Morgan: 53.5-46.5 to Labor

Labor scores its biggest two-party poll lead of the term from Roy Morgan, which records a particularly big blowout in Victoria.

Roy Morgan published results on Wednesday of its latest federal voting intention polling, as it does from time to time, in this case combining surveys conducted over the past two weekends from 2709 respondents. This shows Labor with its biggest lead of the term, from this or any other pollster: 53.5-46.5, out from 52.5-47.5 in the poll it published in mid-July. The Coalition and Labor are tied at 37% on the primary vote, respectively being down two and steady, while the Greens are up a point to 12.5% and One Nation is steady on 3%. These numbers have ticked the BludgerTrack poll aggregate a further 0.4% to Labor, who are now credited with a lead 52.4-47.6.

State breakdowns of the two-party vote are provided, showing Labor leading 51-49 in New South Wales (for a swing in their favour of about 3% compared with the 2019 election), 59.5-40.5 in Victoria (a swing of about 6.5%, and three points stronger for Labor than the previous poll), 55.5-44.5 in South Australia (a swing of about 5%) and 54-46 in Tasmania (a 2% swing to the Liberals, although the sample size here is particularly flimsy), while the Coalition leads 52-48 in Queensland (a swing to Labor of about 6.5%) and 51.5-48.5 in Western Australia (a swing of about 4%, which is a fair bit more modest than other polling from WA recently).

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.

1,778 comments on “Morgan: 53.5-46.5 to Labor”

Comments Page 35 of 36
1 34 35 36
  1. Australia is definitely not vaccinating as fast as the UK was. If the predictions by some (not myself), that Australia will reach 56% fully vaccinated by October or November are to be realized, Australia needs to be vaccinating at a much faster rate than the UK was during its peak.

    https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2021-03-20..latest&facet=none&pickerSort=desc&pickerMetric=total_vaccinations_per_hundred&Metric=People+fully+vaccinated&Interval=Cumulative&Relative+to+Population=true&Align+outbreaks=false&country=AUS~GBR

  2. ”Vaccines aren’t magic”

    And even if they were we would only have 44% of the (total) population partially vaccinated and 27% fully vaccinated by then if things go well – that’s not enough.

  3. Covid to go galactic:

    Variant names written in stars after Greek alphabet is used

    New coronavirus variants are to be named after star constellations when all the letters in the Greek alphabet are used, a senior World Health Organisation official has said. (SMH)

  4. This current Covid wave has also largely stayed out of Sydney’s North. It seems to be concentrating in the poorer suburbs. Today the Penrith LGA was split, with the poorer East is doing worse than the more affluent West and joining the area of concern.

  5. Liberal and Nationals MPs across the country face grassroots campaigns to install independent candidates, with ministers including Greg Hunt, Barnaby Joyce, Paul Fletcher, Angus Taylor and Stuart Robert all being targeted.

    The “voices for” campaigns are modelled on successful efforts to install independents Cathy McGowan and then Helen Haines in the seat of Indi in Victoria, Rebekha Sharkie in Mayo and Zali Steggall in Warringah in the last few electoral cycles. Ms McGowan, now retired from Parliament, is active in advising and assisting some of these new groups.

    https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/liberals-and-nationals-across-the-country-facing-grassroots-challenges-20210807-p58gpb.html

  6. Bird of paradox is a real charmer. Liberal staffer?

    Just convinces me even more there is something in the vaccine distribution.

  7. Making Porter the temporary leader of the house will not cost the coalition a single vote. Anybody who does is completely out of touch with political reality. That is simply an exercise in wishful thinking, something that occurs a lot on here.

  8. Covid to go galactic:

    Variant names written in stars after Greek alphabet is used

    New coronavirus variants are to be named after star constellations when all the letters in the Greek alphabet are used, a senior World Health Organisation official has said. (SMH)

    That might be confusing and cause even more alarm if it gets to Cancer.

  9. Just occurred to me that SfM, assuming he leads the LNP to the election, will be the first PM since Howard in 2007 to be up for reelection (as leader that is).

  10. poroti, C@tmomma and D&M,

    The article in the NZ Herald, originally published in the UK Telegraph, could have been better.

    The review that the majority of the article is based on, remains at preprint status do far as I am aware: https://f1000research.com/articles/10-232/v1

    If you would like to know what others in the scientific community think of this manuscript, please read the reviewer comments (and the reader comments as well). All unfavourable. I am not sure how the authors will be able to retrieve it, but perhaps they can.

    It is a very challenging issue. A lot of reputations are on the line, including the WHO, for initially denying airborne transmission of COVID-19. The WHO, who funded the review.

    If need be, I can argue against the rest of the evidence/learned opinions in the newspaper article. Also problematic e.g. the opinion that the R is too low for COVID-19 be airborne is….surprising. Tuberculosis is widely considered to be airborne (now) and has a lower R than COVID-19.

    Here is something that I found interesting to read recently. A nice essay on how the thinking of airborne transmission of infectious pathogens has evolved over the ages: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1286457921000733

  11. Steve

    Here’s my reckoning of where we are headed..

    Currently, 4,450,418 people have had their first dose. An increase of 646,526 in the past week.
    Currently, 4,611,321 people have had their second dose. An increase of 745,536 in the past week.
    A total of 1,392,062 doses were given in the last week.

    This translates to 17.5% of the population having had a first dose 0nly and 18.2% having had both doses.

    At the current rate, by the end of August (23 days)
    An additional 2,124,299 people will have had their first dose. Raising this to 25.9% of the population.
    An additional 2,449,618 people will have had their second dose. Raising this to 27.8% of the population.

    End of September (30 days) will add 10.9% to first dose and 12.6% to the fully vaccinated group. So..
    38.5% first dose only
    40.4% fully vaccinated

    And this is where the projection is bound to be inaccurate as we will already have reached the inflexion point in takeup. And even at this point we are woefully unprotected and its because of low efficacy after the 1st dose (+3 weeks) and the fact that it requires 2 weeks after the second dose for full effect.

    (Are Gladys/Hazard mathematically literate enough to understand these subtleties?)

    Lets take a closer look at the end of August for example. From above, 25.9% of the population will have had their first dose. We know that after the first dose both vaccines are about 30% effective. However, nearly a third of people with only one dose will have had their dose too recently to take effect. Its not a bad approximation to simply ignore everyone who has had a 1st dose as contributing to reduction in reinfection.

    Again, by end of August there will be 27.8% of the population that have been fully vaccinated, but of those about 6% are less than 2 weeks after their second dose.. So its really more like 22%.

    And it gets more complex than this because of that 22% of the population, some will have had Pfizer (88% efficacy) and some will have had AZ (67% efficacy) given an “average” of around 75%.

    Meaning (if reduction is retransmission is close to efficacy against symptomatic covid) then 0.22 x 0.75 = 17%. In other words, by the end of August the effect of vaccination is to reduce the rate of retransmission (R) by 17%.

    Is this sufficient to level out the number of cases? Very unlikely. It may put a dint in the exponential growth.

    The other thing we should worry about is this. Where will our vaccination rate asymptote towards? In the US, the asymptote is looking like 65%. In the UK its 75% (of population as a whole). In Malta is 95%. Where will Australia head? Thing is, we’re likely to start seeing that inflexion point in September.

    So its only a matter of weeks away when demand will be as important as supply and we need to start taking that $300 seriously.

  12. Thanks for that Griff, I am having a read now….

    According to Deputy Chief Epidemiologist Kamilla S. Jósefsdóttir, if the rate of infection continues to grow, contact tracing will become impossible, which will only further boost the spread of infection and increase the likelihood that the COVID-19 ward will have to turn away patients in need.

    And Iceland has fully vaccinated 75% of its total population. Australia only wants 56% fully vaccinated by its first target. If Iceland is struggling to provide optimal TTIQ when 75% of its population is fully vaccinated, how does Scomo expect our states to manage an optimal TTIQ when we are at a mere 56% fully vaccinated? Lockdowns perhaps?

  13. cud chewer,

    A couple of points:

    On the upside, there will be partial effectiveness against symptomatic disease afforded by one dose onwards.

    On the downside, vaccinations being as effective at reducing retransmission as they are for preventing symptomatic disease is unlikely.

    But ignore what happens elsewhere. NSW is special! A glorious field experiment beckons 🙂

  14. Some Bludgers may find this shocking but the results of Newspoll (or any other poll) have no effect on the actual votes on election day. So chill out on the Murdoch conspiracy theories in relations to polls.

  15. Scott says:
    Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 7:45 pm

    clem attlee the federal election has not been called yet

    These issues will have an even lesser impact come election day. I was referring to the upcoming Newspoll.

  16. Cud Chewer @ #1719 Sunday, August 8th, 2021 – 8:09 pm

    Steve

    Here’s my reckoning of where we are headed..

    Currently, 4,450,418 people have had their first dose. An increase of 646,526 in the past week.
    Currently, 4,611,321 people have had their second dose. An increase of 745,536 in the past week.
    A total of 1,392,062 doses were given in the last week.

    This translates to 17.5% of the population having had a first dose and 18.2% having had both doses.

    At the current rate, by the end of August (23 days)
    An additional 2,124,299 people will have had their first dose. Raising this to 25.9% of the population.
    An additional 2,449,618 people will have had their second dose. Raising this to 27.8% of the population.

    End of September (30 days) will add 10.9% to first dose and 12.6% to the fully vaccinated group. So..
    38.5% first dose
    40.4% fully vaccinated

    And this is where the projection is bound to be inaccurate as we will already have reached the inflexion point in takeup. And even at this point we are woefully unprotected and its because of low efficacy after the 1st dose (+3 weeks) and the fact that it requires 2 weeks after the second dose for full effect.

    (Are Gladys/Hazard mathematically literate enough to understand these subtleties?)

    Lets take a closer look at the end of August for example. From above, 25.9% of the population will have had their first dose. We know that after the first dose both vaccines are about 30% effective. However, nearly a third of people with only one dose will have had their dose at least 3 weeks earlier. Its not a bad approximation to simply ignore everyone who has had a 1st dose as contributing to reduction in reinfection.

    Again, by end of August there will be 27.8% of the population, but of those about 6% are less than 2 weeks after their second dose.. So its really more like 22%.

    And it gets more complex than this because of that 22% of the population, some will have had Pfizer (88% efficacy) and some will have had AZ (67% efficacy) given an “average” of around 75%.

    Meaning (if reduction is retransmission is close to efficacy against symptomatic covid) then 0.22 x 0.75 = 17%. In other words, by the end of August the effect of vaccination is to reduce the rate of retransmission (R) by 17%.

    Is this sufficient to level out the number of cases? Very unlikely. It may put a dint in the exponential growth.

    The other thing we should worry about is this. Where will our vaccination rate asymptote towards? In the US, the asymptote is looking like 65%. In the UK its 75% (of population as a whole). In Malta is 95%. Where will Australia head? Thing is, we’re likely to start seeing that inflexion point in September.

    So its only a matter of weeks away when demand will be as important as supply and we need to start taking that $300 seriously.

    Excellent summary, but (necessarily) based on two assumptions which I don’t think we can assume: (1) that the vaccines used reduce shedding/transmission in populations as efficiently as they produce antibody responses in individuals & (2) that the aggregated population risk reflects the risk in all sub-populations. Neither are likely with Delta in Sydney at present. Any real vaccine effect will take > months to be evident, even if they actually do have a significant effect on a population level – which I don’t think has been demonstrated in any population yet. Vaccines help, but are not the answer that our political class wish. It’s personal protection, snap lockdowns, public funding of people not profits and real ITTQ for as far as my eye can see.

  17. Cud, you continuously use the out dated vaccine efficacy figure of 67% for AZ – which is below the most recent analysis of real world data from the UK eg:

    Vaccine effectiveness
    Table 4 and Figure 2 show vaccine effectiveness estimates by age group or risk group using the cohort analysis. Overall VE after one dose was approximately 60% after one dose, with little variation by age group. VE was similar for AstraZeneca and Pfizer after one dose, though confidence intervals overlapped. After 2 doses, there were more notable differences by vaccine type in both age cohorts though confidence intervals generally continued to overlap. In the 16 to 64 years cohort VE with Pfizer was 93.3% (85.8% to 96.8%) and with AstraZeneca 78.0% (69.7% to 84.0%). In the 65 years and older cohort VE with Pfizer was 86.7% (80.1% to 91.1%) and with AstraZeneca 76.4% (58.8% to 86.5%). The TNCC, generally gave slightly higher estimates (Supplementary Table S5.1 and Supplementary Figures S5.1a, S5.1b).

    See especially Table 4 which breaks the data down by cohort and comorbidity variables

    https://khub.net/documents/135939561/430986542/RCGP+VE+riskgroups+paper.pdf/a6b54cd9-419d-9b63-e2bf-5dc796f5a91f

  18. yabba:

    Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 5:30 pm

    [‘As Cud so eloquently put it — Fuck off, l’arsehole.’]

    I’d describe that as highly ineloquent, personal abuse your forte, Misster Mensa – oh, and childlike to boot!

    __________________________________

    Can’t wait around for Newspoll but I think it will be 53-47.

  19. Pfizer fizzer sends jab hopefuls home in disgust
    People who turned up for a ‘Super Sunday’ vaccination blitz thought they would be getting Pfizer jabs – but left in anger when they discovered they were being offered only AstraZeneca.

    Prob more Liberal lies. When will the public realise that the Liberals are full of shit?

  20. Why would the Super Vaccination clinic make it Astrazenca if you are under 60 – you have to be counselled by your GP?

    How stupid are they? It is all about the words and not the actions. Bloody couldn’t organise a chook raffle.

  21. south
    Not really.
    .
    .
    How are COVID vaccines faring against Delta?
    22 Jul 2021
    …………………..New research, published in The New England Journal of Medicine, has confirmed that both AstraZeneca and Pfizer COVID vaccines have a lower efficacy against Delta, with a single dose of either vaccine around 30% effective against the strain, compared to 48% for the Alpha variant.

    However, after two doses, only modest differences were observed, with Pfizer 88% effective against Delta compared to 93% for Alpha, and AstraZeneca 67% effective against Delta and 74.5% for Alpha.
    https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/how-are-covid-vaccines-faring-against-delta

  22. My low point today was Speers on Insiders with a broad grin describing car park rorts. No gravitas, just tickled by the insider fun of it all. When our leading journos behave like this you know we’re in trouble. Still, a small comfort, despite this, I do get the sense that the general public are polishing their baseball bats

  23. sprocket_ @ Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 8:44 pm

    I cannot see the breakdown of efficacy of the vaccines against the delta variant. Perhaps I missed it? If not, those percentages you are citing are for all-cause COVID-19, not delta-specific.

  24. Rossmore

    I too was disgusted by Speers having a good chuckle about billions of dollars worth of rorts.

    The Drum, QandA and Insiders have become so moderate and scripted

  25. Awash with AZ are we?

    Young Australians frustrated they can’t get vaccination appointments — even for AstraZeneca
    The Project’s Tommy Little has unleashed on Australia’s vaccination program, saying he’s been unable to get the jab — not even AstraZeneca.

  26. BB

    Now that it has been reported that “some studies” found “no evidence” that airborne transmission is a risk with SARS-CoV-2, that some studies found no MRNA – even though some did and that some were inconclusive, while others were conclusive, that’s good enough for me.

    I won’t be wearing masks from now on, at least until more definite studies come out, and bugger the consequences for me and those around me.

    I assume the virus is well aware of these studies and will be refusing to infect anyone who has read the latest ambivalent literature.

    Thank you.

    No, this is the wrong message.

    Masks protect against both aerosol and droplet infection, which as I said are actually a continuum of sizes of particles.

    Both aerosol and droplet infection are occurring – but the proportions are not obvious.

    And the difference between the two is only important when trying to put public health orders in place.

    For both: Wash your hands, or sanitise; wear a mask; stay more than 2 m away from other people. These things will protect you whatever the mode.

    But the corollary to “We do not need to wear masks because infection is through droplet”, is “we do not need to wash our hands because infection is by aerosol”.

    These black and white positions are neither correct, nor espoused by the scientific community, and are definitely not helpful for damping down transmission.

    Apologies for sounding a bit preachy.

Comments Page 35 of 36
1 34 35 36

Leave a Reply

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