Three new national polls to report. Known unknowns include a big sample DemosAU poll that should be along later today, and the inevitable one-last-Newspoll.
• YouGov has a third and final MRP poll, constructing demographically based estimates for all 150 seats off an impressive sample of 35,185, conducted from April 1 to 29. This maintains the pollster’s recent form of strong results for Labor – and, perhaps more to the point, weak for the Coalition ” offering a median projection of 84 seats with the Coalition on just 47, the Greens on three, and 16 for independents and others. Projected Labor gains are Banks, Bonner, Braddon, Menzies, Moore and Sturt from the Liberals and Brisbane from the Greens, while the Coalition is further projected to lose Bradfield, Calare, Cowper and Wannon to independents. A detailed display allows for results to be explored at seat level. The national voting intention results are Labor 31.4%, Coalition 31.1%, Greens 12.6%, One Nation 9.3%, independents 8.1% and others 7.6%, with Labor leading 52.9-47.1 on two-party preferred.
• The final Freshwater Strategy poll for the Financial Review credits Labor with a two-party lead of 51.5-48.5, out from 50-50 in its mid-campaign poll, the first lead for Labor in this series since March last year. The primary votes are Labor 33% (up one), Coalition 37% (down two) and Greens 12% (steady). Leadership ratings are particularly encouraging for Labor, with Anthony Albanese up four on approval to 41% and down four on disapproval to 44%, Peter Dutton down one to 35% and up four to 51%, and Albanese’s lead as preferred prime minister out from 46-41 to 49-39. The poll was conducted Tuesday to Thursday from a sample of 2055, which is nearly twice as big as usual.
• The new online regional news publisher The Gazette has a second DemosAU national poll for the week, recording a two-party lead for Labor of 51-49, compared with 52-48 for the first. The primary votes are Labor 29%, Coalition 32%, Greens 12% and One Nation 9%, as compared with 29%, 31%, 14% and 9% in the earlier poll. It was conducted Sunday to Tuesday from a sample of 1974.
There remains the small matter of how accurate all this will prove to be, and the fresh memory of a general failure in 2019 that was in fact nothing special by international standards. The question of whether this was an aberration in a long-term record of strong performance by the Australian polling industry gets a negative answer from political scientist Luke Mansillo, who has been behind an aggregation model for The Guardian that long appeared quixotic in indicating a Labor primary vote in the high twenties, below what any individual poll was saying. The latter continues to be the case with its current central estimate of 30%, but its two-party preferred measure now has an eminently believable central estimate of 51.5-48.5 in Labor’s favour.
A sense of why such a model should be so bearish with respect to Labor can be gained by comparing final week polling for the most recent elections federally and for the five mainland states with the actual results. The table below goes into detail for two pollsters who have covered enough state elections to make them worth the effort, followed by all final week polls combined for each election (no row is featured for South Australia as the only such poll was the Newspoll).
| ALP TPP | ALP | L-NP | GRN | |
| Newspoll | ||||
| WA 2025 | +0.4 | +2.6 | +0.8 | -1.1 |
| Qld 2024 | +1.3 | +0.4 | +0.5 | +1.1 |
| NSW 2023 | +0.2 | +1.0 | -0.4 | +1.3 |
| Vic 2022 | -0.5 | +1.3 | -2.0 | +0.5 |
| Fed 2022 | +0.9 | +3.4 | -0.7 | -0.3 |
| SA 2022 | -0.6 | +1.0 | +2.3 | -0.1 |
| Average | +0.3 | +1.6 | +0.1 | +0.2 |
| Resolve Strategic | ||||
| NSW 2023 | +1.0 | +2.6 | -1.7 | |
| Vic 2022 | -0.5 | +1.3 | -1.4 | |
| Fed 2022 | -1.3 | -1.3 | +1.2 | |
| Average | -0.3 | +0.9 | -0.6 | |
| All polls | ||||
| WA 2025 (2) | +0.1 | +2.1 | +1.3 | -0.6 |
| Qld 2024 (2) | +2.1 | +0.7 | -0.9 | +2.1 |
| NSW 2023 (3) | -0.5 | +0.7 | +1.3 | -0.0 |
| Vic 2022 (3) | -0.9 | +0.7 | -0.9 | +0.0 |
| Fed 2022 (5) | +0.2 | +2.4 | -0.3 | -0.1 |
| Average (16) | +0.1 | +1.5 | +0.2 | +0.1 |
Thirteen of the sixteen polls covered here overestimated the Labor primary vote, but these errors have tended to be obscured by weaker readings for Labor on two-party preferred, which have shown no bias one way or the other. This was notably the case at the 2022 federal election, at which the last polls by Newspoll and Ipsos both had Labor on 36% – well clear of an actual result of 32.6% – but did well enough in recording two-party preferred at 53-47, compared with an election result of 52.1-47.9. The suggestion of pollsters under-estimating preference flows to Labor is at odds with an emerging narrative about tomorrow’s election that was covered here in depth yesterday.
My own BludgerTrack aggregate, which was given the seal of approval of Laura Tingle of the ABC on 7:30 last night, abandoned the notion of correcting for past observed bias after 2019, and now presumes only to offer a snapshot of what the polls are saying, warts and all. Adjustments are made, but their aim is to reduce distinctions between, on the one hand, Pyxis Polling and YouGov – both of which have had charge of Newspoll at different points throughout the past three years – and the various other pollsters. In two-party terms, these adjustments amount to about three-quarters of a point in Labor’s favour for Freshwater Strategy and half a point for Resolve Strategic, and about a third of a point in the Coalition’s favour for RedBridge Group.
As the table shows, correcting BludgerTrack for the general pattern of errors over the past few years would essentially involve moving about 1.5% from Labor to the “others” column. To extrapolate that to various estimates that were discussed in yesterday’s post on the subject, that would reduce Labor from its present 53.0-47.0 lead in BludgerTrack to 52.3-47.7 based on 2022 election preference flows; to 51.7-48.3 on YouGov’s current preference model; and to 51.9-48.1 on what I take Newspoll to be doing. The latter two are a fairly comfortable fit for what The Guardian’s model says. Then there is what I described yesterday as the “maximal” model, which accommodates what some observes take to be an historic blowout in the share of preferences the Coalition is about to receive from right-wing parties. This tips the balance all the way to 50.4-49.6 in favour of the Coalition by giving them 80% of a 7.9% One Nation vote and nearly as much of Trumpet of Patriots’ 3.5%.
Every election the Liberal Party seem to have a ton of staff preparing and handing out at polling booths. Makes you wonder who is paying them.
Matt31, so the corollary to that is that the Greens couldn’t pass it later on when the LNP bailed out either, then. Or are they irrelevant when Labor stupidly thinks the LNP will play ball but highly relevant when the LNP bails out and leaves them stranded?
Kevin Bonham
@kevinbonham
Reminder: the gateways to heaven and hell are closed at 8 am eastern time Saturday; any poll released after that will not be considered as a final poll for accuracy purposes.
Last edited
6:15 PM · May 2, 2025
·
532
Views
Daniel B @ #484 Friday, May 2nd, 2025 – 6:16 pm
I thought it was either a greens 25%PV or 25 seats or something equally absurd. But 25 teals/green/katter an other indies?. Typical greens behaviour, latch onto the success of the teals and try and claim it as their own – what do they call it stolen valour.
Best thing will be a labor majority , or, at a minority that bypasses need to deal with Brandt. After his posing and scence of entitlement about the prospect of having BoP and his ‘demands’ with any luck after tomorrow he can slink back off to the student union bar with all the other student politicians.
Pi says:
Friday, May 2, 2025 at 5:23 pm
Insight is only relevant if you apply it. It’s like saying “I knew that guy was going to win but I bet on the other guy”. You wouldn’t understand.
—–
I don’t give a crap whether you believe me. I didn’t say it to convince you, I said it because it’s true.
Meanwhile, the bulk of that long comment I made was criticism of the Greens… and you called it shite. Good job.
Someone on here said it earlier today, and I can’t help but note it… it’s often attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt.
“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people”
S.Simpson: “Every election the Liberal Party seem to have a ton of staff preparing and handing out at polling booths. Makes you wonder who is paying them.”
This is also where you see the influence of religious groups. Pretty much always has been everywhere when you think about it.
Will be very interesting to chat to some Liberal booth HTV people tomorrow about how their campaign rolled out. I’m expecting some rather colourful language.
Hard Being Green: I think you will get close to most of those if not all.
I’d honestly hate to see a cross bench of 25. It’s already a mess as it is now.
The reality is some of the ideas that the Greens float are great, except when massive tax hikes need to pay for them.
A thumping majority produces better longer term outcomes.
yabba @ #498 Friday, May 2nd, 2025 – 6:25 pm
You know I’ve always thought that Peta Credlin reminds me of Natasha Fatale from Rocky and Bullwinkle.
Not only in looks but they behave the same too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4txmBNCAXg8
JimmyD’s takedown of NeoLib propaganda earlier today was very nice.
You didn’t respond to me at all Glen O, you just flooded the zone with shite. Like I said. I even provided you a graph so that you could visualize it.
The greens politicians live by the lie that they are not responsible for Australia not having a carbon reduction scheme. You can deflect as much as you like, but it’s a simple fact. And if you had enough integrity to admit it, and that you’d never do it again, I might even move on. But you don’t. You double down. Why? Because that’s how the greens political party works. Block progress, and lie to their ignorant supporters about it. So they can permanently complain about things that they could have helped solve. But if you did that, you might as well vote Labor. Which is why they do what they do.
GlenO,
It’s a shame Pi etc tl;dr’ed your considered response – they might have learned something by reading it. However I suspect that Pi’s opinions are too calcified in hating on the Greens to benefit from it much.
My thoughts are similar to yours; some differences, but I’m in the Democratic People’s Republic of Canberra, which is obviously different from your Brisvegas situation. I would caution though, against generalising too much about Gen-X’s. It might be a useful “generational” division, but their political experience varies wildly – I’m at the older end with rustedon parents who endured the Menzies era (and Collingwood’s long drought), and my first votes were for the Hawke/Keating govt. Thats a very different grounding to someone who grew up with the H/K reforms in place and whose first three or four elections were Howards poisonous regime.
One problem I have with the Greens here in the ACT is that, having polled so well over recent elections, they now seem to be taking votes for granted. They have run a virtually invisible candidate. My son is more Green leaning than me, and is also peeved at being taken for granted and has indicated he’ll preference Labor ahead of them for the first time ever – not due to increasing age, but increasing dissatisfaction.
I’m undecided – still! – because Labor also take votes in the ‘berra as a right, not something to be earned. In this safe Red seat, its understandable, but still mildly insulting. I have seen our local Labor member in action on the hustings, in QT etc – I suspect the Greens candidate will be useless, but I *know* the Labor incumbent is. The Libs have zero chance and their candidate appears to be a joke.
I guess I’ll be throwing a bone to an Indy tomorrow, before my vote ends up, slightly unwillingly, with Labor, not that this will make any difference. I will be taking a lot more interest in other seats than my own. Maybe I should move over to Queanbeyan; at least the Qbangers votes mean something!
Late riser at 6:12 very good
Pi @ #505 Friday, May 2nd, 2025 – 6:28 pm
Very true, first federal election I was involved in was 1990 and the Fred Nile were the principle recruits for extra handerouterers but then it was only one day.
I think we can disregard the opinions of anyone who thinks the crossbench is a “mess” now… seeing as we have a majority government who don’t actually have to negotiate with them.
Interesting from the DT – are they insinuating that she has been locked away by Clive so that she can’t say or do anything embarrassing during the campaign?
Patrick Batemansays:
Friday, May 2, 2025 at 6:25 pm
Matt31, so the corollary to that is that the Greens couldn’t pass it later on when the LNP bailed out either, then. Or are they irrelevant when Labor stupidly thinks the LNP will play ball but highly relevant when the LNP bails out and leaves them stranded?
____________________
Albo’s greatest flaw is his choice to legitimise Dutton and the L/NP by seeking bipartisanship.
Patrick Bateman
The window to pass it was created by the Coalition Senators who crossed the floor to support the deal that had been negotiated, thus my point that the Greens couldn’t provide the numbers on their own. Instead, they helped give Abbott an immediate win. The idea that those Liberal Senators would have voted for legislation which went much further to get the Greens on board is fanciful.
OK, the real joke:
A horse walks into a bar.
The bartender asks “hey, why the long face? Are you depressed?”
The horse thinks for a second, scratches his chin, and says “I don’t think I am” and promptly disappears.
You see, this is a joke about Rene Descartes’ famous statement “I think, therefore I am” and I could have mentioned this at the start of the joke, but that would be putting Descartes before the horse.
Thanks Bluey for your election coverage. You can spit out Nadia and Irene now.
Pi says:
Friday, May 2, 2025 at 6:31 pm
You didn’t respond to me at all Glen O, you just flooded the zone with shite. Like I said. I even provided you a graph so that you could visualize it.
—–
Which part didn’t I reply to, exactly? As far as I can tell, I addressed every part of your posts that were substantive rather than just personal attacks.
The presence on Brethren on the campaign trail and reports of their influence in the Liberal Party reminds me that in the days of the Richard Court government in WA his union busting minister Graham Kierath usually had an audience from the Brethren in the gallery when he was speaking about his latest attempts to noble the unions.
People pondered then about how it was odd that people who didn’t vote would rock up to parliament.
But it was explained they were passionately anti union.
I have Brethren “church” at the end of my street and a school a kilometre or so away.
They used to be a common sight at the local shops but may have moved away.
Occasionally see women with head coverings … muslims not brethren
If the greens had supported the Rudd carbon reduction scheme, and they still didn’t have the numbers, they could have gone to a DD and they would have won in a landslide. That is what the greens killed.
PS Glen O, you’re the one that has been tossing out the ad hominem epithets, not me.
I’m starting to get the same ‘vibes’ re Mutton loosing his seat of Dickson, to either Labor’s Ali France OR Ind Ellie Smith, as I did when Labor’s Kate Jones snatched victory over LNP Premier Campbell Newman who sacked 14,000 public service workers during his one term in office.
If you live in Brisbane, you may have picked up the ‘vibes’, as opposed to voters or commentators in other parts of the state or country.
I wouldn’t mind seeing an up-to-date poll on that scenario.
Trent if you want sensible things like dental and mental into Medicare and genuine movement on the housing crisis they need to be paid for
What better way that whacking the billionaires and making the third of companies that pay no tax pay something?
Whatever happened to ‘Ghost who Votes’?……miss getting those polls early
Luigi Smith @6.40pm
Ok, I see what you did there – that was good!
I think we can disregard the opinions of anyone who thinks the crossbench is a “mess” now… seeing as we have a majority government who don’t actually have to negotiate with them.
_______________________________________________________
That will change from tomorrow. How aren’t they a mess?
The greens view of the crossbench being a “mess” is driven by the fact that Bandt is irrelevant there.
Pisays:
Friday, May 2, 2025 at 6:41 pm
If the greens had supported the Rudd carbon reduction scheme, and they still didn’t have the numbers, they could have gone to a DD and they would have won in a landslide. That is what the greens killed.
————-
+1
Rudd could have introduced a proper CPRS that would’ve produced a DD trigger and a likely election victory.
Under direction from the fossil fuel cartel, he sought bipartisanship with the L/NP with a pro-fossil fuel policy that blew up his Govt and the parliament. Minchin played him like a fiddle.
David Squires is not just an ace soccer cartoonist but also a lot better at political cartooning than the Grauniad’s actual political cartoonists.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/picture/2025/may/02/david-squires-on-australian-election-grand-final-reds-blues-greens-teals
For what it’s worth, I think it was the Friday before the 2010 election and Frank Calabrese posted the Bee Gee song Wine and Women as a reference to Abbott. It was great.
Would this be appropriate tonight?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcJWzlAGiXM
@Luigi – joke of the day!
The simple fact of the Greens CPRS vote is that it’s the manifestation of the best being the enemy of the good. Nothing has changed.
OMG, the CPRS Senate vote of 15 years ago has risen from the grave again. The maths in the Senate back then:
39 votes needed to pass.
Coalition: 37
ALP: 32
Green: 5
Xenophon: 1
Fielding (FF): 1
If all Coalition Senators opposed the Bill, then ALL of the other 39 Senators would have been needed to pass it. How did the Greens propose to get STEVEN FIELDING on board for any Bill which the Coalition opposed? Their demand for Labor to cut the Coalition out entirely from the CPRS process was petulant, absent such an effort to craft a Bill with at least some chance at 39 votes without the Coalition.
Trent if you want sensible things like dental and mental into Medicare and genuine movement on the housing crisis they need to be paid for
What better way that whacking the billionaires and making the third of companies that pay no tax pay something?
_______________________________________________________
The problem is it goes further than that. It means increasing taxes across the board. The misconception is that we can claw that money from billionaires. They already pay a significant amount of tax. The Medicare surcharge is a burden on most working families. What will happen with dental is it will just increase so I’m basically paying for it anyway. It’s not free dental, it’s just moving the costs.
Pi says:
Friday, May 2, 2025 at 6:41 pm
PS Glen O, you’re the one that has been tossing out the ad hominem epithets, not me.
—–
You say that, but my “epithets” were directed at how you were treating me, and the nonsense you were claiming about me and about what I posted. It was a tiny part of some extensive comments on the ideas and topics.
And you still don’t seem to be able to say what I missed. Or address ANY of what I actually said. Interesting how apparently I have to address every minutiae of your post before you’ll even acknowledge my arguments properly, to the point that you can’t even tell me what I didn’t address.
Let me summarise, since it seems you have trouble with nuance and detail:
1. Direct evidence shows that Greens votes have been increasing as Millennials get older.
2. I criticise the Greens just as much as I criticise Labor. You are incapable of doing the same (in reverse).
3. Among other things, the Greens were stupid for not accepting the CPRS as it stood when Labor refused to negotiate.
Luigi Smith says:
Friday, May 2, 2025 at 6:40 pm
OK, the real joke:
A horse walks into a bar.
The bartender asks “hey, why the long face? Are you depressed?”
The horse thinks for a second, scratches his chin, and says “I don’t think I am” and promptly disappears.
You see, this is a joke about Rene Descartes’ famous statement “I think, therefore I am” and I could have mentioned this at the start of the joke, but that would be putting Descartes before the horse.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
WOW man, that’s deep !
Rex Douglas, Friday, May 2, 2025 at 6:49 pm:
Rex, what Bill would the Greens have agreed to, which Family First Senator at the time, Steven Fielding, would also have supported? Because without any Coalition Senators on board, Fielding’s (and Xenophon’s) votes were necessary to get to 39.
Labor, being numerate, knew this, and so they sought a deal with the leader of the party with the only block of Senators able to actually pass a climate-friendly Bill at the time: Malcolm Turnbull.
@98.6
As a Dicksonite, I can tell you there is a lot of movement away from LNP this time. There are an abundance of volunteers from both ALP and Ellie, corflutes all over the place (Moreton Bay City Council bans corflutes on public property unless it’s polling day, and they have a cap per candidate). The desperation in the LNP to intimidate, drown out and skirt the law is profound. At the booths for tomorrow, almost every surface is covered in cladding from the LNP, none of which have Duttons face on it, and they started before 4pm. Ellie’s team has also done cladding, but it’s of her face and it’s where they could get a spot that the LNP hadn’t already taken up.
Ellie has had people handing out HTV at every prepoll booth at every hour on every day.
I don’t think Ellie will win, but her voters will decide who wins between ALP and LNP. We won’t know that until tomorrow night.
The Greens: they opposed the CPRS so that we wound up with Abbott. Apparently for them it was a better outcome so they could howl in protest from opposition.
A bunch of bourgeois sanctimonious hypocrites who, were it not for Hanson, should be put dead LAST!
As a side note Labor also trashed their reputation. Kevin Rudd would rather the country languish in an Abbott led right wing regime even with that ending his career than continue as a minister under Gillard.
At least Shorten didn’t knife the PM this term…
Timmy says:
Friday, May 2, 2025 at 6:57 pm
The Greens: they opposed the CPRS so that we wound up with Abbott. Apparently for them it was a better outcome so they could howl in protest from opposition.
—–
Because the Greens somehow knew that refusing to support the CPRS would cause Abbott to replace Turnbull?
That makes no sense.
Looks like there should be another Morgan
This is from their website on the Monday poll
“Roy Morgan will be continuing to interview Australian electors throughout this week and will report a final pre-election poll later this week to take account of any late swings in voter sentiment over the next few days, and following last night’s final pre-election Leaders’ Debate between Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton on Channel Seven.”
Glen O
“…but they can’t vote for the Greens, because the Greens actively make them not welcome, and basically (verbally) attack them for being Jewish.”
In person? That’s awful, and definitely not part of the Greens. Perhaps inform the local Greens who it is (or even the State committee) – any racism is unacceptable.
“The CPRS as Labor put it forward was an improvement on how things were, and pushing for improvements could have been done after passing it”.
I guess the obvisou counter point is that the Greens, with the ALP, successfully implement a better scheme with the Gillard Government. They negotiated a ton of legislation, successfully, throughout that period. Which, apparently for most people here, never happened.
“I want them to be free (of both Hamas and Israeli aggression – both sides are destroying Palestinians’ lives and livelihoods). But that’s beside the point – foreign policy for an election should be broad and based on principles, rather than specific and addressing only one case. And “Free Palestine” is one of their headline policies, which is nonsensical for an election campaign. But even that’s beside the point – their foreign policy is two things – free palestine and no forced labour. Both laudable goals, but where’s the rest of their foreign policy?”
I am sure you’re aware that the ongoing genocide is of great concern to a lot of Australians. None of the major parties have done much of anything, Greens are just showing that they would look to do something – I would suggest sanctions are the way.
“Look on their website at the relevant section. Literally. Here, I’ll help: https://greens.org.au/portfolios/trade-tourism”
You may have to look further.
“Then have a policy of ending coal export for energy generation, for example. Coal is used for carbon fibre production, steel production, medicine production, and cement production, to name a few things. The Greens are often too black-or-white when it comes to these sorts of things, and don’t understand moderation. Don’t get me wrong, Labor’s gone too far the other way. But the Greens have taken it too far.”
We need to do these things. It’s just a matter of when, I guess that’s an opinion.
Astrobleme: “Which, apparently for most people here, never happened.”
It is as if it never happened. The point.
Bizzcan,
I find it interesting that you left out the sentence that immediately follows the quoted line above. As much as it pains me to quote Wikipedia, here it is:
“In scholarly use, the term is often left undefined or used to describe a multitude of phenomena; however, it is primarily employed to delineate the societal transformation resulting from market-based reforms.” [bold emphasis mine]
The fact that you left the second part out suggests you know perfectly well what is meant by neoliberalism.
Andrew Carswell former Liberal advisor on ABC kept up a fair defence of Liberal hopes. But rather let the side down by suggesting that the outcome likely to be clear fairly early on. Kos Samaras suggesting about 9.
Peter Dutton believes in protection.. he’s been in witness protection the entire campaign.. setting a new standard for gutlessness … he only appears of Trump’s Network aka Fox/ Sky
Final Newspoll Federal poll
TPP: ALP 52.5 (+0.5) L/NP 47 (-0.5)
Primary: ALP 33 (-1) L/NP 34 (-1) GRN 13 (+2) ON 8 (0) OTH 12 (0)
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/final-newspoll-pm-to-defy-historic-major-party-slump/news-story/4589224ac1b653daecc5057e1138e0cc
28 April – 1 May, 1270 voters