Newspoll breakdowns: November-December 2019

Aggregated polling breakdowns from Newspoll offer never-before-seen detail on voting intention by income and education, together with state, gender and age.

Something new under the sun today from Newspoll, with The Australian ($) publishing the first set of aggregated breakdowns since the election. This would appear to be limited to the new-look poll that was launched last month, which has dropped its telephone component and is now conducted entirely online. Only two results have been published in that time, but there is evidently more behind this poll than that, as the survey period extends back to November 7 and the sample size of 4562 suggests three polling periods rather than two.

The results as published are of interest in providing never-before-seen breakdowns for education level (no tertiary, TAFE/technical or tertiary) and household income (up to $50,000, up to $100,000, up to $150,000, and beyond). Including the first of these as a weighting variable promises to address difficulties pollsters may have been having in over-representing those with good education and high levels of civic engagement. However, the poll gives with one hand and takes with the other, in that it limits the state breakdowns are limited to New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland. And it falls well short of the promised new age of pollster transparency, providing no detail on how the various sub-categories have been weighted.

The state breakdowns suggest either that Labor has recovered slightly in Queensland since the election, or that polling is still struggling to hit the mark there. The Coalition is credited with a two-party lead of 55-45, compared with 58.4-41.6 at the election. Their primary vote is 40%, down from 43.7%, with Labor up from 26.7% to 29%, One Nation up from 8.9% to 13%, and the Greens up from 10.3% to 12%. The Coalition lead in New South Wales is 51-49, compared with 51.8-48.2 at the election, from primary votes of Coalition 42% (42.5%), Labor 35% (34.6%) and Greens 10% (8.7%). Labor’s lead in Victoria is 53-47, barely different from the election result of 53.1-46.9, from primary votes of Coalition 40% (38.6%), Labor 38% (36.9%) and Greens 12% (11.9%).

Age breakdowns consist of four cohorts rather than the old three, and tell a globally familiar story of Labor dominating among the 18-to-34s with a lead of 57-43, while the 65-plus cohort goes 61-39 the other way. In between are a 50-50 from 35-49s and 51-49 to the Coalition among 50-64s. The primary votes are less radical than the recent findings of the Australian Election Study survey: the primary votes among the young cohort are Coalition 34%, Labor 35% and Greens 22%, compared with 37%, 23% and 28% respectively in the AES.

Reflecting polling in Britain, there is little distinction in the balance of major party support between the three education cohorts (UPDATE: actually not so – I was thinking of social class, education was associated with Labor support), contrary to the traditional expectation that the party of the working class would do best among those with no tertiary education. The Coalition instead leads 52-48 among both that cohort and the university-educated, with Labor leading 51-49 among those with TAFE or other technical qualifications. However, household income breakdowns are more in line with traditional expectation, with Labor leading 53-47 at the bottom end, the Coalition leading 51-49 in the lower-middle, and the Coalition leading 58-42 in both of the upper cohorts.

Leadership ratings turn up a few curiosities, such as Scott Morrison rating better in Victoria (46% on both approval and disapproval) than New South Wales (41% and 51%) and Queensland (43% and 51%). Conversely, Anthony Albanese is stronger in his home state of New South Wales (41% and 40%) than Victoria (37% and 42%) and Queensland (35% and 49%).

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

7,114 comments on “Newspoll breakdowns: November-December 2019”

  1. a r

    Not sure if it’s the only factor, but it appears to be the dominant one. Easy enough to compare for yourself:

    100 Comments (https://www.pollbludger.net/wp-json/wp/v2/comments/?post=43143&per_page=100&page=1&before=2020-01-04T12:24:55)
    50 Comments (https://www.pollbludger.net/wp-json/wp/v2/comments/?post=43143&per_page=50&page=1&before=2020-01-04T12:24:55)
    20 Comments (https://www.pollbludger.net/wp-json/wp/v2/comments/?post=43143&per_page=20&page=1&before=2020-01-04T12:24:55)
    5 Comments (https://www.pollbludger.net/wp-json/wp/v2/comments/?post=43143&per_page=5&page=1&before=2020-01-04T12:24:55)

    Those links (I have added the URLs) use per_page to set a non-default posts per page parameter. This mean using something like LIMIT and OFFSET and probably also sorting the all the posts for the whole thread (so long threads are bad too..). Unless the QO can do this via indexes it’s almost certain to be slow (too hard for the QO to optimize and too big to cache)

    Note that links like:
    https://www.pollbludger.net/2019/12/26/newspoll-breakdowns-november-december-2019/comment-page-142/#comment-3315938
    Have the default page size (50 posts) and aren’t slow (though they’re sometimes off by one causing the post on the boundary between page n and page n+1 to appear in both pages. or vary between the two, or something…)

  2. How bad is bushfire smoke?

    The US EPA has published some advisory papers developed by the California Air Resources Board abot wildfires https://airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=topics.smoke_wildfires_guide_factsheets
    Includes
    Entire Wildfire Guide https://www3.epa.gov/airnow/wildfire-smoke/wildfire-smoke-guide-revised-2019.pdf
    Which says (in part):

    Although a large population can be exposed to smoke during a wildfire event, most healthy adults and children will recover quickly from wildfire smoke exposure. Certain lifestages and populations may, however, be at greater risk of experiencing health effects, including people with respiratory or cardiovascular diseases, children and older adults, pregnant women, people of lower socioeconomic status, and outdoor workers.

    and Fires and your Health https://airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=topics.smoke_events

    If you have heart or lung disease, if you are an older adult, or if you have children, talk with your doctor about whether and when you should leave the area. When smoke is heavy for a prolonged period of time, fine particles can build up indoors, even though you may not be able to see them

    Our gov’ts should be warning people to look after their lungs on high pollution days.
    But they’re Liberals; why pretend they care now – they have never cared in the past.

  3. Seasprite says @Saturday, January 4, 2020 at 3:55 pm

    I am reading a lot of tweets over at #auspol about Morison smirking and smiling while telling fibs. He does this when he knows he’s not telling the truth and the reporters don’t pick him up on it.
    “Remember this disturbing grin? Professional liespotter Pamela Meyer calls it “Duper’s Delight,” the thrill a liar may not be able to contain at getting away with it.”

    If anyone has twitter you may want to post about it because it seems no one has picked up on it yet.
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/duping_delight
    http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/lying/dupers_delight.htm
    https://www.criminalelement.com/dupers-delight-duping-lie-liars-smile-getting-away-with-it-liespotting-pamela-meyer-ted-crime-hq/

    Actually, it’s not so easy to detect a lie. Listen to a recent Talk the Talk that discussed the subject at http://talkthetalkpodcast.com/388-lies-all-lies/

  4. OH has speculated (and I had been thinking it too) that maybe smoko’s insistence on touching people physically is rooted in his religious beliefs, a la faith healing?
    Seems plausible

  5. Zeh

    I think it was more about getting good shots for use in his disastrous promotional video.

    And yes, this does mean he deliberately delayed announcing these measures to ensure the advertising could be bedded down in the middle of a nationwide bushfire emergency.

  6. I know Celeste Barber and am thrilled about her putting our shithead incompetent prime ministers 11 million dollar commitment to a total of 4 (FUCKING FOUR!) new fire-fighting air-craft to shame. Go Celeste go!

  7. Blanket:

    Four C130Hs would would be a good start. US Forest Service has access to eight (mix of C130Hs and more modern C130Js) via Air National Guard /. Air Force Reserve:
    https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/fire/planes/maffs
    The modular approach means the plane doesn’t need extensive modification and can continue its military role (which is at ANG / Reserve level not USAF level)

    RAAF sold/gave away its C130Hs (RAAF now has C130J Super Hercules only, and these are expensive), but the five RNZAF C130Hs might be viable – they were modernized in the period between 2008-2016 hence probably in decent condition but RNZAF has contracted to replace with C130Js and presumably is looking to sell/give-away C130Hs to developing world (or trade in back to L-M). Australia can almost certainly make a better offer, particularly since they can provide RNZAF with access to C130Js and even C17s (with RAAF pilots) if the RNZAF needs something before they get their own C130Js.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *