First up, two other things to note. There is another new post below this one exploring the minutiae of pollsters’ preference flows, a subject of great relevance to much of what is discussed below. The other is the Poll Bludger’s pre-election donation drive. On with the show:
• RedBridge Group has a national poll that gives the Coalition its poorest result yet, recording both major parties at 34% of the primary vote – up one in Labor’s case and down two for the Coalition ” with the Greens steady on 12% and One Nation up a point to 8%. This includes a timely two-party preferred result based on respondent-allocated preferences, in addition to the usual one based on 2022 election flows (a matter explored in very great depth in the aforementioned other post), both of which come in at 53-47 in favour of Labor. This is despite 73% out of the 7% One Nation vote (with a duly very small sample) going to the Coalition, compared with 64.3% in 2022. The report notes that that this improvement in isolation would have added 0.8% to the Coalition’s two-party result. Small-sample state breakdowns have Labor leading 52-48 in New South Wales and 56-44 in Victoria, and trailing 57-43 in Queensland. The accompanying report features voluminous further detail on factors influencing vote choice. The poll was conducted Thursday to Tuesday from a sample of 1011.
• A new outfit called Spectre Strategy, whose managing director Morgan James was until recently with Freshwater Strategy, has a federal poll with results well in line with the general consensus: Labor has a two-party lead of 53-47 based on respondent-allocated preferences, from primary votes of Labor 31%, Coalition 34%, Greens 15% and One Nation 10%. Anthony Albanese is credited with a 47-35 lead over Peter Dutton on preferred prime minister. Among other things, the full report contains breakdowns for the four largest states along with useful (albeit small sample) age-by-gender result, one finding being that the Greens are twice as strong among young women as men. The poll was conducted Saturday to Wednesday from a sample of 2000.
• DemosAU has two polls offering combined results of selected marginal seats in Melbourne and Sydney (and has a large sample national poll on the way), the former of which puts meat on the bones of suggestions One Nation is surging in seats such as those covered, namely Bruce, Dunkley and Hawke. Labor is down 7.2% on the primary vote to 32%, of which the Liberals yield only a one-point gain to 31%, while One Nation is up 5.6% to 10%. The Greens are up 3.2% to 13%, and Trumpet of Patriots manages only 2%, down 4.5% on the United Australia Party result. Labor holds a two-party lead of 53-47 based on 2022 election flows: if the Liberals really are doing as well out of One Nation as some have suggested, that may reduce to 51-49. The poll was conducted April 13 to 22 from a sample of 924.
• The DemosAU Sydney marginal seats poll covers Parramatta, Reid and Werriwa and is much better for Labor, who are credited with a two-party lead of 56-44, a swing in their favour of 1.3%. Both major parties are well down on the primary vote, Labor to 36% (down 4.3%) and Liberal to 28% (down 7.4%), mostly accounted for by 11% for independents (there are four independent candidates across the three seats, none particularly high profile, compared with only one last time), with the Greens on 10% (up 1.4%). All three seats are highly multicultural and duly weak for One Nation. The poll was conducted April 13 to 27 from a sample of 905.
• Andrew Tillett of the Financial Review offers an overview based on the views of “multiple campaign strategists and frontbenchers from Labor, the Coalition and the Greens”. Most of the assessments offered are conventional wisdom, though Labor appears hopeful about Griffith and Bonner along with more fancied Brisbane; a Liberal source goes so far as to say they “think we will win Werriwa”; Labor is rated a better chance of retaining Chisholm than was earlier thought; both sides expect Labor to hold Tangney, and give Labor a “slight edge” in Lyons; and Liberals are pessimistic about Bradfield, though “early anxiety over independents in Wannon and Forrest had faded”. A Liberal source did not concur with a view related by “senior Labor and Liberal sources” in The Advertiser that Sturt was “increasingly likely to fall to Labor”. The West Australian reports a Liberal source saying Curtin is 51-49, without revealing in whose favour.
• A survey of 2000 respondents aged 18 to 29, conducted by RedBridge Group and Monash University for the Y Australia, features various qualitative and quantitative findings together with voting intention findings of Labor 33%, Greens 32% and Liberal 23%. Half the sample was drawn nationally and the other half from “30 Commonwealth electoral divisions with large concentrations of young voters”.
https://static.ffx.io/images/$zoom_0.799%2C$multiply_1.9577%2C$ratio_1.5%2C$width_756%2C$x_0%2C$y_518/t_crop_custom/q_62%2Cf_auto/b4c54446ba83f858d657c7be6947192055522619
Are the Brethren allowed to marry outside the faith? Outside the family? Why do they (men and women presenting alike) all seem to be around the same height with a retired rugby player’s build, including the just-there necks.
“Hypothetically, he could (with the support of the Greens) have switched to PR for the Reps before the 2022 election. Then the Teal albatross would never have graced the Libs.
That scenario probably never occurred to him or his advisers.”
I don’t think a scenario which adds Greens and takes out Nats from the Parliament would ever play well in the Coalition.
Also bear in mind the Liberals still imagine themselves a party of majority government – on proportional representation this would become basically impossible for them to get back to, they’d forever be at the mercy of ratbag parties like One Nation to get past 50%.
In other words – they’d never do it and rightly so.
Ghost Of Whitlamsays:
Friday, May 2, 2025 at 12:34 am
Right-Wing Nutjob Alliance = 39
Left-Wing CFMEUMarxistAnimal Network = 40
____________________
It might be interesting to go back and think of previous major reform in that context, and ask if they would have ever happened in the first place:
– Left-Wing CFMEUMarxistAnimal: would it have passed the floating of the dollar, superannuation system, lowering of tariff barriers, general financial system liberation etc.
– Right-Wing Nutjob Alliance: would it have done gun control, or Howard’s migration boom?
By the “brethren” you mean the Raven Taylorites or PBCC as they now call themselves there are lots of different sects that refer to themselves as the brethren.
The simple answer is no,Raven Taylorites believe you should not socialise with anyone you would not take communion with which means anyone outside the PBCC so yes small gene pool as there are only about 40k of them worldwide and 99% would be born into the sect as they don’t really welcome outsiders even other calvinists.
A friend of my mum’s now in her nineties grew up in a brethren family, not this mob but a slightly less austere faction still really strict no radio, movies, sport etc etc.,
It hurts me to see so many smart people discuss bookmaker odds so badly.
Once betting starts and money is filtering in, the BETTING sets the prices not the bookmaker (unless they have a tip from a trainer… OR are stupid) The bookmaker does set the odds befor betting starts though.
So any disscussion re odds of a certain result overall vs odds in individual seats are kind of fun but irrelevant to the result. As the betting in each of those seats determines the odds.
So a smart punter could probably find good odds on either (if they think it’s closer than polls) backing an ALP minority or even a LNP win, OR (if they think the seats are too few in favour of ALP based on the 2PP polls) then finding seats where the ALP is not favoured and betting on those.
Either way you are gambling but that is ALL the use of the betting odds in practicality. They don’t predict the results, there is argument that they match sentiment of the public but that is also tough to hang your hat on IMO as only gamblers bet, whereas here at least, everyone of eligible age votes.
“Right-Wing Nutjob Alliance: would it have done gun control, or Howard’s migration boom?”
At age 16 instead of getting the meningococcal vaccine you get an assault rifle.
A brief final comment – thanks William for the outstanding work you have done on covering this election. Bludgertrack is a great tool. Your posts have been frequent, detailed, insightful and clear to read. Thanks 🙂
Had the rare opportunity to vote at Australia House in London today.
The line was long but moved quickly and staff inside did a great job guiding everyone through the process.
6 ALP and 3 Lib volunteers outside distributing HTVs booklets covering every electorate and each state (Senate).
Voters and volunteers alike just happy to be outside on a beautiful sunny 27 degree day.
Howlin Wolvessays:
Friday, May 2, 2025 at 1:02 am
“The point of my original post which went straight through to the keeper for one particular contributor is if you have faith in bludgertrack there must be four or five seats where Labor are not favourite but should be providing the opportunity for some betting opportunities.”
Yeah-nah. Patrick called it right. The point you are missing is “vote efficiency”.
Simple example, to illustrate the problem (and we’ll assuming this polling is perfectly accurate). Lets say you have five equal sized seats, where party A is polling 80%, 80%, 47%, 47%, 46% against Party B. Overall they are leading 60% v 40% TPP. Yet they are likely to win 2 and lose 3, as their vote is unequally distributed. That’s how governments win without a popular majority (eg: Howard 1998). The darker side of “vote efficiency” is gerrymandering.
Your logic is that with a 60-40 lead, they should win 3 seats, so there must be at least one seat providing a betting opportunity. But there isn’t.
It is *possible* there are opportunities out there. But there is no “must be” about it, which is your claim. The only way you would find any is to look through seat by seat TPPs, with no guarantee any in fact exist. Or that such polling is accurate – the YouGov seat by seats polls people here have been quoting are quite suspect IMO; if I’ve done the maths right, they are likely to have error bars of 5% or more.
Sooo…If you can find a single seat poll where Labor is >55% on TPP and they are not already favourite, it might be worth your while having a flutter. I wouldn’t know, the betting markets dont really interest me – I’m doubtful that the wisdom of crowds is relevant here, and I haven’t handed any of my hard-earned to a bookie in 25 years.
New thread.