2PP Aggregate (Tuesday 16 July): 50.0 TIED (+0.2 for ALP since last week)
Individual Seat Betting: Labor favourites in 63 seats (+2 this week - Lingiari, Brisbane)
Seat Total Market: Labor 68 seats (+2)
This is instalment three in what seems to be becoming a regular weekly series in the leadup to the election. The first Seat Betting Watch is
here and last week's Poll Roundup and Seat Betting Watch is
here. As stated before, the aim of this exercise is not to claim that seat betting markets have predictive value, but to test whether they do, and to see which of the markets and the aggregated polls see the ultimate outcome of the election first.
This Week's Polls
As well as the
51-49 to Labor from AMR late last week, we've now had a
50-50 from Nielsen, a
52-48 to the Coalition from Essential and a
51.5-48.5 to Labor by last-election preferences from Morgan Multi-Mode. (I did cop an "AGGGGHHH!!!!" and a "stupid" on Twitter for continuing to prefer last-election preferences to respondent-allocated but I'll believe KAP voters have turned into lefties only when data show they have.)
The net impact of these on my aggregate has been small and I currently have the two parties dead level on two-party-preferred vote share. Essential and Morgan don't seem to be behaving the same way compared to other pollsters as they did before Rudd was reinstalled, and Mark the Ballot has a nice wrap of what a pain in the neck this all is for modellers
here. (Also see the comment by Julian King on that article.) Fortunately, the probably false assumption that neither has a significant house effect results in them largely cancelling each other out in my very simple model, but it's a bigger problem for those who take Morgan's large sample size into account. It may turn out that either of these pollsters has struck it lucky and all the rest are too high or too low, but I'll keep assuming that that isn't the case. Something to keep an eye on here is that Rudd is doing very well with young voters, and young voters are the most difficult to sample accurately for conventional polls, even with scaling.