The latest Newspoll and Morgan Poll return strikingly similar figures for the estimated two-party preferred vote and major party primary vote. Both estimate the 2PP vote as 60-40 in favour of Labor over the Coalition. Labor’s primary vote is estimated at 52 per cent by Newspoll and 51 per cent by Morgan, whilst the Coalition vote is estimated at 35 per cent by Newspoll and 35.5 per cent by Morgan.
Where the interesting discrepancy arises is in the figures for the Greens and other minor parties or independents. Newspoll has the Greens on 3 per cent and “Others” on 10 per cent, whereas Morgan has the Greens on 8 per cent and the combined vote for the Democrats, Family First, One Nation and “Independent/others” at 5.5 per cent. The Morgan estimate of the Greens vote is in the same range as the most recent AC Nielsen and Galaxy polls (7 and 9 per cent respectively).
I have previously commented on Newspoll’s underestimation of the Green vote in recent State elections, and there is prima facie reason to believe that Newspoll is also underestimating the Greens’ Federal vote. Comparing the two most recent polls suggests two possible explanations for the discrepancy. One is that Newspoll polls people by phoning to landline numbers whereas Morgan relies on in-person interviews. There was some discussion of this on the earlier thread. The other is that the way the poll question is posed could be influencing the responses. Morgan asks: “If a Federal election for the House of Representatives were being held today – which party would receive your first preference?â€? whilst Newspoll asks: “If a Federal election for the House of Representatives were held today, which one of the following would you vote for? [Presumably with a list of 'the following' - PN] If ‘uncommitted’, to which one of these do you have a leaning?”
What do others think?
Pollsters are notoriously secretive about the detail of their methodologies.
My guess for a while is that Newspoll does not read out the minor parties on their initial list of parties – its just ‘ALP’, ‘Coalition’ or ‘Other’. ACN appears to read them out, while Morgan has them on their ballot paper.
I don’t think the phone/ face to face explanation works since ACN and Galaxy are both over the phone.
As the newspoll link shows, Rudd is staying relentlessly on message by saying (again and again) that John Howard “is a very clever politician”.
Gillard and Swan say it again and again also.
Why that should be a negative for Howard, I have no idea. But it must be showing up in the Labor focus groups for them to bang on and on about it.
Whatever he does, he does belatedly and only to win the election. That’s the message.
And while we’re discussing polling methodology…
Re Newspoll and Morgan Poll question methodologies.
One explanation may be that the Morgan question:
elicits an articulation of a global emotion of discontent against he Howard government. The major opposition party (ALP) is the natural beneficiany of this gut reaction.
However the Newspoll question:
Invites the participant to think about why s/he would vote against the Howard government. Environmental concerns and questions of civil rights tell somewhat against the ALP. The Greens and Democrats are natural beneficiaries of this more modulated sense of disconent with the way things are.
Whatever, these latest figures should cause Liberals to think very seriously about dumping Howard.
Well, whatever’s going on, it makes the Gazette’s ‘midweek’ 55-45 poll look fairly dubious.
I’d agree with Andrew Norton:
http://clubtroppo.com.au/2007/05/29/post-annihilation/#comment-121467
… and also with Katz. It’s noteworthy that the Coalition primary is virtually identical in both polls. This suggests that voters have made their mind up not to vote Lib/Nat, and there’s some fluidity in where that vote will actually go in first preference terms.
I’m not personally sure at this stage, for instance, whether the Greens or Labor will get my first preference. The more that it looks like a big Labor win, the more I’ll lean towards the Greens to register my distaste at a lot of Labor’s rightward move.
With climate change running so hot as an issue, Newspoll’s 3% Greens vote simply isn’t credible, and this is borne out by state election results.
Probably not, no.
But worth thinking about 93 – another election which looked like producing a change of government and which had a very unpopular policy at the centre of debate – there was a very significant squeeze of the minor party vote, and stronger primaries for both the Coalition opposition and the Labor incumbents.
I suspect, though there are differences in the dynamics as well as similarities, this election is also a polarising one which will see the major party share of the vote rise in the lower house. Don’t rule out a bigger vote for Labor in the Senate than expected, either.
The only poll that counts. Go the Eels!
Love watching the Gazette squirm through this one. Serves you right, HFGs! This is what happpen when you cease even pretending to be a national daily, and become coalition press agents – you go down with the ship too, and look like braying asses.
Listen to Shagahan still pretending IR is a problem area for the ALP . Bahah! http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21811822-601,00.html
Shags, I want you meet a friend of mine – Its called reality dude: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/files/newspoll-29-may.jpg
Now, I dont want to be rude, but Im not sure I agree this is all margin of error stuff. The ALP primary just got a massive spike over the last few days. My money’s on two things, one spotted by the Commentariat, and one less so:
1. Rudd/ Rein and the modern marriage dilemma playing well with female voters, etc.
2. The Rum Corps factor. One of the subtler messages here is that a Rudd government is not opposed to dodgy private wealth accumulation from state largesse, and that a nod will still be good as a wink to a blind bat.
Expect the feint whiff of legalised graft and double standards arising from the Rein episode to reassure swinging voters en masse that all will be all under Rudd.
Its the perfect formula: Battlers will get a fair crack at the leftovers while Mammon gorges.
This is the greatest Australian tradition of all – and plays especially well in NSW and QLD.
I only hope the coalition is stupid enough to continue the attacks on Rein (and they are). That Thatcherite whisper “you too could be rich…” inherent in Reins success is the key to voters losing reservations about Rudd, especially as he offers reregualtion of the labor market as insurance.
“With climate change running so hot as an issue, Newspoll’s 3% Greens vote simply isn’t credible”
Only if you believe that climate change = environmental issue = bigger vote for Greens.
For many people, perhaps most, climate change is both an environmental and economic issue. For them, it’s about how to mitigate climate change at lowest economic cost.
To the extent that the Greens have talked about this, they’ve either said or implied that this means shutting down the coal industry etc, banning cars and instead everyone gets on their bicycle.
(If the Official Greens themselves have not said exactly this, then certainly a lot of people associated with green activism have, such as Tim Flannery with his comments about the coal industry losing its’ “social licence”, whatever that means.)
This kind of talk may go down a treat in New Farm/Glebe/Fitzroy but perhaps not so with the general populace. They are concerned bout climate change, but concerned about the economy too. They may look to John Howard and see catch up pefunctory non action on climate change, all in the name of the economy, and be unimpressed. They may then look to Labor and see sort of the right balance. All very woolly and two-bob each way, to be sure, but it m ight be what they want this time.
The Greens are kidding themselves if they think that greater environmental consciousness in the population necessarily means more votes for them.
Yay! New Farm not being ignored among the mentions of inner city latte leftdom!
Lefty E, on the question of margins of error, the 2PP spike here is movement above the margin of error, but you need to look at it cumulatively because the last poll may have been below the margin of error.
The primary movement to Labor, which I hadn’t seen when I wrote my previous comment, is interesting.
It suggests to me that whenever the government thinks it’s on a winner and brings out the big guns, it backfires badly.
Somebody said on a thread somewhere that the government’s best tactic might be to shut the hell up. That may indeed be right, but it’s gone past the time that they could have.
I think we’re seeing the backlash against the Howardian permanent campaign. Andrew Robb was almost suggesting that, but I think he forgot to factor in how much people blame Howard for the constant government attack dog noise machine levels.
Greens problem is partially that they are reluctant to run the ‘vote for us to keep Labor honest’ line which is their best chance for winning soft Labor votes.
There’s definitely that sort of vote out there – probably also why the Democrats were doing better than many might have anticipated in the recent Morgan poll which is the only public snapshot of Senate voting intentions available this year.
“New Farm not being ignored among the mentions of inner city latte leftdom!”
Indeed, it is the new frontier.
Though the only people I’ve (personally) known to live there were anything but latte left.
Yeah, actually, it doesn’t deserve the rep.
Mark wrote:
“I’m not personally sure at this stage, for instance, whether the Greens or Labor will get my first preference. The more that it looks like a big Labor win, the more I’ll lean towards the Greens to register my distaste at a lot of Labor’s rightward move.”
I’m taking a different approach again. Part of my cross-bench voting intention is contemplating the consequences of losing every single Democrat senator.
Part of “restoring the balance” is restoring the Democrats. They have been punished enough by decisions they effectively made eight years ago. I know there’s a lot of “noise” out there right now and that the Democrats have only themselves to blame for a certain degree of insensitivity towards their constituencies, but people really are ignoring the Democrats at their peril because the best purpose of the cross-bench is assessing policy in all its complexity, something the Democrats are experienced to do.
I don’t believe the Greens or Family First are worthy of holding the balance of power in the Senate for this very reason and it would take a great deal of convincing to make me rethink this position.
…From Justin
“Greens problem is partially that they are reluctant to run the ‘vote for us to keep Labor honest’ line which is their best chance for winning soft Labor votes.”
Sounds mightily unsubtle to me, Geoff R.
Probably a counter-productive message for the greens.
Maybe the Democrats could give it another go.
Newspoll asks who you would vote for and then lists ALP, Lib, Nat, Other, Independent. I suspect that most poll respondents are already thinking through their 2pp result and answer ‘ALP’ or ‘Lib’, and don’t consider ‘Other’. Morgan lists parties (ie; Greens, Democrats, Family First) so voters will react differently to the question. This in part explains the discrepancy between Galaxy, Morgan and Newspoll in relation to the Greens.
As to Climate Change being an issue – well it is, but every party got a position on it (acknowledging that ‘its a reality’ or ‘we must act’) but few have really tackled some of the big GHG emitters – woodchipping or coal. Leaving aside woodchips (and our addiction to paper!), the coal industry is the obvious target for emission reduction – both of our own, but also in terms of exported emissions. So its an issue, but we’re still at the lip-service level of changing light bulbs.
BearCave, I was talking about my choice for the lower house.
Ozpolitics has a single graph which shows the Greens vote in polls conducted by Nielsen, Morgan and Newspoll ‘04 to ‘07.
It is notable that, roughly, Morgan has the Greens vote fluctuating around 8%.
Nielsen follows that graph but about 2% higher.
Newspoll follows the Morgan graph but about 2% less.
So whatever method each is using seems to result in a bias where Nielsen rates the Greens highly, Newspoll much lower and Morgan in the middle.
In real elections the Greens gained [roughly]:
Federal 04 7.2%
SA 06 6.5%
Tas 06 16.6%
Qld 06 7.9%
Vic 06 9.8%
NSW 07 8.9%
Make of that what you will.
Waiting for the bounce (with apologies to the Doors)
At first flash of budget, we raced down to the Oz.
Standing there on reform’s shore.
Waiting for the bounce …
Can you feel it, a wedge to trounce
A masterclass! the Dawg has pounced,
I’m waiting for the bounce
Waiting…. waiting…. waiting…. waiting….
Waiting for you to – swing on back
Waiting for you to – hear our clap track
Waiting for you to – swing along
Waiting for you to – tell me what went wrong
This is the strangest poll Ive ever known.
Waiting for the bounce
Newspoll’s failure to include the greens as a specific option for voters to choose skews the result in favour of Labor and independents who are presented as an option for voters. For the greens to record a vote the person surveyed must first choose the “another party” category and then volunteer “the greens ” as their answer.
The fact that the Greens are in the Newspoll results is because enough people indicate they would vote for them despite the greens not being presented as a specific answer option.
Newspoll’s public presentation of its results states that the question is “which of the following would you vote for” but doesn’t list what are “the following” . That is not good enough.
5% is more than a margin of error swing. I have been wondering whether the egregious waste of taxpayers money on Fed Gov’t advertising may have been a factor. I know that amoung the small number of floating voters that I know it is a real issue. Aside from the Rein Anomalie – that is the only other major issue since the last poll.
I posted last night on OzPolitics, but thought I would re-iterate (mainly because I want to use the phrase “Poll from the Grassy Knoll” again
) …
If the Labor TPP vote is really steady at about 57-58% (i.e. the population), then the probability of obtaining consecutive samples of 55% then 60% is VERY low (less than 1%, if my stats lessons from years ago haven’t started peeling away from Guinness consumption).
The alternatives are: a genuine positive trend to the ALP (suggested by the jump in primary vote), or a bias was introduced by the special mid-week NewsPoll.
Possible bias sources are purely speculative, hence ripe for blog discussion/ranting. They could be:
- Time of the week.
- The ordering of the questions. The mid-week 55% poll focussed mainly on “who do you think will win”, which NewsPoll don’t normally do. Maybe some respondents get coy about saying “ALP” for too many questions
- The special poll was outsourced by NewsPoll and there were differences in execution, or churning through another 1100 phone calls has led to sloppiness (how this leads to bias I’m not sure).
I’m sure the research is conducted with maximum integrity etc. etc., but then the NewsPoll nabobs or Crosby-Textor know a lot more about the psychology of polling then us plebes.
(Cue X-Files music) … was the special poll an attempt by The Daily Howard to smack down leadership rumblings, or a desperate attempt to get some sort of return on all the coin spent by the Liberals over the last month, knowing in advance that crabby work-slaves might slightly favour the devil you know during mid-week?
The truth is out there, subject to 95% statistical confidence
Incidentially, if the leak is correct, and Howard is planning to bombard us with “Climate Clever” show bags, its an interesting choice of language.
Is this more “turn your negs into a pos” type thinking, a la “this election is about trust”?
Or will punters read and think “Ok, look: Rodent is Climate Mean and Tricky now. Another reason to bin the old tool.”
Lefty E, that is THE slogan for the election, fits nicely on a bumber sticker, placard or a street sign: “Bin the old tool”.
Love it, now where’s Christine Keeler when you need a poster artist?
“Or will punters read and think “Ok, look: Rodent is Climate Mean and Tricky now. Another reason to bin the old tool.â€? ”
Right on, Lefty.
This is how Oliver Goldsmith (1728-1774) in “The Village Schoolmaster” perceived a vainglorious poseur who’d passed his “Use-By” date.
“….For e’en though vanquish’d he could argue still;
While words of learned length and thund’ring sound
Amazed the gazing rustics rang’d around;
And still they gaz’d and still the wonder grew,
That one small head could carry all he knew.
But past is all his fame. The very spot
Where many a time he triumph’d is forgot. ”
Comes a time when even “the gazing rustics rang’d around” wise-up to perpetual humbuggery.
Mind you, I’d like a couple of “Climate Clever” fridge magnets for the amusement of friends in the kitchen at parties. Novemberish.
And Doller $weetie is doing his bit to lower the Coalition Support Base
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21815950-1702,00.html
Are the Libs on a Death Wish or what ?
I think Petey can see his whole political career going down the toilet and it has made him cross. The more they rant and smear, the higher Rudd’s popularity seems to go.
Don’t be surprised if these poll fugures are as good as it gets for the Libs.
Nobody is listening to Deputy Dawg. He is not widely liked nor respected. Between 23 and 31 per cent see Deputy Dawg as foreman material (Morgan).
Nobody takes any notice of what is said in parliament. It’s a waste of time. People read their payslips and draw their own conclusions and have done so since 2005.
See LINK .
It’s the bloody IR stupid!
On IR Gillard 50 per cent , Jokin Joe 31 (Roy Morgan May 17 poll).
To cut to the chase: IR legislation has sealed Ratty’s fate. And he is promising more where that came from. Frank, you’re right. It’s a death wish.
And Ratty is joining Deputy Dawg into the Doghouse of obscurity
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,21816713-5005361,00.html
Its pure denial too. At some point, Rodent made the mistake of believing the Govt Gazette hype.
May I, at this point, suggest that the LIberal Party Campaign Song should be “Listening” by Pseudo Echo.
http://www.lyricsandsongs.com/song/562848.html
Yes, Frank, they’re sounding very shrill and defensive. There’s a serious question mark over Ratty and Iceberg’s ability to handle genuine pressure. Beazer and Boof never really turned the screws like this.
Maybe they’re just not up to the top job!
Wait… Is he claiming to be the personification of the Australian People here? ‘Cause it’s actually you who decides when the people decide, Mr. Eyebrows, or at least up until the first week in January.
“Mr Costello justified his attack because Mr Rudd, during his speech, had criticised Mr Howard’s character over the so-called “children overboard” affair, the Iraq war and the AWB wheat scandal.”
Wow, did Rudd do and say all that? How cruel and silly.
All those issues that the general public just accept as normal rodent behaviour.
Hang on? Not damning John boy with faint praise is he?
Maybe Tipus Brutus will take a tilt at the top job yet.
Grace, my bumper sticker of choice is: ‘Howard hater, and proud of it’.
Clearly the Greens will do better than Newspoll – they have a deep green base, plus an effective machine that will ensure they have candidates and hence ballot labels in every seat.
But it won’t surprise when their vote falls in 07 from 04:
1. When change is afoot, the electorate polarises somewhat.
2. The Greens rise was a mix of frustration on global warming collapse of Democrats. Labor first (and now in catchup the govt) have put climate policy in the mainstream. A policy victory but political poison for the Greens (similarly, ‘border security’ was Hanson’s pyrrhic victory).
3. Rudd is slippery and no leftie. But he exudes urbane intelligence. A large slice of Green support has been intellectuals, who trust his brains and hate Howard enough to forgive (for now) Rudd’s lack of ideological anchoring.
The Greens will roll with the punches, but short of ecological catastrophe of the kind that hurts suburbia, they won’t break through the minor party barrier.
Why would you draw attention to the AWB or children overboard unless you wanted to hurt Ratty. Deputy Dawg is doing a dirty on the boss. Clearly. Thisis dog whistling of a fairly sophisticated kind. A payback for the years of humiliation. You can see the logic. $weetie is the winner in the end.
- Franz Kafka, The Trial
From the Govt Gazette:
Oh Dear, It ain’t looking good in internal Liberal Party Polling either.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21818045-601,00.html