In an interesting post at Politicalowl, inspired by The Greens’ continued poll strength in House of Reps voting intention, Richard Farmer takes a look at the claim that The Greens always do worse on election day than in the polls. He doesn’t believe it to be true.
The whole piece is worth reading.
From Fredex at Poll Bludger;
……………………………………………………
Greens polling in the last 6 Newspolls before an election.
2001
6-4-5-6-6-5.5 Election 5.4
2004
8-6-7-7-7-7 Election 7.2
2007
5-4-5-6-7-7 Election 7.8
In every state, with 2 exceptions, in ‘04 and ‘07 their Senate vote was higher than their Reps vote.
The ALP was usually less, the COALition varied.
I predict a Greens vote of 10% plus a bit in the Reps on Saturday and if so that would be an increase of more than 2% cf ‘07.
Is that the same Richard Farmer from way back, the Hawke consultant (and Dr Zaius lookalike) who warned circa 1992-93 or thereabouts that Australia was going to become an economic basketcase because of the rising Greens vote?
Strange if it is he. Ironic if it’s a namesake…
I blogged on this matter three years ago, along similar lines to Richard Farmer.
@2 – I don’t know about what he may have said back then, but yes, it’s the same Richard Farmer.
Re Richard Farmer article, in Adelaide the dessication of the Democrats leaves a small but politically aware group of folk who will do what Andrew Bartlett has done in Queensland and recognised there are enough synergies between Green and Democrat for the Greens to be their nearest and newest plitical home.
I think someone like Sandra Kank, the former Democrats upper house rep here, would be able to move seemlessly to a Greens senate vote, given the alternatives.
If enough others also moved on that feeling, could there not be a chance for a Greens senate seat here?
Here’s what I wrote on Farmer’s blog:
“I am aware of that pattern of past Newspoll results, but there is a reason to believe that this time we cannot be quite so sure of the result.
“Newspoll changed its methodology in national polls after the 2007 election and began to ask directly if people were voting for the Greens rather than expecting them to nominate the party’s name themselves. So we don’t know what effect this will have on the figures on Saturday. What we do know is that when the methodology changed, there was a jump in Newspoll figures for the Greens.
“See Antony Green on this issue: http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2010/06/how-well-the-greens-are-polling.html ”
My guess is that the Greens will get at least 10-11%. Interestingly, I have heard that it has been much harder to get volunteers excited this time compared with the last 2 elections, with the exception of places like Melbourne. But that’s anecdotal and maybe the bigger picture is different.
Speaking out this way (Bennelong) The Greens have apparently had far fewer volunteers than in 2007.
It’s probably a perverse effect of the ALP’s failure on CC. People thought that the ALP would commit to this in 2007 and wanted to push for a robust scheme. When the ALP jumped ship and effectively joined the b-a-u crowd, many of those who sought to use The Greens to influence ALP policy in a progressive direction accepted that this could not happen, and so The Greens were forced back onto their hardcore supporters.
That’s not to say that The Greens won’t do better in the polls this year than in 2007 — they probably will, in part because they are the only party with significant profile that is talking positively about policy. The Greens will probably attract some of the less reactionary coalition supporters. I’ll be surprised if The Greens in Bennelong don’t get 12%.
My impression is that the Greens have had no difficulty in getting volunteers for the ACT electorates
Doug @ 8 – there’s a real chance they’ll finally get that senate seat in the ACT too apparently….
Dr Tad, The Greens are also struggling to do anything with the volunteers that they have, so it’s a bit hard to tell whether this will make any difference.
Having moved Sydney-Melbourne since the last election I was somewhat bemused that The Greens are just as hopeless with volunteers here as they are in NSW. The gulf between “sign up on the website” and “be contacted” is still impossibly vast. They do have the email newletter saying they need volunteers thing down pat though. Of course, populating it with people who’ve already offered to volnteer seems somewhat odd.
The Greens branch I belong to already has quite a few ex-Democrats, so it’s a natural progression for many.
We’ve also had no shortage of volunteers for leafletting, although we may come up a bit short handing out HTVs on Saturday.
12 Yes, DINR, am wondering whether to get more involved myself. You reckon this election is a bit like 1993?
I was handing out Labor stuff back then. In the wake of the attack by Atkinson and others on parks, enviro and heritage, might do the same, except with the Greens.
At the state election a few months ago a labor supporter made a serious presumption about who I should vote for, but the look on her face was diametrically opposed to the Green who grinned infectiously, when I replied “yes” and took a Greens card instead.
ACT seems reasonably well organised based on my limited involvement to date with cascading from central office to regional coordinators who coordinate the letterboxing, signs and organising poll workers.
@10 yes I noticed the same – a difficult organisation to volunteer for lol. But I’m taking that as a sign they need more volunteers, and after I hand out HTVs on Saturday I’ll most likely see what else I can contribute in the longer term.