Australia - 7 September 2013

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I respect Nielsen, so take it seriously, like Galaxy.

[Talleyrand]

Newspoll in Queensland marginals is out, and it's nasty for Labor (and doesn't match the 2 point swing to the party their national poll showed...).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Link

[Talleyrand]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Link

Another one of those ReachTel polls showing nasty results for Labor in Tasmania. It would be nice to see another pollster look into the situation here (especially in Lyons).

[You kip if you want to...]

Is this all basically over then?

[Hifly]

Is this all basically over then?

It never started.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Is this all basically over then?

It never started.

That's a basically an over-statement. Rudd frankly was pretty disappointing in the first two weeks and handed momentum to Abbott.

[morgieb]

Individual seat polling still seems strange, regardless of who's polling. I can't see the LNP winning 100+ seats on 53/47.

As for the campaign, it's been pretty plain for both parties. But Rudd hasn't played ball so far. He's been better this week, but is it too late?

[morgieb]

Like for example, how are the ALP holding their own in the state-wide polling in Queensland, but are really struggling in the individual seat polling? Labor doing better in marginals rather than safe seats doesn't tell the full story here.....

[morgieb]

Assuming Labor loses the election, who does everyone think will be the next leader?

[Talleyrand]

Assuming Labor loses the election, who does everyone think will be the next leader?

I'm for Bill Shorten, so his chances will be killed off once he loses the unwinnable 2016 election.

My actual preference, and someone I'd like to see become Prime Minister, would be Albanese, and possibly Plibersek.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think the upper limit is about 85... but again, I'm hearing a lot more anxiety from the Coalition supporters that they know the election is a lot more complex and closer than polling suggests... and they don't want people to think that the election is in the bag.

[RogueBeaver]

Apparently the Griffith push was preplanned, and IMO a feelgood project which should be only attempted after more advances are made in QLD.

Since we're on the subject of leadership, I'm still hoping for Shorten as Labor leader. Looking beyond the horizon, are there any young, dry Liberal econocrats in sight?

[morgieb]

Apparently the Griffith push was preplanned, and IMO a feelgood project which should be only attempted after more advances are made in QLD.

Since we're on the subject of leadership, I'm still hoping for Shorten as Labor leader. Looking beyond the horizon, are there any young, dry Liberal econocrats in sight?

Hawke?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Apparently the Griffith push was preplanned, and IMO a feelgood project which should be only attempted after more advances are made in QLD.

Since we're on the subject of leadership, I'm still hoping for Shorten as Labor leader. Looking beyond the horizon, are there any young, dry Liberal econocrats in sight?

Hawke?

Hawke has 'issues'... and would be a problem with leadership. I don't think that's the direction the Libs need to go in. Their current support is based on swing-voters being pissed off at the ALP, not a new coalition base.

They need to moderate on social issues, whilst maintaining their more free-marketish position... they basically need to make consistent in-roads into soft-ALP supporters.

[Frodo]

Assuming Labor loses the election, who does everyone think will be the next leader?

I'm for Bill Shorten, so his chances will be killed off once he loses the unwinnable 2016 election.

My actual preference, and someone I'd like to see become Prime Minister, would be Albanese, and possibly Plibersek.

Why is 2016 unwinnable for Labor, assuming Tony Abbott becomes the next PM this year?

[morgieb]

Assuming Labor loses the election, who does everyone think will be the next leader?

I'm for Bill Shorten, so his chances will be killed off once he loses the unwinnable 2016 election.

My actual preference, and someone I'd like to see become Prime Minister, would be Albanese, and possibly Plibersek.

Why is 2016 unwinnable for Labor, assuming Tony Abbott becomes the next PM this year?

Because most election winners in Westminister systems get at least two terms. Yes Labor were lucky to get a second term, but that had more to do with changing leaders before the election IMO.

[Talleyrand]

Assuming Labor loses the election, who does everyone think will be the next leader?

I'm for Bill Shorten, so his chances will be killed off once he loses the unwinnable 2016 election.

My actual preference, and someone I'd like to see become Prime Minister, would be Albanese, and possibly Plibersek.

Why is 2016 unwinnable for Labor, assuming Tony Abbott becomes the next PM this year?

Because most election winners in Westminister systems get at least two terms. Yes Labor were lucky to get a second term, but that had more to do with changing leaders before the election IMO.

A lot of factors go into it in Australia, including the sophomore surges for newly elected MPs and the newfound incumbency a first-term government holds. Even if there is a nasty swing against the government (e.g. 1998 or 2010), they tend to hold on due to those factors. There hasn't been an one term federal government in Australia since the ALP Scullin government from 1929 to 1932, IIRC, although one could argue the Whitlam government (which lasted less than 3 years) "comes close".

[Platypus]

I'm coming to the conclusion that Labor will be about the same in the nation as a whole excluding Sydney and Tasmania, where they'll be absolutely massacred. Maybe a point or two lost in SA as well, but no seats.

[Vosem]

Like for example, how are the ALP holding their own in the state-wide polling in Queensland, but are really struggling in the individual seat polling? Labor doing better in marginals rather than safe seats doesn't tell the full story here.....

Wouldn't it be the other way round, that Labor is doing better in safe seats than marginals?

I'm coming to the conclusion that Labor will be about the same in the nation as a whole excluding Sydney and Tasmania, where they'll be absolutely massacred. Maybe a point or two lost in SA as well, but no seats.

Isn't polling showing a rather large swing in SA, a mid-size one in Queensland (concentrated in Brisbane; in rural areas/the north of the state it seems they may actually gain due to the KAP's preferences), enough to get 3 seats in Victoria, with only WA holding steady? That's how I'm interpreting this...

[morgieb]

Like for example, how are the ALP holding their own in the state-wide polling in Queensland, but are really struggling in the individual seat polling? Labor doing better in marginals rather than safe seats doesn't tell the full story here.....

Wouldn't it be the other way round, that Labor is doing better in safe seats than marginals?

I'm coming to the conclusion that Labor will be about the same in the nation as a whole excluding Sydney and Tasmania, where they'll be absolutely massacred. Maybe a point or two lost in SA as well, but no seats.

Isn't polling showing a rather large swing in SA, a mid-size one in Queensland (concentrated in Brisbane; in rural areas/the north of the state it seems they may actually gain due to the KAP's preferences), enough to get 3 seats in Victoria, with only WA holding steady? That's how I'm interpreting this...

Yes it should. Thank you Vosem.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Based on both polling and what I'm being told -
- outside of Sydney there seems to a swing to the ALP, but in some pockets of Sydney the swing is large, but in the realm of 5-6% and not double-digit by any means.

- QLD is kind of intersting, I've heard nothing to suggest a loss of seats for the ALP, but there will be odd swings in QLD. I would be the least but surprised if the ALP pick one up in FNQ.

- The swing in VIC is moderated - a 3 seat loss is kind if seen as the ceiling, most have given Corrangamite away, Deakin is dodgy, but the ALP is feeling much more comfortable about LaTrobe and Chisolm. The swing is coming off a high, but I'm under the impression the swing will be relatively small.

- SA has been an increasing worry over the past few days. There was a large swing to the Libs, which did start to come back, but the fact that Abbot is back in Adelaide suggests the swing to the Libs might be pushing out again. I can see Wakefield as their only chance for a pick up - but I kind of doubt it happens.

- WA ... is flat out weird, despite the Newspoll, I think it's almost undoubted that there will be a swing to the ALP - the degree to which the candidate for Hasluck is being pushed tells me that this is their likely pick-up.

- NT - I think Solomon could be a surprise - it wouldn't shock me if there's a seat swap - but Snowden has a strong personal vote and support base with Indigenous voters.

- TAS will be intersting - a swing is unavoidable the issue is how big. Bass and Braddon are probably gone... the issue is that the only polling has been done by the robopolls... so I don't think we have a real idea of TAS until the night itself.

- ACT status quo, will probably have the smallest swings - the Senate race will be intersting, but I can't see the Lib primary being low enough to risk the Grens picking it up.

[Platypus]

Like for example, how are the ALP holding their own in the state-wide polling in Queensland, but are really struggling in the individual seat polling? Labor doing better in marginals rather than safe seats doesn't tell the full story here.....

Wouldn't it be the other way round, that Labor is doing better in safe seats than marginals?

I'm coming to the conclusion that Labor will be about the same in the nation as a whole excluding Sydney and Tasmania, where they'll be absolutely massacred. Maybe a point or two lost in SA as well, but no seats.

Isn't polling showing a rather large swing in SA, a mid-size one in Queensland (concentrated in Brisbane; in rural areas/the north of the state it seems they may actually gain due to the KAP's preferences), enough to get 3 seats in Victoria, with only WA holding steady? That's how I'm interpreting this...

I vaguely ignore the polling.

As it stands, I see the ACT, WA, SA, and the NT as a wash, although Labor may gain Hasluck. I really doubt they'll get Solomon, and while they could lose Wakefield or Lingiari, both are improbable.

NSW excluding Sydney and Victoria will see very small swings to the Coalition, certainly less than 2%. Labor will lose Dobell and Corangamite, but probably nothing else. They may even gain Dunkley, due to state Liberal issues, but it's not likely, and less likely than losing LaTrobe or perhaps Robertson.

Tasmania... No idea. Wilkie is safe, and I'd be very surprised if the Libs picked up Franklin and Lyons. Bass I think is gone, Braddon I suspect will be incredibly close and I don't know which side it will fall to. I'm putting it as a Liberal gain, but very very tentatively - it's the area of Tasmania that hates the state Labor government the least, and it has a well-liked local member.

Queensland: If it wasn't for Entsch, Leichhardt would fall, but he should be re-elected handsomely enough. Other than that, I kind of agree with Polnut in that I think the swing will be to Labor, but I think it will be slight and not affect any seats. Dawson if any, but still not probable. In Brisbane, I have no idea what will happen. My gut feeling is Labor to pick up Brisbane, Bonner, and Forde.

So excluding Sydney, I have the ALP losing one seat, but most of the maybes are in their favour. It's more likely for them to gain one than lose three, I think, but anywhere between no change and -2 is about equally likely.

Sydney is where things get bad. Polnut thinks Macquarie and Bennelong are winnable for Labor, and he may well be right... but I think they'll get massacred in the LIV seats. Greenway they might hold on to, but Lindsay is gone, and Banks. Reid and Parramatta should stick, but will be close. The big swing I think this election will come in Kingsford Smith, Barton, and Banks - certainly over 4%, and maybe as much as 7%. While I only think they'll lose Banks, they could be in for a fright in both Kingsford Smith and Barton. There'll be a swing in Werriwa too, but the ALP will hold it. Basically I see the best case scenario for the ALP, if they win both Macquarie and Bennelong, being a wash. But the best case scenario for the coalition is holding those two seats and winning up to 5 from Labor. I think they're pretty much set on two, and will hold their own seats. Which is enough to govern. They ought to get a third in Greenway, but it is in a unique situation in terms of candidates

[Platypus]

Oh, and yeah, Zed Seselja will be comfortably elected after Kate Lundy for the ACT senate seats.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Like for example, how are the ALP holding their own in the state-wide polling in Queensland, but are really struggling in the individual seat polling? Labor doing better in marginals rather than safe seats doesn't tell the full story here.....

Wouldn't it be the other way round, that Labor is doing better in safe seats than marginals?

I'm coming to the conclusion that Labor will be about the same in the nation as a whole excluding Sydney and Tasmania, where they'll be absolutely massacred. Maybe a point or two lost in SA as well, but no seats.

Isn't polling showing a rather large swing in SA, a mid-size one in Queensland (concentrated in Brisbane; in rural areas/the north of the state it seems they may actually gain due to the KAP's preferences), enough to get 3 seats in Victoria, with only WA holding steady? That's how I'm interpreting this...

Yes it should. Thank you Vosem.

The problem with that theory Vosem, is that in the 29 seats in QLD, the ALP only hold 8 of them... and their biggest margin is Griffith with 8.5%. There aren't enough 'safe-seats' for that explanation to hold water.

Extend that further... to consider the seat-by-seat polling, including the two Newspolls of Griffith and Forde, showing a similar sized swing... mean both the state-level Newspoll is right, and the electorate polls are wrong (although with a MoE near to 5%), vice-versa... or they're all wrong. I mean, you cannot have 8-10% swings in both marginal and their safest seats... and end up with a state-wide swing of 2% TO them.

EDIT: http://election.crikey.com.au/cash-tracker/ - the Libs up to $61 billion in spending promises, without outlining specific savings yet.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Both regional breakdowns of national polls and constituency polls are inherently and notoriously unreliable; it shouldn't be that surprising if they don't seem to link up that well. Fairly clear that the election is probably lost though.