EMRS: New Poll More Similar To Last Election

EMRS Lib 34 (-1) ALP 30 (-1) Grn 13 (-1) JLN 8 (+2) IND 12 (+1) other 3 (=)
IND likely to be slightly overstated at expense of others.
Liberals would probably be largest party in election "held now"
Possible seat outcome for this poll Lib 15 ALP 11 Grn 5 IND 3 JLN 1

A new EMRS poll is up for Tasmania.  The November poll saw some signs of the long-struggling Labor opposition finally making some progress but this poll is more similar to the previous election.  Compared to the election, and after adjusting for the generic "independent" vote being somewhat overstated, Labor and the Jacqui Lambie Network are up slightly at the expense of the Liberals.  However the Lambie Network has imploded in the parliament and the most recent stated intention of Jacqui Lambie was to re-endorse only her sole remaining MP, Andrew Jenner.  Thus, it is not clear the robust polling for the JLN brand (which appeals strongly to a low-information cohort dominated by working-class blokes) actually means anything.

The leadership figures show that both Jeremy Rockliff and Dean Winter have taken a net favourability hit compared with the November poll, with Rockliff on a net rating of +10 (36-25 with the +10 being after rounding, down five points) and Winter on a net +6 (18-11 ditto, down 8).  These net numbers are still acceptable for both, but Winter still has a recognition problem especially in the north - something that is being picked up by EMRS's approach of not stating the role of the person who they are testing recognition for.  In fact, this sample has an even higher "never heard of" score for Winter (27%) than the previous 18%, which itself raised a few eyebrows.  This said, firstly it is possible some voters could have a strong opinion either way of 'the new Tasmanian Labor leader guy' without actually knowing his name, so the 27% may be an overestimate.  Also, it isn't catastrophic; the example I always quote is that 39% of NSW voters could not identify Barry O'Farrell as Premier in one poll after he had been Premier for a year and a half.  However this is consistent with a general issue of State Labor lacking profile and cut-through across the whole state that also dogged it during the 2024 campaign.  Jeremy Rockliff has also made a minor gain on preferred Premier (which favours incumbents), his lead now out to an acceptable 44-34 after shrinking to 43-37 last poll.

Preferences Help Non-Majors Beat Major Parties Far More Than The Other Way Around

This article is about single-member electorates, and cases where preferences result in someone who did not lead on primaries winning the seat, and how this affects battles between the major parties and candidates from outside the major parties ("non-majors") for seats.  

I've written a few articles on here in which I discuss mistaken views held by many Australian supporters of minor right-wing parties on social media.  Many of them rail against preferential voting, which they claim helps major parties to maintain a "duopoly" or "uniparty".  They often support scrapping preferences, although this would make it pointless to vote for the parties they support.  I've pointed out in these discussions that actually in the 2022 election, nine non-major candidates were elected from outside the parliament by beating one major party with help from the preferences of the other.  If there were no preferences, such candidates would need to rely on very organised strategic voting for any chance of winning.  Probably many would have lost.

Despite this, people keep claiming that the major parties conspire to keep smaller parties out of parliament by doing preference deals with each other so that if a smaller party leads on primaries the majors can beat them on preferences.  The supposed prime example is the defeat of Pauline Hanson in Blair 1998.  But the fact is that Hanson's loss was actually an unusual case, and examples of both majors cross-recommending against a competitive opponent are nowadays rare.  Indeed, including state elections, even One Nation has more often beaten majors from behind thanks to preference flows than led on preferences and lost, by a margin of 9 cases to 4.

I thought I would compile a list of all the cases I could find in single seat elections since 1990 (state, federal and territory) where either a major party has led on primary votes but been beaten by a non-major, or the other way around.  What I find is that non-majors beating majors by overtaking a major party primary vote leader on preferences is about nine times more common than the reverse.  

Western Australia 2025: Can The Liberals Get Back To 2017?

There hasn't been a lot of polling to talk about for the WA 2025 state election but I just thought I should do a quickish writeup on a general view of this election, which Labor is universally expected to win.  In 2017 the Barnett Liberal Government suffered what was at the time a historically lopsided dumping, losing the 2PP 44.5-55.5, with the new Labor government of Mark McGowan winning 41 seats to 13 for the Liberals and 5 for the Nationals.  Some people were more surprised when this outcome loomed than they should have been; the state government was eight years old and federally dragged, and signs of its doom had been growing in the polling over years. 

2021 then saw WA become a one-party state, with McGowan polling through the roof and then some and a rabble of an opposition hopelessly tied to unpalatable views on COVID management.  Now McGowan has moved on and COVID politics have faded, and now it's Labor who have an eight year old government that's facing the headwinds from Canberra.  And yet the polling picture so far is that the Liberal and WA National parties are not yet sure to get back to where they were in 2017.  

How Might Minor Right Parties Win More Federal Seats?

This article covers a few recent things I've had my eye on in terms of the Australian minor right movement's attempts to win more federal seats.  By "minor right" I primarily mean parties like One Nation, Libertarians, United Australia, the current version of Family First and so on.  In the broadest sense the term includes these parties plus Australian Christians, Australian Citizens, Gerard Rennick People First, Katters Australian Party, Shooters Fishers and Farmers, Great Australian Party, Trumpet of Patriots (yes that's a thing, nee Australian Federation Party), the federally unregistered Democratic Labour Party, the unregistered AustraliaOne and Reignite Democracy Australia and also unregistered "don't call us antivax" parties like HEART and Health Australia.  

That's a lot of parties.  Some of these parties have legitimate reason to exist independently - Australian Christians and Libertarians each represent an ideology (though how many Australian Libertarians actually believe in it as opposed to being random culture warriors or Liberal Right refugees is another question).  KAP at federal level is basically a vehicle for a single de facto independent and Shooters Fishers and Farmers represents a specific set of interest groups.  But most of the rest fall broadly into the same nationalist/populist/conspiracist/Trumpist/culture-warrior basket and have no reason for independent existence other than that they just can't bang the rocks together.   So this is one of the problems - the Australian minor right is a rabble.  So how do they become more successful?

Prahran and Werribee By-Elections Live

Prahran (Grn vs Lib 12.0%)
Vacancy for resignation of Sam Hibbins (Grn/IND)

Liberal gain from Green/IND (called Sunday 4:20 pm)

Werribee (ALP vs Lib 10.9%)
Vacancy for resignation of Tim Pallas (ALP)
Labor retain (called Thursday 3:30 pm)

----

Distributions: Both preference distributions have been posted and I don't know if there is any scope for further changes so for now it looks like the Liberals have won the primary vote count in Prahran by one vote.  In Prahran, the lead changed a few times through the distribution, and going into the Lupton exclusion the Greens were still ahead. However, that exclusion flowed 63.7% to Liberal.  I have heard from scrutineers that the flow from 1 Lupton votes was 68-32.  

In Werribee, the Liberals gained slightly from the final (Paul Hopper) transfer; here I have heard that the split off the 1 Hopper votes was 60-40 to them but the preferences that had pooled with Hopper from other sources favoured Labor.  What is notable here is that far from the minor candidates preferences pooling with Hopper, he actually went backwards compared to both majors, and got only 27.8% of the preferences at the 3CP stage.  This means that while there was a very large vote for non-majors in Werribee, a lot of those voters were not consistently opposed to the major parties; they just liked someone else more.  The term "double haters" has been thrown around in reference to this result but the distribution doesn't suggest that's what the voters are.  

Friday 6:20 ALP lead in Werribee out to 639, there will be slight changes but I expect it to finish well within 100 of that.  

Friday: Labor has very reasonably claimed victory in Werribee but the result is not official until after the adding of final votes and the distribution of preferences, which I'd expect to happen sometime next week.  In Prahran, it's interesting to note the Liberal primary vote lead over the Greens has come down to seven votes; although the Liberals will win the seat thanks to their superior preference flow, it is still possible they will do so from second on primaries (that would be embarrassing for right-wingers who oppose preferential voting).  

Tony Lupton has been claiming credit for the result in The Australian and suggesting Labor should put the Greens last everywhere.  However not only did his vote not look very Labory in booth terms, but his how to vote card which was orange and said "It's Time For An Independent" was hardly pitched at Labor voters beyond the endorsement from Steve Bracks.  

Thursday 3:30: Recheck primaries have come through without any major changes to Labor's position; this plus the increased lead after postals counted so far makes it clear Labor has retained the seat.   (Update: I understand there are now only provisionals and the last postals to come.)

Thursday 3pm: A report that Labor has done well on primary votes on the late postals and are poised to pull further ahead on 2PP.  (Update: report from Labor that the lead is now 591.)

Thursday midday: Counting of about 2000 Werribee postals has been brought forward to today.  This plus rechecking of booths may put the seat beyond doubt.  

Tuesday: Rechecking in Prahran has not resulted in any significant changes.  Still waiting for rechecked primaries in Werribee.  

Sunday: Where The Lupton Vote Really Came From!

There has been some damage-control spinning from the Greens of a result that is simply very bad.  Among this has been a tweet by leader Ellen Sandell claiming that "Obviously it’s not the result we would have liked but with the unofficial Labor candidate sending their preferences to the Liberals, those Labor preferences have handed the seat to the Liberals this time."  Firstly, Lupton was not a typical unofficial "independent Labor" type candidate but one who'd got involved in some culture war issues and criticised the party.  Secondly, candidates don't send preferences anywhere (it's the lower house) and I'd be surprised if the follow rate for the Lupton card was that high anyway.  Thirdly the evidence is that where Lupton got his votes from tended not to be the ALP support base.  In booth terms, while his vote was pretty flat everywhere, he did worst in the good Labor booths from 2022 and better in the good Liberal booths from 2022 - even though the former had more votes up for grabs care of Labor not running!  Neither result is statistically significant but they do very strongly contradict the idea that the Lupton vote was a large chunk of the former Labor vote - it looks more like an independent conservative sort of thing:

Victorian Labor Kicks The Group Ticket Can Down The Road

(Coverage of Victorian by-elections tonight from 6 pm.  Live page will go up around 5 pm).

Victoria is the last place in Australia where Group Ticket Voting persists in upper house elections.  The system was invented in the 1980s because the Democrats, who are to blame for everything, forced the Hawke Labor government to retain full preferencing in Senate elections.  Because requiring voters to number all the boxes for Senate elections often caused extremely high informal rates, Group Ticket Voting was created as a way to retain full preferencing while cutting the informal rate.  A voter could vote 1 for a party and their party would allocate their preference for them.

Initially this system lacked obvious downsides but its potential for exploitation was obvious as early as the 1987 federal election, where a Nuclear Disarmament candidate with 1.5% of the primary vote was elected.  A series of farcical GTV elections around the country since led to the abolition of the system in NSW, federally, SA and WA leaving only Victoria.  Problems exposed with the system have included:

* parties winning off tiny vote shares defeating much more popular parties when they would not win under any other system

* confusing and deceptive GTV preference allocations that are beyond the understanding of most voters if they tried to follow them

* preference harvesting in which ideologically unrelated parties band together to try to secure election off each others' group ticket preferences

* creation of unnecessary tipping points that should be irrelevant to the contest, making it easier for elections to be voided (eg WA Senate 2013)

* creation of bogus near-100% preference flows between parties when, if asked to choose preferences for themselves, voters spread preferences in a much less concentrated fashion

* corruption of parliamentary voting behaviour, in the form of party votes on electoral reform being influenced by fear of losing the ability to work with Glenn Druery, as stated by Druery himself in the Angry Victorians sting video

* denying voters the ability to direct their own preferences between parties above the line (which they will be used to doing so having done so twice since the last state election) and throwing away their stated preferences and overwrites them with a group ticket vote if they do. 

*confusion between the Victorian system and the Senate system

Poll Roundup: The Long Slow Slide Continues

2PP Aggregate (Last-Election Preferences) 50.6 to Coalition (+0.3 this year)
With One Nation Adjustment 51.1 to Coalition

If polls are accurate, either side could win election "held now", most likely well into minority

We've had quite a few pollsters out early with 2025 being an election year and the nine federal polls so far provide plenty to talk about for a roundup piece.  There have been four weekly Morgans plus one each from Newspoll, YouGov, Freshwater, Resolve and Essential.  All nine have had the Coalition ahead on their headline 2PP measure, and six have had the Coalition ahead on my estimate of respondent preferences.  Nonetheless my own estimate still has the last-election 2PP rather close.  

Voting Intention Fine Details

This section has a little more wonky detail than usual, mainly to explain the ins and outs of why my aggregate is better for Labor than the headline preferences in the current batch of polls, but also to explain why it could easily be a bit worse.  While I have Labor on 49.4 by last-election preferences, it could arguably be 49.2.  

Going The Distance: Federal Seats That Do And Don't Make It To The Final Two

Recently I had this question on the website formerly known as Twitter.  

I thought this was a very interesting question because while whether a seat comes down to the final two or not doesn't have much to do with how close the seat is, it's something we don't think about much in federal elections.  Every vote is thrown by the AEC to the final two candidates, but in some cases it doesn't reach the final two until after the seat has already been decided because a candidate has crossed 50%.  Indeed, in a rapidly reducing number of seats the contest is decided on primary votes and the preference throw is entirely academic to the result.

Contests don't get thought about in these terms so much because every vote is present in a notional final two soon after it is counted via the notional two-candidate preferred.  This gives a single indication of the margin of victory.  It obscures the nuance that a candidate who finishes on 54% of the final two-candidate preferred might have even crossed 50% before the last exclusion then done badly on the last lot of preferences, while another candidate might have needed a trickle of preferences to get over the line yet got so many preferences that they finish up with a 2CP of 68%.

Prahran and Werribee By-Elections

In a nice appertiser for the federal election year, Victoria has a couple of unusually interesting state by-elections coming up on February 8, which I intend to cover on the night.  One is especially interesting because it's a more or less stock-standard test for the theory that the a government is in trouble, the other because of its uniqueness.  This is a preview post for these by-elections where I look at some factors that might affect the results; I will add notes on polling if I see any.  

Prahran (Green vs Lib 12.0%, 3CP Green vs ALP 5.8%)
ALP not contesting
Vacancy for: resignation of Sam Hibbins (Grn/IND) following personal scandal

Prahran is a unique seat to begin with, and this by-election is even more of an oddity because of the decision of the Allan Labor government to not turn the rock over.  Labor cited the fact that they had not won the seat since 2006 and didn't need it as pretexts for not having a go.  Winning would have been challenging because the standard anti-government by-election factor would have made it hard for them to get over the Greens even with the loss of Hibbins' personal vote.  On the other hand with the government currently not polling well there could have been fear of a really bad result (such as being jumped by some indie and finishing fourth).  If Labor could have won the by-election they may well have been in a better position to hold off the Greens at the next general election, but unlikely to happen and not to be.