AC Nielsen has this note on its website:
Margin of error : For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error due to sampling is plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.
LABOR’S vote has dropped significantly despite last week’s interest rate rise, and Kevin Rudd’s approval rating is lower than at any time since he assumed the leadership, according to the latest Age/Nielsen poll.
But there are straws in the wind, and if Howard — a known political conjurer — grabs one, declares it a log and climbs aboard, who would truly be surprised?
Barnaby Joyce thinks bad economic news has sent voters scurrying back to Howard’s safe port in the storm. But let’s remember the margin of error, and be wary of instant over-analysis. As The Poll Bludger put it pithily:
The movement most likely represents a correction from a somewhat excessive result last time.
Although it’s worth noting that before Ministers, in their capacity as running commentators on polls (remember how Howard used to refuse to comment? - that was very sensible) seized on the Nielsen numbers, the spin coming out of the Liberal Party was that Howard was winning in the marginals. Through his porkbarrelling. Well, that’s not quite how Christopher Pearson put it, and we can assume that he’s on the Liberal dripfeed because he quotes (presumably) secret Liberal polling. Pearson also put his best populist foot forward, and biretta in hand, implied that the Canberra press gallery weren’t seized of his non-elitist wisdom.
From a position of often unselfconscious privilege, they’re apt to sneer at populism. People in the seat of Braddon could just as well argue that the federal compact was explicitly designed to moderate the harsher effects of arguments based on the greatest good of the greatest number, and that one man’s concept of populism was another’s idea of democracy in action.
There has also been an element of Jansenist sanctimony about most of the reportage and comment about Mersey Hospital, an affectation that ill becomes Australia’s Fourth Estate.
I guess he’s on the Jesuit side of the great seventeenth and eighteenth century theological controversies.
Anyway, make of that what you will, though it’s amusing to find that there’s a people v. the elites argument from someone so well versed in ecclesiastical history.
The tedious fact, for all the colour and movement that we get from the latest instalment of The War on the States and other government shenanigans, is that the polls have been remarkably stable this election year. And while Pearson makes a trite point about uniform swings, the polling has also shown the government in deep trouble not just in the marginals that are awash with money but in its own safe(r) seats. Possums Pollytics has done some searching analysis to estimate the degree to which Rudd’s leadership has made much difference to Labor’s vote, and has concluded with the help of regression equations, that the story to be told is that Labor’s vote is far from being “soft”:
The ALP TPP vote before Rudd was soft, as it relied on a large amount of preference flows from a large amount of minor party voters. But now those voters have come across and put their primary vote with the ALP instead of their preferences. That isn’t a soft vote – it’s as hard as it gets. It’s a primary vote. So the next time you read some dullard waxing lyrical about the soft Rudd vote – remember this:
What that person is really saying is that there are a number of voters which could easily switch back, not to the minor parties from whence they came and where they used to preference the ALP, but back to the government that they deserted over the last 3 years, mostly starting after the 2005 budget and whom have gone out of their way to vote for anybody BUT the government.
The voting behaviour running against the government has been inertial. The TPP trends show that clearly, and what the Rudd leadership has done is merely change the nature of that inertia.
Where before Rudd it was just a general retreat away from the government, it is now a general charge to the ALP. It has changed from people not voting FOR the government and letting preferences flow to the ALP via the minors, to people voting for the ALP directly.
For the government to win the election, not only do they have to turn the vote around, but they have to turn around 3 years of momentum running against them in 3 months.
That tends also, I think, to confirm my view that the government was on the nose even before the last election, and that its victory, and much of its safety margin was a result of an anti-Latham vote rather than a ringing endorsement of the Dear Leader.
Michelle Grattan might have done well to lead instead with this para in her story:
In the 14 polls since July 1 (Nielsen, News, Morgan, Galaxy — nearly 16,000 interviews), Labor leads on a weighted two-party average of 56-44 per cent. On primaries it is ahead 48-39 per cent.
Ps: Note also that Grattan points out the inconsistency between the Westpoll last week which had Labor ahead in WA by 54-46 and the Nielsen state by state breakdown:
The Nielsen poll shows much variation between states. Labor leads on a two-party basis 62-38 per cent in South Australia, 57-43 per cent in Queensland, 56-44 per cent in NSW, and 51-49 per cent in Victoria. In Western Australia Labor trails 44-56 per cent. The WA finding is in contrast to a Westpoll last week showing support surging for Labor.
The Nielsen sample would be too small when disaggregated on a state by state basis to give reliable results. End of story. Westpoll had a rather small sample as well, but unless WA is vastly over-represented in the Nielsen sample (which would obviously invalidate the national numbers), the state breakdown shouldn’t even be cited. And as an aside, it’s disappointing that AC Nielsen hasn’t updated its website with the latest poll details - the July numbers are the most recent I can find.
If the government is genuinely taking solace from this poll then I feel sorry for them. It is in contrast to two previous polls, especially the Morgan phone poll that showed 58.5/41.5 taken after the interest rate hike.
The poll may have yet again stayed a leadership challenge for another few weeks. Everytime a challenge seems near a poll coincidentally throws doubt into the mix. They could go on like this all the way to the election only realise they should have changed at anytime before.
Funny to see some Liberals couldnt hold in their scepticism to Climate Change. That will help their cause a lot.
Yes, let them think they are on the way back. So much more the glee on election night.
It aint over until the fat lady sings, A
It aint over until the fat lady sings, Or as Arny would say I’ll be back !
Australian voters are as fickle as the day is long,the poles mean nothing at this stage, and a lot of people may get a lot of egg on their kisser over this.
I will take bets,even if Howard loses it will not be by a landslide two or three seats max at best.The West is certainly not looking good for Rudd, and he will need some movement there to get elected.Of course the great unknown will be the Senate, if Labor can’t get control of it we may see a Fraserish type/Costello Mk 2 counter offensive, especially if the economy tanks as some pundits are predicting.
Rudd aint there yet,interesting weeks ahead.
Oh, that Jansenism.
For a while there I thought you were either carrying about the Roman deity of revolving doors or the subcontinental sect that believes all is foretold.
Chris Pearson really said that? Laugh? I nearly bought a round.
I read Pearson’s drivel on the weekend and laughed once, now again. Thanks for that. Does anyone take this dribbling old fool seriously? Wish he would stick to writing about antique furniture. He did quite a good article once on Tasmanian nineteenth century tables and chairs.
Possum’s analysis is spot on. The solid primary vote for Rudd is the key and always has been. Keating once said that the magical number is 43 and it works for me. Pork-barreling marginals is Howard’s only strategy to win, and it will probably backfire.
Voters will take the money and run when they get wind of the stampede against Howard. Nobody wants to back a loser.
If your ABC has anything to do with it, Howard will be returned.
After being treated to a 10 minute
gentle caressinginterview with Howard yesterday on AM, we had a happy birthday interview with Costello, ending with the hard hitting question: “what would you like for your birthday, a new job?”.Pleeease.
Yet again, much ado about sampling error. Labor is ahead 55:45, as it has been been solidly since Rudd became opposition leader.
“The West is certainly not looking good for Rudd”
The West is actually looking very good for Rudd. He will win 2 or 3 seats there on current polling.
“and he will need some movement there to get elected”
No he won’t. On current polling he will win the election on seats won just in NSW, let alone the resr of the country.
So Monsignor Pearson alleges that the reptiles of the press are unworthy to behave like Jansenists.
There’s more than a hint of Jansenism in that accusation.
Presumably, Monsignor Pearson thinks that if anyone has a right to Jansenist salvation by grace, that person is … Monsignor Pearson.
I guess there is a parallel universe somewhere where Monsignor Pearson’s reference to 17th century theology carries some weight.
Maybe Ratty should transport himself to that particular universe. He might even win an election there.
If your ABC has anything to do with it, Howard will be returned.
And the rest of the media. The SMH’s front cover headline yesterday, for a story about this poll, was HOWARD’S BACK IN THE GAME.
Below this, the teaser for Peter Hartcher’s opinion column said: “It’s not enough to save Howard from annihilation, but it’s a start”.
Wtf?!
With these kinds of poll figures before any other election, the newspapers would be full of stories of the doom facing the incumbent government instead of headlines such as “Howard’s back in the game”. Howard may be hoping for something like the ‘93 election, except that the opposition doesn’t have an a policy as unpopular as the 1993 Coalition’s 15% GST.
I’m going to guess that it’s a misprint of Jensenist, referring to the more modern militancy of the Sydney Anglican family. You never know though, those fucking SJs are everywhere, even in the Australian.
They’re worse than the Masons.
No he won’t. On current polling he will win the election on seats won just in NSW, let alone the resr of the country.
Hey Spiro I hope you are right.
The Deveil Drink, found a story about your second cousin, the demon drink.
Howard is VERY scared if he resorts to this.
In a concerted attack on Mr Rudd, Mr Howard called him the “greatest political contortionist” ever while Water Minister Malcolm Turnbull accused him of causing the drought in southeast Queensland.
But in an upbeat address to caucus, Mr Rudd told Labor MPs that the Government was wasting question time with attacks on them instead of laying out fresh policies for the future.
“This is a government that has stopped governing,” Mr Rudd said to the private meeting.
“They’ve surrendered the advantage of incumbency which governments have.”
Rudd “Messing with Howard’s Head” is a political Masterstroke - and is working.
Peter Costello might not think Howard can win but if the ALP needs a uniform swing of 53%, then the current margin is only 2%. For more see: ‘Labor View from Broome’ http://laborview.blogspot.com/
In particular Kalgoorlie numbers game
Kevin Rennie
Accept no imitators, little s steve. None genuine without the Lee Marvin seal of approval.
Now then, as for the argument that alcohol can be a mitigating factor in acts one wouldn’t ordinarily commit sober, I’ve argued before on this blog that that’s a contemptible, disgusting ploy. Not that there’s anything wrong with despicable acts, but you oughtn’t to blame them on the booze. Have a bit of fuckin’ spine, CityKat, whoever you are. Take responsibility for the shitty things you do to other people, then wash them down with sweet sweet drink—like the rest of you mortals do.
At least the Flemish heresy didn’t have a Temperance flavour, as the crypto-Calvinist scum have always had in the New World. Worst thing that ever happened to the Reformation, I’ve always said, was the Atlantic Ocean.
Folks, can I please ask people not to leave comments about political developments on threads which have a specific topic? That’s what the Saturday Salon open thread is for. If anyone still wishes to discuss the specific material canvassed in this post, it really does disrupt the flow of the conversation.
Mark and Nabokov:
I was thinking of the Quaker progressives sort of Jansenism …. anyway, all the poll mathematics will be in turmoil if Howard’s save-his-political-hide-at-ANY-cost stunt collides with the collapse of subprime/low-doc loans and the hedge funds.
Mark:
Ooops. Sorry. Misread your 11:11pm post. Yeah, okay.
That’s ok, Graham, but I’d appreciate it if people took some notice. It’s really starting to grate.