderful forum, some with the need to be the smartest, the latest and the loudest.
But importantly,Poll bludger is a great forum and the worthy stage for of its readers, contributors, psephologists, news and importantly WB. Thanks.
“Every generation bemoans how things used to be better.”
Things ain’t what they used to be and never was.
Smiles all round.
Chinda63
You are making some heroic assumptions about the Trust that you know nothing about.
The assets of a Trust are owned by the Trust and would not be subject of a Will unless the Trust Deed instructed that the assets owned by the Trust are to be given to the Estate on death of a Trustee or beneficiary. That may not be the case.
The meme continually being rolled out that voters voted against their best interests is a load of paternalistic tripe.
It is an excuse for the fact that the ALP, despite their deeply held belief that they know what’s best for Australia (but keep losing federal elections), just doesn’t understand Australian voters. The ALP just reached 1/3 First Preferences. Two out of every three Australians preferred others. In Queensland it was only just slightly over 1 in 4.
So, you can keep rolling out the flawed meme or actually do some introspection about why the ALP are so horrible at the Federal level. You couldn’t even beat the LNP after they tried committing seppuku by emulating the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd fiasco.
It is the case that the Liberals will reduce the real incomes of working people and increase unemployment while also demolishing the social incomes on which they rely.
The Liberals have just won an election by attracting support from voters who will be directly harmed by Liberal policies.
It’s not paternalism to say so. It’s an accurate statement of events. The Liberals will set out to inflict economic and social harm on working people. That’s what they do. That’s why they exist.
briefly,
That is a seriously distorted opinion. You are either deliberately trying to get a rise out of conservatives or you are having significant issues dealing with reality.
Bucephalus, this is the reality. We’ve many years of Liberal Government and Opposition to guide us. The Liberals almost always seek to harm the economic and social conditions for working people and to undermine the social income framework that exists to serve working people.
This is not contentious. It’s plain as Day. I doubt we could find a single social advance that the Liberals have supported. Lately they have opposed good ideas simply from tactical intransigence. They are basically a reactionary force these days.
The use of the term conservative is also quite misleading. The Liberals are no longer liberal. Nor are they conservative. They are reactionary. They want to reinstate the pre-Curtin order.
They believe in the past, or in a veiled version of it, a pastel past. They exult in the stupid, moreover.
The Liberals will gouge the lives of workers, pillage the environment and take us to war. They will do all this so they can try to revive the 1920s. They are pre-Menzian in their outlook and goals. They practically oppose modernity itself.
Bula!
Last day in the paradise that is Fiji.
A random question: is the 41.44% primary vote the coalition received in fact the lowest coalition vote recorded since WW2?
If so. Riddle me this: How good is ScoMo?
Andrew_Earlwood @ #546 Friday, June 28th, 2019 – 5:21 am
Good enough for the vote to translate into 58% 2PP in Queensland so he could then win 21/30 of their seats. 😐
Peter van Onselen
@vanOnselenP
So in his first TV “interview” Israel Folau compares being gay to being a drug addict….that really does sum him up quite succinctly
It’s Israel Folau who is the ‘drug addict’. And Religion is his drug.
Mr Denmore says:
Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 9:44 pm
….
Australians, by and large, are a stupid populace ruined by prosperity and governed by morons.
…
But we are lucky; if you take the trifecta; Trump, Johnson and Morrison; things don’t look too bad.
Israel Folau was interviewed by the homosexual Alan Jones on SAD last night. What a couple of hypocrites.