Midweek miscellany: Morgan, JWS Research True Issues, referendum pollster performance (open thread)

A poll records the Coalition with a two-party lead for the first time since the election, but there are reasons to be dubious.

The Courier-Mail will have a Queensland state poll through at 10am local time, presumably from YouGov, which the paper has been promoting with its trademark subtlety. Alongside the usual bilge about how the results will rock the state to its foundations, we are informed the poll includes questions on how respondents might vote if Labor changed leaders.

In what’s likely to be a fallow period for federal polling post-referendum, Roy Morgan turned a few heads with its weekly voting intention result, which is the first poll this term to credit the Coalition with a two-party lead, by a bare 50.5-49.5 margin, after Labor led 54-46 a week previously. However, the result is in large part down to an anomalous flow of respondent-allocated preferences: the primary votes of Labor 32% (down three), Coalition 36% (up two), Greens 14% (steady) and One Nation 4.5% are all in the ballpark of the 2022 election result, and in fact convert to 53-47 in Labor’s favour if preference flows from the election are applied. The poll was conducted in the immediate aftermath of the referendum, from last Monday through to Sunday, from a sample of 1383.

JWS Research has released its monthly True Issues survey of issue salience, which finds 56% nominating the cost of living when asked unprompted to identify their three most important issues, shooting up from 43% in June. Housing and interest rates, health and aged care and environment and climate change are little changed in second through to fourth place, with health levelling off after a long post-pandemic slide. An index measure of the federal government’s performance is down to 48, after the four previous readings since the 2022 election came in at 52 or 53. The survey was conducted

With most of the votes from the referendum now in, here’s a ranked listing of how the pollsters performed:

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.

1,000 comments on “Midweek miscellany: Morgan, JWS Research True Issues, referendum pollster performance (open thread)”

Comments Page 19 of 20
1 … 18 19 20

  1. If ever there was an opportune time for Australia to strategically take a more neutral and independent position in world affairs it is now. Yet our establishment brains trust have handcuffed us to a failing train wreck.

  2. ‘Watermelon says:
    Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 2:26 pm

    Why don’t you answer my relevant question?
    Ceasefires nearly always involve a calculation of pluses and minuses for both sides.
    What, militarily, is Hamas giving up to secure a ceasefire?

    Based on your (exceptionally inhumane) commentary, you are obviously confusing the meaning of “ceasefire” with “surrender”…’
    ———————-
    Nope. I am pointing out that military ceasefires usally accrue advantages and disadvantages to the combatants.

    My question is quite straightforward.

    What does Bandt propose to do, or even say, about Hamas using a ceasefire to regroup, re-arm, fortify its positions and resupply with medicines, food, water and fuel?

  3. The next polls will be of interest to see if Albo’s strategy of grandstanding with the POTUS will hold steady his satisfaction rating after the referendum defeat.

  4. @Bizz:

    “ For those with more budget experience, is the $370’ish billion for AUKUS subs on a comparable basis (acquisition and whole of life upkeep) to what was being discussed about the French diesels (about $230 billion)?

    https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/lost-the-plot-how-an-obsession-with-local-jobs-blew-out-australia-s-90-billion-submarine-program-20210913-p58r34.html”

    ________

    The $230 billion figure for the Attack class programs was an all up – incls – ‘dust to dust’ cost covering:

    1. The Naval Group contract ($32 billion in 2016 constant dollars);
    2. Associated Program costs (estimated to be $18 billion in 2016 dollars as at the signing of the contract, but actually shrinking to $15 billion on the day the contract was cancelled);
    3. The effects of inflation over the life of the build contract (so between 2016 and 2052 when the last boat was due to be delivered into service with the RAN). This represents the difference between the headline $50 billion quoted in 2016 (constant dollars for the contract plus associated program costs estimate) and the %90 billion ‘blow out’ figure: which clearly wasn’t a blowout at all – just the difference between ‘constant dollars’ (ie. the value of the contract in 2016 dollar terms) and ‘turned out’ costs, which include a ‘best guess’ as to the impact on inflation on such a long term contract; and finally
    4. All submarine programs end up with operational costs – also referred to as sustainment costs – of about 150% of total construction costs; so that’s another $135 billion in operating ‘turned out’ costs for the period 2032 and 2082 – the period of expected operation of the Attack class.
    5. Throw in a ten year life extension program (the attack class hulls are actually designed for up to 40 years of service) and bingo – the sum of all of the above = that $230 billion figure above.

    Contrast that with AUKUS:

    First off the bat – there is an obvious deception in the headline figures that only David Shoebridge has really commented on. namely that the money runs out in 2053. That’s in the budget papers.

    When queried by this, our Perfumed Warlord went into a towering rage of Chanel No.5 steam: ‘No. there is a $100 billion in contingency costs built in, so Shoebridge is wrong’, he fulminated. This is straight up lie. To his shame.

    The contingency the Perfumed One referred to covers blow outs within the next 30 years. However, even assuming ‘the plan’ is on track by 2053, there will still be at least 3 and possibly still 5 SSN-AUKUS Subs to be built over the following 10-15 years, PLUS at least another 30 years of sustainment costs for an 8 strong nuclear sub fleet, plus a long tail sustainment (for the last in class to exist service) and decommissioning costs [the vexed issue of what to do with the waste and reactor core] to factor in.

    In truth, adjusting for inflation the Australian Government will not get much change out $1 trillion when all is said and done. So at least three, perhaps four times the incls cost of the Attack class program.

  6. What does Bandt propose to do, or even say, about Hamas using a ceasefire to regroup, re-arm, fortify its positions and resupply with medicines, food, water and fuel?

    It’s not Bandt. It’s the United Nations General Assembly, every international humanitarian aid organisation, every international human rights organisation, everyone who’s not frankly a racist monster. Because the alternative to a ceasefire is maiming and murdering innocent people, half of them children, with nowhere to flee with no water, no antibiotics or even gauze for their wounds, no painkillers for excruciating phosphorous burns, carnage on an industrial scale with few historical parallels; and we can’t even say “this should stop” because the so-called “human animals” and “children of darkness” currently being slaughtered in a concentration camp haven’t promised to unilaterally disarm. If the killing stops and Hamas regroups, re-arms, fortifies its positions and resupplies, that’s what a fucking ceasefire is. If you don’t think that’s better than what’s happening now, I invite you to go on X watch some of the first-person footage of what’s actually happening as we speak, if you have the stomach to see some real beheaded babies.

  7. The PNG NRL franchise proposal, and Vlandis’s White House dinner invite are apparently no coincidence. Ruby League is PNG’s national sport. Both America and Australia want to see PNG not fall into the ChiComms sphere of influence. This deal seemingly has assumed geopolitical significance. …

  8. “It’s not Bandt. It’s the United Nations General Assembly, every international humanitarian aid organisation, every international human rights organisation, everyone who’s not frankly a racist monster. Because the alternative to a ceasefire is maiming and murdering innocent people, half of them children,”

    Turns out that many Australians and Australian politicians who had a feigned fondness for international law and order when it pertained to Russia and Ukraine are wildy supportive of international crimes and war crimes and the ongoing slaughter of children on a truly unimaginable scale. Racist f*cking monsters indeed.

  11. Andrew_Earlwood
    It will be interesting to see if the USA stay the course in Ukraine.
    As to the rest of it I don’t know. If it gets to the point where we need the US to defend us against the big bad panda the world is in a serious mess.

    My own view, we actually don’t need the subs. Chine is going to have demographic problems before they get around to wanting to invade Australia.

  12. A_E
    Lehrmann’s alleged crime is apparently stealthing.
    In general I think a conviction for this is difficult because it would almost always be “he said… she said” – is this your experience?

  16. ‘Watermelon says:
    Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 3:34 pm

    What does Bandt propose to do, or even say, about Hamas using a ceasefire to regroup, re-arm, fortify its positions and resupply with medicines, food, water and fuel?

    It’s not Bandt….’
    —————
    Bandt is demanding an immediate and unconditional ceasefire.
    So, it IS Bandt I am talking about. I will repeat the question:
    ‘What does Bandt propose to do, or even say, about Hamas using a ceasefire to regroup, re-arm, fortify its positions and resupply with medicines, food, water and fuel?’

  18. ‘frednk says:
    Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 3:48 pm

    Andrew_Earlwood
    It will be interesting to see if the USA stay the course in Ukraine.
    As to the rest of it I don’t know. If it gets to the point where we need the US to defend us against the big bad panda the world is in a serious mess.

    My own view, we actually don’t need the subs. Chine is going to have demographic problems before they get around to wanting to invade Australia.’
    ———————————
    The premise structure here seems to be:
    1. China will have pressing economic problems cos demography.
    2. Those problems will distract China from its territorial aggressions.
    3. Therefore we don’t need x, y, z military equipment.

    I can see some significant problems with this thinking.

  20. Rex Douglas
    Wonder if Albo and Wong are observing the massive rallies happening around Australia at the moment…?

    Ask them.

  22. BW you’re making this about Bandt but he is only saying the same thing as the United Nations, every aid agency, every human rights organisation and most actual human beings who have a clue what’s actually happening. What do they propose to do about Hamas “using” a ceasefire? How about nothing! Because that’s how ceasefires work. They don’t require that one side, the weaker side, simply surrender.

    You’re correct that a ceasefire will not militarily advantage Israel, when compared with the current strategy of turning Gaza into a gigantic oven. To use this as a reason to not have a ceasefire is the definition of collective punishment.

    You are saying Bandt is wrong to call for an end to the torture and murder of 2.3 million people, because he cannot guarantee their collective, unilateral disarmament in the face of an onslaught by their colonizers so cruel and merciless it will reverberate for generations. You’re saying Bandt is wrong because he doesn’t agree with the racist logic of illegal collective punishment. Well neither does anyone else who isn’t absolutely fucked in the head like yourself.

  23. Netanyahu declaring invasion: “You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible”

    1 Samuel 15:3

    Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass

  24. In other – mildly less horrible – news: with only a few months to go until the primary season starts, and after numerous indictments, being found guilty in a civil court of sexual assault, and a myriad of the usual batshit crazy statements, included calling for the death of a general who criticised him, Trump’s position in the race for the Republican nomination is stronger than it has been has been all year:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2024_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries

    His current head-to-head polling against Biden – with and without Kennedy – is also, erm… concerning:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_States_presidential_election

  25. ‘Watermelon says:
    Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 4:27 pm

    BW you’re making this about Bandt…’

    ———————

    Bandt made it about Bandt. I repeat the question:

    ‘What does Bandt propose to do, or even say, about Hamas using a ceasefire to regroup, re-arm, fortify its positions and resupply with medicines, food, water and fuel?’

  28. Watermelon says:
    Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 4:27 pm

    ….

    You are saying Bandt is wrong to call for …’
    ———————————-
    I have said nothing of the sort.

    I have said in a general way, that ceasefires create advantage and disadvantage to the combatants.

    My query is about what Bandt is saying about Hamas using a ceasefire to regroup, fortify its positions, build up its supplies of food, water and fuel, build more rockets and stockpile more ammunition.

  29. Boerwar @ #926 Sunday, October 29th, 2023 – 4:50 pm

    ‘Watermelon says:
    Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 4:27 pm

    BW you’re making this about Bandt…’

    ———————

    Bandt made it about Bandt. I repeat the question:

    ‘What does Bandt propose to do, or even say, about Hamas using a ceasefire to regroup, re-arm, fortify its positions and resupply with medicines, food, water and fuel?’

    Why are you inviting Watermelon to speak for Bandt ..??

  30. The obvious conclusion is for the Dems to manage out Joe, right ..?

    Why would that have any bearing on Trump’s popularity relative to the other candidates for the Republican nomination?

  33. My query is about what Bandt is saying about Hamas using a ceasefire to regroup, fortify its positions, build up its supplies of food, water and fuel, build more rockets and stockpile more ammunition.

    He’s not saying anything. Nor should he. Because it doesn’t matter to anyone who’s not a racist cretin.

    His current head-to-head polling against Biden – with and without Kennedy – is also, erm… concerning:

    Genocide Joe is completely finished now. The base will not turn out for him after this.

  34. Watermelon says:
    Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 5:03 pm

    He’s not saying anything. ….’
    ————————
    Bandt IS saying something. He is demanding a cease fire. My query is about what Bandt is saying about the consequences should Haniyeh and Netanyahu respect Bandt’s demands. What does Bandt expect of Hamas if there is a ceasefire? Does he have a view on Hamas using a ceasefire to regroup, fortify its positions, build up its supplies of food, water and fuel, build more rockets and stockpile more ammunition?

  35. I assume DFAT knows stuff that we do not.
    Foreign Minister Wong is telling Australians in Lebanon (some 15,000 of us) to leave ‘now’.

  36. If the Dems see Trump as the near certain nominee – and given head to head polling with Biden, along with Bidens other baggage – then logically it’s time for a change, right ..?


  39. Boerwar says:
    Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 4:09 pm
    …
    The premise structure here seems to be:
    1. China will have pressing economic problems cos demography.
    2. Those problems will distract China from its territorial aggressions.
    3. Therefore we don’t need x, y, z military equipment.

    I can see some significant problems with this thinking.

    Perhaps; but you could save a lot of money by pretending your going to build subs.

  41. frednk

    LOL.

    We pretended we had a modern airforce and submarines going into WW2.

    Brewster Buffaloes against Zeros.
    NO submarines at all and no aircraft carriers in a Pacific naval war that was dominated by aircraft carriers and submarines.

  43. Rex:

    You’re obsessed with people being “managed out”, aren’t you?

    You can’t manage out an incumbent President of the United States. Biden appears determined to run and doesn’t seem very interested in what anybody trying to tap him on the shoulder has to say. There’s very little of anything that the Democratic machine (who I’m guessing you assume would be doing the “managing out”?) can do to force his hand. If a credible primary challenger emerges, then, sure, maybe Democratic voters might end up nominating them over Biden, but none have put their hands up so far.

    Right now, the only major candidates (the word “major” putting in a lot of work here) are a complete whackjob and/or con-artist and a little known congressman who is challenging Biden from the right. Neither has a hope in hell of beating Biden, and even if they did would have less chance of beating Trump or any other GOP nominee anyway.

    I agree that Biden isn’t a spectacular candidate. But he isn’t electoral poison either. His government has been doing good thing domestically, things seem to be gradually improving on the economic front, and I’ve been pleasantly surprised by his determination to get progressive reform passed against the odds. Better him than a DINO like Phillips or Manchin or a charlatan also-ran like Williamson.

    Were a worthwhile candidate to challenge him for the nomination – someone who is actually electable and commited to some form of progressivism – I’d quite possibly be barracking for them right about now, as I do have some pretty serious misgivings about Biden’s chances next year. But there doesn’t seem to be much appetite among anybody meeting that description to go up against him, nor does he seem to be interested in standing aside. And there’s still every chance he could win in 2024, perhaps even relatively comfortably depending on what impact (if any) Kennedy has on the contest.

    Head-to-head polling in US presidential elections is notoriously unreliable this far out, and the Democrats outperformed expectations in 2022. I don’t think Trump is remotely unelectable either – as much as he obviously should be in any sane world – but he isn’t exactly popular with a majority of Americans, has becoming even nuttier and more narcissistic and unpleasant since losing in 2020, and the combination of his legal issues, the GOP going full Handmaid’s Tale where abortion is concerned, and the whole thing where he incited an attempted coup may mean he struggles in a general election.

    We’ll have to wait and see. Only prediction I feel comfortable making at this point is that it’ll probably be about as close as 2016 and 2022 were, with the final outcome dependant on some narrow results in a several key states.

  44. Rex:

    If the Dems see Trump as the near certain nominee – and given head to head polling with Biden, along with Bidens other baggage – then logically it’s time for a change, right ..?

    Yeah, maybe. But Biden doesn’t want to stand aside and no credible candidates have put their hands up to challenge him, so…

  45. Well, it’s time for the Dems to get energised and produce a credible successor for Biden, who, let’s face it is fast in decline.

  46. Rex:

    Well, it’s time for the Dems to get energised and produce a credible successor for Biden, who, let’s face it is fast in decline.

    They don’t grow these people in laboratories, you know.

    It’s up to these potential credible successors to make themselves the credible successors, by getting out there and campaigning and fundraising and making media appearances and putting in the prep work for a presidential campaign.

    Nobody besides a few delusional also-rans (and, I suppose, Manchin) has said or done anything to suggest they are even considering a run, and we are only a few months away from the primaries.

  48. The Lehrmann case I heard hinges on that they were supposedly having consensual sex at the time ,then he removed the condom he was wearing which then allegedly constituted rape.

    Now where have we seen and heard of case like this ,in the past JA might have had the same charge levelled against him.

    Look we’re he is now.

  49. As much as I’d like a progressive candidate that could easily take it up to Trump and win, the question remains… who is that?

    It’s a bit easy to say that Biden is hopeless, but at this stage in the cycle, put some chips on the table and say who the best Dem candidate is.

Comments Page 19 of 20
1 … 18 19 20

Leave a Reply

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