Day eight: latest candidate update

1. Is it a rogue after seeing the polls in Lindsay and Robertson/Dobell? These polls indicate quite substantial swings to the Coalition.

   I recommend everyone keep an eye on Rudd’s campaign in the next week. Should he start campaigning in the second tier seats (i.e. margins of 3% plus) then you will know it is probably over.

   The Lindsay poll, particularly, has a substantial sample size of over 1000 in this seat. I can’t remember ever seeing a sample of this size in one seat. It cannot be discounted, particularly given constitutents were also asked how they voted in 2010 and that pretty much matched (actually it was 1% in Labor’s favour) the 2PP outcome in 2010.

   Taken more widely, one would have to argue that all of the seats in western Sydney on margins under 5% are in play, as I have been arguing on this site. That means: Greenway, Banks, Reid and Parramatta must also be in play. I might suggest other seats such as Kingsford-Smith (Libs polling well), Werriwa (unpolled) and McMahon (unpolled) must also be considered as possible changes. Note, the most recent Reachtel McMahon poll when Gillard was PM suggested that Labor would struggle to win this seat even should Rudd be PM. Should Rudd turn up in Parramatta or Kingsford-Smith, you know Labor’s internal polling is showing some deep trouble.

   I still believe VIC and SA are going to be very hard for Labor. It would not surprise me at all if seats such as Adelaide (ALP margin 7.5%) or Chisholm (ALP margin 5.8%) or Bendigo (ALP margin 9.4%) fell.

   The biggest argument seems to come from QLD and TAS. The LNP argue that they are not giving any up in QLD, yet Labnor seem to think they will make solid gains. In Tasmania, The Libs believe they are guaranteed at least one, but possibly three, yet Labor seem to believe that they will hold all of these seats. Unfortunately for Labor all of the Reachtel polling seems to indicate large swings on offer which is also reflective of the Liberals polling.

   In NT, I think Solomon could change. In WA I think Labor could win Swan. I don’t think they will win Hasluck.

   I look forward to the public polls this weekend which show the wider trend across the country. If any of them show 53s or 54s to the Coalition, then there the trend away from Labor is continuing and a large, one-sided result again becomes possible.

2. Is it a rogue? I can’t see how it isn’t, but the weekend polling should settle it. I have to repeat that the TPP based on last election’s preference flows is 59/41. My calculation is based on Labor multipliers of .7884 of the Green vote and .4174 of “Other” vote. That yields 58.6 to 41.4, but must be rounded as the inputs were only significant to the ones place.

   Even you don’t seem to be suggesting that we are likely to see the other polls jump out to a range that would make the Morgan phone poll look less out of place. I can easily imagine the other polls moving to 53 or 54 to the Coalition, but nothing has happened that would explain a sudden jump of about five points.

   I admit the Lindsay poll gives me pause (though not much because I know nothing about this Lonergan outfit other than the fact it released some poll or other last week). The Dobell/Robertson poll, if anything, confirms me in my belief. A 54/46 split there doesn’t seem like a sudden, enormous jump. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t remember it being 51/49 to the ALP recently.

   That isn’t to say it didn’t get the trend right, meaning the polls are still moving in the Coalition’s direction. I suspect they are, in part in continuation of the end of the honeymoon effect and in party because of Labor’s shambolic campaign. ReachTEL’s 53% to the Coalition is a bit of evidence in that direction, as is the Newspoll from last weekend. While it showed a steady 52, it was based on primaries that must have produced an unrounded TPP of at least 52.3% and as much as 52.49999999999999%.

   All of what you say about seats may be true, but it is hard to credit a poll so far from the pack on TPP or a poll showing a swing on primaries about double that which you’ve been seeing, regardless of the size of the poll.

3. One more thing about the Morgan poll: the fact that the “how did you vote last time” approximates the last TPP is actually a point against it because people tend to over-report voting for the winner. In short, there should have been more Labor responses.

4. I just found out that, apparently, Lonergan polled my house last night. Wasn’t me that answered, but another member of the household. This is, to all of my family’s awareness, the first time the house has been polled in any opinion poll.

   Also worth noting – the Lonergan polling was automated, via house phone, and spent some time asking questions specifically regarding Peter Beattie.

5. Glen – interesting. Probably will come out tomorrow. I hear there will be plenty of individual seat polling by the pollsters over the coming few days.

6. So, nominations have closed, and ballot orders are being decided. It scares me how many candidates are running in the seats I’ve seen lists for, so far.

   Forde, which had just four candidates in 2010, has TEN candidates this time. Melbourne has SIXTEEN (seven in 2010), Denison has ten (up from five in 2010). New England has nine (up from six in 2010).

7. Is there a site with all of the ballot orders?

8. The AEC website, I believe, will have them up some time today. I just checked, they’re not up yet.

9. Glen – you were JWS’d. 8 marginal seat polls are coming out tomorrow. Forde obviously already released.

10. So with KAT and PUP swapping preferences, how much will this effect the outcome?
    Crazy Bob is still expecting 10 lower house seats, combined with Clive’s 30, and none for the greens. Do these men have a grasp on reality, or a secret crystal ball?

11. DB – it was Lonergan, not JWS. But then, I think you know that, now.

    Rockman – I don’t think it’s going to help PUP much, but KAP may get some benefit from it, as otherwise the PUP would have been cannibalising the portion of the KAP vote arising from protest voters. It might just be the deciding point on one or two seats, maybe.

12. For those whom are unaware of the KAP deal. This from The Australian today:

    1. “KAP negotiators confirmed to The Weekend Australian last night that the party would trade preferences with the ALP in the Coalition-held electorates of Hinkler, Herbert and Flynn, as well as Labor’s Capricornia”.
    2. “In most Queensland seats, the KAP will then direct preferences to the Liberal National Party ahead of Labor, but the Katter party’s preferences are expected to be vital in the four seats in which it’s backing the ALP”.
    3. ” the ALP-KAP deal will have the practical effect of maximising the chances of a Senate position for the KAP’s James Blundell at the expense of the Greens’ Adam Stone”.

    My take.

    Capricornia was a seat the LNP were hoping to win on 4.1% margin. That is probably now unlikely. As for the other 3 seats (Hinkler, Herbert, Flynn) I believe this could hurt the Coalition and there is a prospect they could lose two although the LNP are polling strongly in each of them.

    It appears KAP is preferencing the LNP ahead of the ALP in the remainder of the seats. If so, I really can’t see the ALP picking up any (maybe 1) off the Coalition unless PUP starts preferencing the ALP and I really doubt that will happen.

    There is a possibility that the ALP will pick up no seats in QLD. The good thing from a Coalition perspective in this deal is that KAP is now more likely to get the last Senate spot ahead of the Greens which may mean the Coalition might be able to deal with the minor parties or the Greens in effectuating legislation. It would probably require a 54-55% 2PP across the country however for this to happen.

13. Continuing a debate between RichR and myself, on the unusual poll swings, from here: https://www.tallyroom.com.au/aus2013/bennelong2013/comment-page-3#comment-545487

    The 5-10% swings are in some of the most recent poll numbers in various seats. The multiple polls saying Beattie would get a 5 point bump was meant literally – polls before he was actually nominated, run by Labor, and just after he was nominated, both said 5 point bump, before half the people even knew about him running.

    And the Lonergan polling was automated, at least in Forde – I can say that with 100% certainty, because my household was polled. As for ReachTEL, the thing about these polls is that people have another choice – to hang up entirely. They’re automated, people don’t feel guilty about doing it. And if they haven’t made up their mind, they’re more likely to hang up when not given a choice to say “I haven’t decided yet”.

    As for the difference between voter response and past flows, there’s multiple issues – first, we have no past flows for KAP or PUP. Second, HTV orders change from election to election. Third, there’s far more candidates on the ballots in most seats in this election than last, so preference flows aren’t trustworthy (because they tend to estimate flows on a broad basis). And if the KAP vote in the state election were protest votes coming from the ALP, then the Greens would also get some of the vote, at least in suburban and urban seats – in Albert, Logan, Springwood, and Coomera, to name a few of the southside seats, the Greens had a loss of primary vote. Even in Brisbane Central, which had no KAP candidate, the Greens vote was reduced. In some seats, like Whitsundays, even the LNP had a lower primary vote, with pretty much all of the primary vote gains being made by the KAP.

    I don’t think the Robopolls are putting out complete crap. I just think there’s a phenomenon that is unusual in the campaign; the absurdly high undecided count where “undecided” is tracked separately is an indicator of this. I would suggest a very simple explanation for this phenomenon, which hasn’t really happened before – a highly popular leader of a highly unpopular party. It leaves people more ambivalent than usual. It doesn’t help that people also now have the KAP and PUP to consider, two parties with a lot of push behind them.

14. Glen,

    Ultimately, we’ll see. But what I’m saying is there is nothing to suggest a reason why hangups, or any other methodological element of robopolls, are suddenly taking on a partisan lean. Especially not a massive one. That isn’t to say it isn’t happening, but I want to see proof such as Newspoll doing polls in seats that actually matter, or other phone polls in going into the field, giving us a basis of comparison.

    Asking voters about hypothetical scenarios like a Beattie replacing the existing candidate. Aside from the fact that a voter might actually make a different decision should the event come to pass, there are other reasons why the results might not match up with the expectations. First, if the voters were asked “would you be more likely to vote for Labor if Peter Beattie were the candidate,” it could well have been true that 5% said they’d be more likely, but the likelihood ended up not being enough to change their minds. And then of course there is the reaction of the voters to how the switch happened. Perhaps people didn’t like a candidate getting shunted aside or that there was an assumption that now Labor could have a candidate campaign elsewhere in Qld and take them for granted. Finally, it could be the difference between hypothetical Peter Beattie and Peter Beattie out campaigning.

    As for TPP, the HTV cards always change, yet last election flows is the one that is reliable. This election could well be different, but the mere fact of a difference is not enough to decide the standard calculation of TPP is wrong.

    Whether or not we get other sorts of polls, we’ll eventually get something to test them against. Anyway, I hope you’re right.

15. My view is that:
    – these Robopolls seems to be slightly overstating the Coalition primary vote in some (less than 50%) of the seats;
    – the national polls are overstating Greens and Other support by a fair bit, whereas, I believe the Robopolls are about right (i.e. ALP + LNP = about 87% in most of the seats polled);
    – it is remarkable how accurate the robopolls were in the lead up to the 2010 election;

    All of the above factors need to be taken into account.

16. I have now increased by rolling seat take for the LNP to 89, to include an extra seat in VIC and 2 less losses in QLD.

17. “- the national polls are overstating Greens and Other support by a fair bit, whereas, I believe the Robopolls are about right (i.e. ALP + LNP = about 87% in most of the seats polled);”

    Last election the Coalition made up approx. 82% of the Primary vote. Galaxy’s poll this morning shows approx. 81% of the electorate to vote either Coalition or ALP. Do you think that this election is going to be more polarised due to the hung parliament with the Greens and others (KAP, PUP, FF) less relevant?

18. Oops should read Coalition and ALP made up approx. 82% of the Primary vote.

19. RichR – I think “wait and see” is the best option at this point; I’ll just repeat that I’m skeptical of the numbers coming out of all of the polls right now.

    One interesting thing to note is that Newspoll had ALP ahead by 2% in the weeks leading up to the election, and the numbers shifted at the last minute – I’d posit that the same phenomenon was happening, but in reverse; people who were leaning Labor had solidified earlier, but those leaning Liberal were less certain.

    DB – Are you referring to the JWS robopoll taken just a few days before the election that said Labor would get 51.6% 2PP and win 79 seats? The one that said that Labor would pick up Dunkley with a 7% margin (Libs held by 1%)? The one that said that Labor would pick up Cowper with a 4% margin (Libs held by 10%)?

    I’d say that poll exhibited very similar behaviour, in the opposing direction, to what we’re seeing now.

20. Bear Necessities

    In answer to your question at 10.00am, I certainly do in the marginal seats (except perhaps QLD) but probably not in the safer ones.

    Also, in the polls leading up to the 2010 election, The Greens were polling at close to 14%, yet only received 11.8% on election day. I believe The Greens will struggle to get to 9% in this election and it could be closer to 8%.

    I think you will see swings to Labor is some of the safer Liberal seats like North Sydney and Warringah and upper north shore of Sydney, but swings against the Government where it really counts.

    Glen – you have picked on few seats yet the JWS Robopoll was taken in something like 30 seats just before the last election and in most (not all) of those considered “bellwethers” it was right i.e.from memory Lindsay, Eden Monaro, Petrie, Corangamite, Bass, Hasluck, Hughes, Macarthur. I’m not saying in every case it will be right (I could identify ones where I think it is wrong at the moment) but as an overarching view taken in totality, it was remarkably accurate within any reasonable Margin of Error and supported that there would be a slight Labor majority days and weeks before the election. Put it this way, as you say, if JWS said Labor would get 79 in 2010 (and I have no doubt to believe that you are right), it is a pretty accurate assessment in my view; not perfect, but pretty accurate and within a reasonable margin of error taken in its totality.

21. DB: “I have now increased by rolling seat take for the LNP to 89, to include an extra seat in VIC and 2 less losses in QLD.”
    That is heading back towards Gillard numbers. Perhaps not much of the furniture will be saved? Also perhaps, it is still early days. Rudd hasn’t exactly campaigned well thus far but the writing does appear to be on the wall.

22. So, the Senate Group Preferences have now been finalised, and there’s a few surprises along the way (hey Ben, could we have a new main article about the Senate preferences, perhaps, so we can discuss them in a dedicated thread?)

    Note that this is following the Poll Bludger listing, so it’s missing some micro-parties and independents from the counts and orders.

    Greens preferences in NSW start out in an expected order – Wikileaks, Democrats, Sex Party, Labor as the first four. And then the surprise: Palmer United Party, followed by KAP, and then Coalition.

    Katter Party in NSW had a lot of unsurprising choices at the start (except One Nation – first on their list… I’m shocked by that, to be honest)… but they put Wikileaks before Shooters and Fishers!

    Sex Party in NSW put One Nation and Shooters and Fishers ahead of the Greens?

    The Animal Justice Party in NSW put PUP (plus Democrats, Sex Party, FF, One Nation, Wikileaks, and Christian Democrats) ahead of Greens, despite the Greens clearly being the most natural choice for them (given that the Greens would consider animal justice to be essential).

    Also interesting is that the Coalition didn’t actually put Greens last! They put One Nation last, and Greens only second-last.

    And perhaps the most interesting is how many parties have put the Sex Party high on their lists. If Sex Party can maintain their vote, I could actually see preferences being enough to push them into a seat. Parties from both sides of the spectrum are putting Sex Party rather high (some others are naturally putting them very low – Family First and KAP both put them last).

23. I just did, so this thread is now closed.

    Go here to continue the conversation on Day Fourteen.

    Ben

Comments are closed.