Australia - 7 September 2013

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And 2016 is hardly unwinnable for the ALP, unless the party collectively decides that it is (and acts accordingly). There's a first time for everything - and both Howard and Rudd/Gillard only barely survived their first re-election attempt.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'm not prepared to say there's no way back - it's more likely than not that they have lost - but it will be close enough that Abbott will have to watch his every step. Plus the Senate will block EVERYTHING he tries to do. He'll have his mandate respected as much as he respected Rudd's.

[Smid]

I'm not prepared to say there's no way back - it's more likely than not that they have lost - but it will be close enough that Abbott will have to watch his every step. Plus the Senate will block EVERYTHING he tries to do. He'll have his mandate respected as much as he respected Rudd's.

You will recall the Liberal-controlled Senate supported Labor's mandate on the repeal of Workchoices. It if Labor that is consistently negative and obstructive in opposition.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Well Workchoices was what killed the Howard Government and it was in their long-term political interests to see the back of it, and to be seen actively participating in its end.  I was referring to Climate Change, considering it was THE issue that caused Abbott and Minchin to move against Turnbull.

 

[Hifly]

I vaguely ignore the polling.

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.

From the evidence we've seen, the notion of Labor loosing only 1 seat excluding Syndey is a bit of a silly prediction. You're more than 'vaguely' ignoring polling, and I don't see the point really. I remember a certain reporter who decided to ignore polling for the WA state election, making his own silly little optimistic prediction for Labor and of course, it turned out completely wrong.
Btw Kevin Bonham is out with a little analysis of the plausibility of the electorate polls.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think either way, some people are going to be embarrassed ... we have to wait and see.

[Hifly]

For anybody interested, here's robopollster JWS's record for the 2010 election. Some wrong, but close:

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2010/08/17/nielsen-marginals-mega-poll/

[Platypus]

I go by general trends, media mood, and gut. And I do well - in 2007, only got 2 seats wrong (Dawson and Robertson, IIRC), in 2010, 3 (two of the lib pickups in Queensland and Denison).

I'm not saying I'm better than the polls, I'm just saying I don't think it's trash to ignore them. Being in tune with various communities is far more important that following the polls, and similarly accurate.

[minionofmidas]

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

Doing better in the Liberals' safe seats then?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

That would be odd... not implausible, but highly unlikely

[Talleyrand]

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.

What factors exactly do you think would make Leichhardt ripe for an ALP takeover if not for the Entsch factor?

[Platypus]

I think it's a remarkably diverse seat, really. Plenty of miners and people involved with toruism, but also a large indigenous population, and Cairns is booming. Add in the Queenslander factor for Rudd, and things like the NBN which are particularly important in regional areas, and the fact that Entsch has one of the most sizeable personal votes in the parliament, and that the conservatism in FNQ is far removed from that of Sydney's North Shore or Melbourne's Eastern suburbs, and the natural lean to me is more like Lingiari than Maranoa. I think in a 50/50 election with two fresh candidates, Leichhardt would be a very interesting seat to watch, and while in such a situation it would probably stay in the Coalition's hands Labor would not be far behind at all.

[RogueBeaver]

Hawke wants Oz to be the world's nuke repository. Also said, apparently without irony, that "I like Julia and I supported her but the caucus had to look at the facts."

[RogueBeaver]

Newspoll also has Rudd losing Griffith 52/48. Some academics interviewed believe that's plausible but unlikely. Even though Griffith's far safer than Howard's marginal Bennelong, they speculate that a similar factor is at play: they're losing government anyways, let's spare ourselves a by-election.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

In the absence of Rudd, Griffith would not be a safe seat at all (he has a substantial personal vote for whatever reason), but I think this is one of those things you have to put into the noted and very important category of 'I'll believe it when I see it'. Now, a by-election following hastily on from a Rudd 'resignation' five seconds after an election defeat...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Regarding divisions in areas deemed likely to swing heavily, be sure always to check what the swing was last time round. If it was large and against the ALP, then they'll be less room for a large swing ('large' defined as relative to the rest of the wider area in question) this time round. And vice versa, etc.

[Smid]

In the absence of Rudd, Griffith would not be a safe seat at all (he has a substantial personal vote for whatever reason), but I think this is one of those things you have to put into the noted and very important category of 'I'll believe it when I see it'. Now, a by-election following hastily on from a Rudd 'resignation' five seconds after an election defeat...

Rudd worked pretty hard at a constituency level in the parts of the seat least likely to vote for him (originally around Carindale, which is now in Bonner). He did attract a personal following, as a result. That said, there are safe Labor areas in the seat, particularly (obviously) South Brisbane/West End/Highgate Hill, which were in the seat of Brisbane when Rudd lost in 1996 (and why Bevis held Brisbane then, but subsequently has lost the seat - it also absorbed Ascot/Hamilton/Clayfield from Lilley, making Wayne Swan more likely to hold it, even though he lost in 96).

Regarding divisions in areas deemed likely to swing heavily, be sure always to check what the swing was last time round. If it was large and against the ALP, then they'll be less room for a large swing ('large' defined as relative to the rest of the wider area in question) this time round. And vice versa, etc.

This is certainly my assumption, with occasional exceptions to the rule.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

In the absence of Rudd, Griffith would not be a safe seat at all (he has a substantial personal vote for whatever reason), but I think this is one of those things you have to put into the noted and very important category of 'I'll believe it when I see it'. Now, a by-election following hastily on from a Rudd 'resignation' five seconds after an election defeat...

Rudd worked pretty hard at a constituency level in the parts of the seat least likely to vote for him (originally around Carindale, which is now in Bonner). He did attract a personal following, as a result. That said, there are safe Labor areas in the seat, particularly (obviously) South Brisbane/West End/Highgate Hill, which were in the seat of Brisbane when Rudd lost in 1996 (and why Bevis held Brisbane then, but subsequently has lost the seat - it also absorbed Ascot/Hamilton/Clayfield from Lilley, making Wayne Swan more likely to hold it, even though he lost in 96).

Regarding divisions in areas deemed likely to swing heavily, be sure always to check what the swing was last time round. If it was large and against the ALP, then they'll be less room for a large swing ('large' defined as relative to the rest of the wider area in question) this time round. And vice versa, etc.

This is certainly my assumption, with occasional exceptions to the rule.

Which is kind of why I'm not at all comfortable giving away Lingiari, there was a 13% against Snowden on primary at more than 7% TPP... it's certainly not impossible/plausible for Snowden to lose... but the rule of all things being equal, how much bile in there reasonably left in some of these electorates?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

According to PVO... the Newspoll out later tonight will apparently generate an interesting reaction...

I think either Abbott is now preferred PM or there's been swing back to the ALP... I'm leaning toward a correction from the slight odd number last week.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Newpoll ... developing

Primary
ALP: 37% (+3)
LNP: 47% (NC)
GRN: 9% (NC)

TPP
ALP: 47% (+1)
LNP: 53% (-1)

... seems a bit odd with that TPP...

[morgieb]

Yeah, strange. Possibly rounding could be a factor though.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Yeah, strange. Possibly rounding could be a factor though.

Could well be...

[Talleyrand]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Link

A 'decent' result for the ALP, as some reports suggested that insiders in both Labor and Liberal camps in South Australia had suggested thus seat was beyond gone.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Most I've spoken to had Hindmarsh as a chance for the LNP, but a reach.

[Talleyrand]

More from Newspoll...

Preferred PM
Rudd: 44% (+1)
Abbott: 40% (-1)

Rudd Approval
Approve: 36% (+1)
Disapprove: 52% (-2)

Abbott Approval
Approve: 42% (+1)
Disapprove: 49% (-2)

And here's the Morgan Poll.

Primary:
LNP: 45% (+0.5)
ALP: 34.5% (-2)
GRN: 11% (+1.5)

TPP
LNP: 51.5% (+0.5)
ALP: 48.5% (-0.5)