The Sydney Morning Herald yesterday reported that the bi-monthly New South Wales state poll from Resolve Strategic has Labor down one to 37%, the Coalition steady on 28%, the Greens steady on 10%, generic independents up four to 15% and others down one to 11%. I would roughly estimate Labor’s two-party preferred lead at 58-42, compared with a 2023 election result of 54.3-45.7, though the size of the independent and others result makes this highly imprecise. Chris Minns lead over Mark Speakman narrows substantially from 37-16 to 31-19. The poll was conducted from the New South Wales components of the last two monthly national surveys, from a collective sample of 1000.
It will only get worse for the Libs when they knife Speakman.
One Nation’s surge will ensure OPV will benefit Labor and not the Coalition like it usually does. PHON are more likely to exhaust than Green voters.
This is a completely useless and misleading poll. Excluding One Nation as an explicit choice bastardises and artificially inflates the vote share of all parties and independents/others. The result is we do not know what is the actual primary vote of the 4 major parties (Labor, Greens, LNP, One Nation) and Others/Independents.
What is the purpose of this poll? It just reinforces my view that Resolve should be excluded from Bludgertrack until such time as One Nation is explicitly included in Resolve polls.
“Chris Minns lead over Mark Speakman narrows substantially from 37-16 to 31-19.”
So, in proper LNP form, they should roll Speakman. I’d say given his personal numbers are improving he could have 2-3 weeks left in him.
Turnbull was right. They didn’t roll him because they thought he would lose. They rolled him because he feared he might win.
Ley will be gone by Christmas – fools.
Battin has days in the job.
Wild and woolly times on the east coast.
Freedom, you do realise that ON are a bunch of moronic fascist dipshit losers, don’t you?
Any fascination for them must be purely intellectual, surely?
MAWBM – I want accuracy in polls not useless noise pollution masquerading as a poll. One Nation is now one of the 4 major parties and our personal views are completely irrelevant.
I have zero interest in your personal political views and you just have to accept that One Nation in poll after poll is now major player on the Australian political stage. It doesn’t matter whether you like it or not. It is a fact so grow up and deal with it.
Resolve Strategic’s federal polls include results for One Nation.
It’d be perfectly reasonable for a poll to mention all parties currently represented in NSW parliament. That would mean the Greens, Shooters, Cannabis, AJP, Libertarians… but not One Nation, who lost all their MPs yet again after they split with Hanson.
Yes I am slightly trolling “Freedom” here, but I’ll believe the One Nation surge when it’s backed up at an election. They’ll be a legitimate fourth party when they can (a) reliably get people elected to every parliament in Australia and (b) not have them leave the party within two years. Pretty sure they’ve had more MPs defect since Albanese became PM than the Greens have in the entire 35 year history of the party.
Key update:
Definitely True 10
Probably True 2
Probably False 1
Definitely False 1
7 False keys for opposition 2PP win.
If it was today:
Definitely True 11
Probably True 1
Probably False 0
Definitely False 2
“One Nation’s surge will ensure OPV will benefit Labor and not the Coalition like it usually does. PHON are more likely to exhaust than Green voters.”
You make the classic error of assuming that a party’s sizeable chunk of new voters, who have switched from somewhere else, will behave in the same way as their longstanding more diehard voters have done hitherto. It’s possible that that could be true, but needs analysis/understanding and verification before we can make any such assumptions.
It generally holds good if there is not a big change in a party’s vote from one election to the next, though One Nation’s preferencing in particular is a bit all over the place from year to year so probably the most volatile anyway (even those whose votes don’t exhaust).
As a side note, that was a nasty post 9.29, I’ve not visited PB much lately but thought that normally the regional threads were pleasanter and tended to stick to psephology more. . .
I’ve seen a lot more of Speakman in the media in recent weeks, including a couple of days he spent in Newcastle recently. Maybe his improved preferred premier rating is just due to more exposure and name recognition. I hope he is retained as leader, as in the highly unlikely event the LNP wins in March 2027, I think under Speakman NSW would get the same relatively centrist version of the LNP that it got during their last period in government, and not the far-right version which seems have taken control elsewhere.
Does anyone know if Tim Crakanthorp will run again for the ALP in Newcastle? I’ll certainly be looking for a credible independent candidate to vote for if he does, it’s just unacceptable to have a local member whose family are undisclosed major real estate owners and developers in his own electorate.
Agree with Freedom in his main contention. The polls should list Alp, libs and nats separately, green, one nation, teal independents and indeed all parties with representation in parliament.
It would be far more helpful.
Does this poll do that? I haven’t looked at the raw data.
All polls at the very least should separate Nats and libs. Publishing their result as a coalition is misleading.
>Mabwm
>Thursday, November 13, 2025 at 2:31 pm
>All polls at the very least should separate Nats and libs. Publishing their result as a coalition is misleading
Are their any seats where people have a choice about which one they vote for?
Catprog – my understanding is the Federal Coalition agreement does not allow either of the Coalition parties to stand a candidate against a sitting Federal Coalition MP. However, the Federal Coalition agreement does allow both Coalition parties to stand a candidate in a seat held by a non-coalition party Federal MP ( eg the Federal seat of Bendigo in Victoria at the last Federal election).
The non-compete nature of the Federal Coalition agreement tends to suppress the national vote of both the Liberal Party and National Party at Federal elections for the simple reason each party does not stand candidates in all House of Reps seats. Likewise in the Senate both parties in NSW and Victoria (and by definition in QLD and the NT where the parties are merged as a single entity – the LNP in QLD and CLP in the NT) run joint Coalition tickets which suppresses each parties individual senate primary vote. This non-compete Coalition agreement also occurs at the state level in both NSW and Victoria.
In light of the above, I don’t believe separating the 2 Coalition parties in polling at a Federal level and in NSW and Vic at a state level would be practical nor relevant. However, I believe for full transparency and fuller information all parties (other than the Coalition) with representation in the Federal parliament should be explicitly offered as a choice when polling. This implies at the very least pollsters should explicitly offer Labor, Greens, Coalition and One Nation as options whilst also explicitly separating Other Parties from Independents.