Galaxy Senate poll

As reported by the Sydney Morning Herald (link broken at the time of writing), GetUp! has commissioned its third national poll of Senate voting intention from Galaxy. This is a highly dubious exercise which is producing very strange results. Make whatever you like from the news that Labor’s vote has slumped in the last month from 39 per cent to 33 per cent. The sample size was 1003; Family First and the Democrats were both on 2 per cent.

ALP LNP GRN
October 20/21 33 38 11
September 8/9 39 35 10
June 23/24 38 34 13
2004 Election 35.0 45.0 7.7

UPDATE: GetUp! press release here. Maddeningly, “other/don’t know” has been rolled into one.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

707 comments on “Galaxy Senate poll”

Comments Page 1 of 15
1 2 … 15

  2. The link is broken again. I suspect there is a problem with the story and they have pulled it.

    It certainly does seem a bit off compared with the other numbers.

  3. Chinster, I don’t think it’s ever been working – I did not access the article from their website. The West Australian has a report as well, which reads:

    A Labor government is likely to face a hostile Senate that could frustrate reforms promised by Kevin Rudd, according to a new poll.
    A Galaxy survey of 1003 voters, commissioned by activist group GetUp, found that despite Labor’s continued strong showing in the Lower House, the coalition had gained ground in the Senate since the election was called.
    The poll found that 38 per cent of those surveyed said they would vote for the coalition in the Senate, 33 per cent for Labor and 11 per cent for the Greens. Two per cent said they would vote for the Democrats and another 2 per cent would vote for Family First.

  4. Okay. I’ll state the obvious.

    Ridiculously small sample even for a HoR survey. I find it very difficult to take this at all seriously. To do justice to a Senate Survey you would need to have serious samples for all States at the very least, so you are looking at a survey size of around the 10,000 mark.

    Even then, given that you are talking about small percentages for quotas and know little about preference deals yet you have a problem.

    Finally, many pollsters would contend that few voters are focussed on the Senate in the campaign and that you would need to poll their opinion on the HoR first before asking them about the Senate.

    GetUp! are biased as they want to restore the Senate to a situation where minor parties have the balance of power. I’ve signed up to them and support about 90% of what they are campaigning for, which is I believe their philosophy. I will be seriously suggesting that they spend their money (which includes my donations) more wisely.

  5. From GetUp! press release regarding their previous survey with similar sample size in September 07.

    “Interviews were conducted using CATI (computer assisted telephone interviewing) with telephone numbers randomly selected from electronic White Pages. Age, gender and region quotas were applied to the sample. Following the completion of interviewing, the data was weighted by age, gender and region to reflect the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics population estimates.

    The survey of 1004 Australians had a 3% margin of error nationally. The survey hada large enough sample size to break out results in New South Wales and Victoria independently.”

    I’m no polling expert but I find a 3% margin of error nationally a little difficult to accept and regardless what does this mean on a State by State basis?

  6. The sample size is fine. The typical Newspoll sample size, for instance, is not far north of 1000.

    Though you could make the case that a cumulative national figure is less meaningful for the Senate than it is for the House of Reps. That’s because the Senate is grossly malapportioned and not all votes are equal.

    As for your last query: If they had sample sizes of 350 for NSW and 250 for Victoria then that would mean MoEs of 5% and 6% respectively.

    I’d agree that by far the biggest problem is the artificiality of a Senate poll.

  8. Do I believe the ALP will do worse in the ’07 election in the Senate than in ’04?

    No. Even if they completely burn out in this campaign they will not receive 2% less than ’04.

    My prediction is they’ll get around 40-42% of the Senate vote, the Libs also around 40-42% with the others squabbling for the rest.

    Family First will not receive a significant portion of votes, since people don’t know who they are.
    ______________________________________________________
    Predictions as at 24 October 2007
    Nostradmus Coalition: 77-79 seats
    LTEP: Coalition, 78 seats
    BaztheSpaz: ALP, 77 seats
    BrissyRod: ALP, 79 seats
    Howard Hater: ALP, 79 seats (independent win in Forrest)
    Swing Lowe: ALP, 81 seats
    Let It End: ALP, 85 seats
    Ratsak: ALP: 85 seats
    ShowsOn: ALP, 85 seats
    Bluebottle: ALP, 85-87 seats
    Sinowestie: ALP, 86 seats (independent gain, Howard to lose Bennelong)
    CL de Footscray: ALP, 89 seats.
    Possum: ALP, 89 seats
    John Rocket: ALP, 90 seats
    ruawake: ALP, 100 seats
    Lord D: ALP, 100+ seats
    Ashley: ALP, 146 seats

    We still need more Coalition backers here. Glen’s backing them but refusing to put a number down.

  10. I’ll also add that I don’t think we can abstract any information as to the improvement of the Coalition vote in this poll in relation to a HofR election. In my view, I think the Coalition receives roughly the same vote (plus around 2%) in the Senate as the House.

    It’s mostly ALP voters who change parties in the Senate. This means that even if this poll were correct I’d say we’d be looking at 41-42% tops for the Coalition in the HofR, hardly much of an improvement on the last Galaxy.

  12. LTEP

    Put me down for ALP 87 seats (assume 54/46 vote). It also is one of the unluckiest numbers in Australian cricket, which would be fitting for the former Member for Bennelong. I think the Liberals will claw it back a little from here but with the intertest rate decision their chance of victory is gone IMO. Labor just need to stay disciplined.

    As for the Senate, I find this poll hard to reconcile too. But as for Family First, I think they will not get much, but for precisely the opposite reason – people do realise what they are now! Every minor party should just remind punters what they have already voted for, and that will see them reduced.

  15. I was also collecting predictions, a couple more I had found.

    predictions as at 24 October 2007
    —————————————–
    Nostradmus Coalition: 77-79 seats
    LTEP: Coalition, 78 seats

    BaztheSpaz: ALP, 77 seats
    BrissyRod: ALP, 79 seats
    Howard Hater: ALP, 79 seats (independent win in Forrest)
    Swing Lowe: ALP, 81 seats
    Let It End: ALP, 85 seats
    Ratsak: ALP: 85 seats
    ShowsOn: ALP, 85 seats
    Bluebottle: ALP, 85-87 seats
    Sinowestie: ALP, 86 seats (independent gain, Howard to lose Bennelong)
    CL de Footscray: ALP, 89 seats.
    Possum: ALP, 89 seats
    John Rocket: ALP, 90 seats
    ruawake: ALP, 100 seats
    Lord D: ALP, 100+ seats
    Ashley: ALP, 146 seats
    Don Wigan: ALP, 115-120
    Adam: ALP, 95
    Charles: ALP, 105

  16. So a 10% swing in Primary to the ALP in the HOR corresponds to a 2% away from the ALP in the Senate ……. asphinctersayswhat?

    BTW LTEP put me down for ALP 93 seats

  17. More predictins, plus alpha order.

    Ashley: ALP, 146
    Adam: ALP, 95
    Ashley: ALP, 146 seats
    BaztheSpaz: ALP, 77 seats
    Bluebottle: ALP, 85-87 seats
    BrissyRod: ALP, 79 seats
    Charles: ALP, 105
    CL de Footscray: ALP, 89 seats
    Don Wigan: ALP, 115-120
    JJ: ALP, 83 seats
    John Rocket: ALP, 90 seats
    Howard Hater: ALP, 79 seats (independent win in Forrest)
    Karma Policeman: ALP, 82
    Let It End: ALP, 85 seats
    Lord D: ALP, 100+ seats
    LTEP: Coalition, 78 seats
    Nostradmus Coalition: 77-79 seats
    Pancho: ALP, 83
    Possum: ALP, 89 seats
    Ratsak: ALP: 85 seats
    ruawake: ALP, 100 seats
    ShowsOn: ALP, 85 seats
    Sinowestie: ALP, 86 seats (independent gain, Howard to lose Bennelong)
    Swing Lowe: ALP, 81 seats

  24. Three people were standing on the side of a river wondering how to get across. Two ALP supporters and Nostradmus. A crocodile swam up to them and offered to take them across if they stood on his head, they were a bit dubious at first, but he said he had just eaten. So the first ALP supporter climbed aboard, the crocodile swam out to the middle then threw the ALP supporter in the air, then gulp down he went. He swam back to the bank and said to other ALP supporter climb aboard, “but you’ll eat me”, “No I won’t I am full” said the crocodile. So he climbed aboard half way across he did the same thing. Then he went back to Nostradmus. “Climb aboard” he said. “No you’ll eat me ” said Nostradmus. “No I just don’t like those ALP types” said the crocodile”. Nostradmus was in a hurry so he climbed aboard. Half way across he threw him in the air and swallowed Nostradmus. A few second later he spat him out and Nostradmus swam to shore where he found a farmer watching. “How did you do that?” I just mentioned that I was going to miss the Liberal election win by 77-79 seats. But even the crocodile wouldn’t swallow that.”

  26. Apologies William for reposting this list but it seems I missed a few people.

    Predictions, arranged in order of seats gained by the ALP:

    24-25 October 2007
    Thommo: Coalition, 80 seats
    Nostradmus Coalition: 77-79 seats
    LTEP: Coalition, 78 seats
    BaztheSpaz: ALP, 77 seats
    Yo Ho Ho: ALP, 78 seats
    BrissyRod: ALP, 79 seats
    Howard Hater: ALP, 79 seats (independent win in Forrest)
    Swing Lowe: ALP, 81 seats
    Karma Policeman: ALP, 80 seats
    Pancho: ALP, 83 seats
    JJ: ALP, 83 seats
    Coota Bulldog: ALP, 84 seats
    Let It End: ALP, 85 seats
    Ratsak: ALP: 85 seats
    ShowsOn: ALP, 85 seats
    Bluebottle: ALP, 85-87 seats
    Sinowestie: ALP, 86 seats (independent gain, Howard to lose Bennelong)
    Socrates: ALP, 87 seats
    RGee: ALP, 87 seats
    CL de Footscray: ALP, 89 seats.
    Possum: ALP, 89 seats
    John Rocket: ALP, 90 seats
    Arbie Jay: ALP, 92 seats
    Timbo: ALP, 93 seats
    Adam: ALP, 95 seats
    Mike_F: ALP, 95 seats (independent to gain additional seat)
    ruawake: ALP, 100 seats
    Lord D: ALP, 100+ seats
    Charles: ALP, 105 seats
    Don Wigan: ALP, 115-120 seats
    Ashley: ALP, 146 seats

    I don’t think it’s particularly surprising that people who support the ALP think they will win, with Coalition supporters sure that people won’t turn their backs on the Coalition en masse. Unsurprisingly noone is predicting the Coalition to gain seats this election. We have some predicting a near wipeout for the Coalition, leaving them with 50 or under seats.

    It’ll be interesting to see how these predictions pan out over the course of the campaign. I think I’ll do a recheck once a week for the rest of the campaign and measure the changes in peoples’ predictions.

  27. Speaking of this Senate poll and minor parties, I went back to the last Newspoll and noticed one consistency – minor parties are down in both. (BTW, when do we start caling Nationals a minor party?) The Newspoll had Greens on 5% and “Others” down from 9% to 6%. This compares with the (unreachable) Galaxy Senate poll with Greens on 11% but Democrats and Family First on 2% each. So is the vote dropping for the minor parties except Greens? Or is that a State by State thing and not meaningful at this level?

  28. LTEP, You’d fit right into my family – a very long line of Labor pessimists.
    Mum was talking to the great Mungo the other day (a family friend and as long as I’ve known him the greatest labor pessimist of them all) he is feeling very bouyant indeed and thinks labor will probably get up this time, he also thinks the JWH is in real trouble in Bennelong.

  30. “Interviews were conducted using CATI (computer assisted telephone interviewing) with telephone numbers randomly selected from electronic White Pages……”

    I’m always unfailingly attentive when being interviewed by a telephone computer. Instantly quit whatever I’m doing at the time and concentrate. Always best to keep things scientific; wouldn’t want to mess with the MoE.
    Besides, some phone bots have got real personality and arn’t afraid to project it. It would be Un-Australian to hurt their feelings.

  31. I reserve the right to alter my prediction in the next 4 weeks. I’m thinking 79 seats for Labor might be too conservative an estimate.

  33. People seem to be (wilfully) ignoring the topic – the Galaxy results.

    They are explicable.

    If you treat the Greens as what was once the ALP left, you find their combined vote is 44% up 1.5 from 2004. Coalition down 7. There must be a lot of undistributed ‘don’t knows/won’t say’ (presumably higher in Senate polls than those focusing on government).

    Whilst Laborites might argue Rudd’s coattails will drag up its Senate vote, there could also be a lot of tactical voting on the left. Once-were-Labor voters will come back from the Greens in the HoR, desperate for a new government and a clear repudiation of Howardism. But plenty of Labor voters (staunch and Green leaning) think Rudd is too centre-right, and will want distinct and diverse voices in the Senate.

    Here’s a game: besides Senator Wong, name one Labor Senator who is articulate, credible or creative. Senate talent is Labor’s achilles’ heel: and this shows on the frontbench.

    In short, polarisation in the Reps vote may not guarantee the same in the Senate.

  34. ps You may not know me.
    I am one of the many silent but frankly, amused, right-wingers who read this blog for our daily funnies. Bit like I used to read ‘Peanuts’ as a child.

  35. Graeme, I agree with your analysis of the Labor/Green relationship but Arbie Jay is right – there is still 14% missing from William’s quoted figures and I still can’t access this poll at the SMH site. Given Labor’s surging primary vote in other polls, I find this one still looks odd.

  39. So Jim, cough up your prediction for the 24th and add yourself to LTEP’s list. You seem to understand the real world better than us.

    LTEP sign me up for 87/61/2. (That’s ALP 87.)

  41. Jim, I’m one of the lefties who amuses myself reading your postings. You should know that Pushing sh..t up hill in such an earnest fashion has lots of comical implications

  43. oh my. I thought what was interesing about this election was you can’t even find diehard supporters of the coalition on the internet. And you can find most anything on the internet. This should be a fierce battle fbetween the sides and I can find a handful of coaltion supporters. And now, I just clicked: Tabitha is taking ths piss. So, now I need one less hand to count the Libheads on.

  44. Glen and Tabitha: go and get a room!
    This election is starting to smell like 1996. I get the impression the majority have stopped listening to Howard, it doesn’t matter how much extra electoral largesse he dispenses over the next 4 weeks.

  48. I’ll go for Labor 97, Liberal 41, National 10, Independent 2.

    On the Galaxy poll – they should have been too embarrassed to even publish that nonsense. Labor primary on 33%? Rubbish.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 1 of 15
1 2 … 15