Yesterday, the Australian Electoral Commission performed an act which in a rational world would have excited no interest. Since last weekend the commission has featured a “national two party preferred result” on the front page of its Virtual Tally Room, which has assumed tremendous psychological interest as Labor’s margin has steadily eroded from 0.6 per cent to 0.4 per cent. However, the tally had a flaw which biased it in Labor’s favour: there were no Labor-versus-Coalition figures available from strongly conservative Kennedy, Lyne, New England or O’Connor, where the notional two-candidate preferred counts conducted on election night involved independents. This was only balanced out by left-wing Melbourne, where Labor and the Greens were correctly identified as the front-running candidates for the notional count. For whatever reason, the AEC decided yesterday to level the playing field by excluding seats where the notional preference count candidates had been changed since election night, which in each case meant left-wing seats where the Liberals had finished third to the Greens (Batman and Grayndler) or Andrew Wilkie (Denison). The result was an instant 0.4 per cent drop in Labor’s score, reducing them to a minuscule lead that was soon rubbed out by further late counting.
In fact, very little actually changed in yesterday’s counting, which saw a continuation of the slow decline in the Labor total that is the usual pattern of late counting. The media, regrettably, has almost entirely dropped the ball on this point. Mark Simkin of the ABC last night reported that Labor’s lead had been eradicated by the “latest counting”, as opposed to an essentially meaningless administrative decision. Lateline too informed us that Labor’s two-party vote had “collapsed”, and Leigh Sales’ opening question to Julie Bishop on Lateline was essentially an invitation to gloat about the fact. Most newspaper accounts eventually get around to acknowledging the entirely artificial nature of the 50,000-vote reversal in Labor’s fortunes, but only after reporting in breathless tones on the removal of votes that will eventually be put back in.
The reality is that nobody knew who had the lead on the two-party vote yesterday morning, and nothing happened in the day to make anybody any the wiser. The Prime Minister equally had no idea on election night when she made her ill-advised claim to the two-party majority mantle. Only when all seats have reported Labor-versus-Coalition counts, which is probably still a few weeks away, will we be able to say for sure. The best we can do at present is to construct a projection based on the votes counted and our best assumptions as to how the gaps in the vote count data will be filled when all the figures are in.
At present we have completed “ordinary” polling day totals for all electorates and advanced counts of postal votes in most cases, but there has been no progress yet on absent or pre-poll votes in roughly half. Where counting of any of these three categories has been conducted, I have projected the party results on to the expected total of such votes (derived from the “declaration vote scrutiny progress” for absent and pre-poll votes, and from the number of applications for postal votes discounted by 16 per cent as per experience from 2007). Where no counting of a particular category has been conducted, I have compared the parties’ 2007 vote share in that category with their ordinary vote share, and applied that difference to the ordinary vote from this election. For example, the 2007 Liberal two-party vote in Canberra was 7.19 per cent higher than their ordinary vote share, so their 40.54 per cent ordinary vote at the current election has been used to project an absent vote share of 47.73 per cent.
For Batman, Grayndler and Denison, I have used the figures from the two-party Labor-versus-Liberal counts that were conducted in these seats from ordinary votes on election night, calculated the swing against the ordinary vote in 2007 and projected it over the expected absent, pre-poll and postal totals. For Melbourne, New England and Kennedy, where no Labor-versus-Coalition figures are available, I have used preference shares derived from the Labor-versus-Coalition counts from the 2007 election to determine the swing on ordinary votes, and projected that swing through the other categories. It’s with Lyne and O’Connor that things get crude, as we have no case study of how Rob Oakeshott’s or Wilson Tuckey’s preferences split between Labor and Nationals candidates. For O’Connor, which has at least been a Labor-Liberal-Nationals contest at successive elections, I have crudely arrived at a 7.9 per cent swing against Labor derived from the primary vote swing plus moderated by a 70 per cent share of the swing in favour of the Greens. The best I could think to do for Lyne was average the two-party swings from the neighbouring electorates, producing a 5.14 per cent swing against Labor.
Plug all that in and here’s what you get:
Labor 6,313,736 (50.02 per cent)
Coalition 6,307,924 (49.98 per cent)
In other news, Andrew Wilkie says the two-party vote total is “not relevant” in determining which party he will back. Good for him.
UPDATE: An Essential Research poll has it at 50-50, which is “unchanged” – I’m not sure if this is in comparison with the election result or a previously unpublished Essential result from a week ago. Basically no change on preferred prime minister. UPDATE 2: The 50-50 from last week was indeed an unpublished Essential result from their rolling two-week average, which they understandably felt was not worth publishing under the circumstances.
Remember the 2PP lead Labor has is ‘slender’ and pales in comparrison to the Monks crushing 2PP lead he had overnight.
[The ALP is out to 2607 now.]
OMG, the Narrowing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well its great to see so many people get excited about the TPP vote.
🙂
New Election!!!! Bring It ON.
No disagreement there. But as she hasn’t had her face out there everywhere for the past week (no criticisms about that), then I do think it’s important she appear a bit more ‘peppier’.
If this coverage of the 2PP over the last couple of days tells us anything, its that the Australian media are a bunch of lazy, dumb and arrogant sh!ts.
[ALP now more than 3,500 votes ahead: 50.02%]
Mesma, your Undies is showing.
mark riley is a fool
he cant add up
🙁
Oh go suck an egg Mark Reilly.
Andrew @ 382
I believe models use some sort of glue to stick the clothes to their skin so it doesn’t slip, in strategic places. I saw it for sale in a lingerie shop. Maybe that is how tone keeps the smugglers in place.
I can’t believe Riley just put that to Julia! What a goose!!
I’ve always liked the intricacies of the TPP
but it was always a rather lonely spectator sport
in previous elections to sit and watch it creep
up or dip or very occasionally jump when
the AEC took a seat out or put one in.
This election I feel like I am in a huge grandstand
with Julie Bishop sitting next to me barracking for the
dark side and many of the pollbludgers with me.
snap!!! The Coalition is not coalition anymore. I said it previously that Labor is the party with largest seats
[mark riley is a fool
he cant add up
🙁 ]
Is this in reference to last nights report? Or did he just ask a question?
If Channel 7 had a shred of credibility they would sack this ameteur. He claims to ‘cut through the spin’, yet he is one of the worst examples of a cliched spin doctor out there.
[TONY Abbott has moved to spoil Julia Gillard’s pitch to form government, declaring today that the Coalition is no longer in opposition.]
But, but, but he’s trashing the Westminster system in a desperate grab for power!
Riley is a bigger moron than Diog 😉
lwp
just tehn
pure fib talking point
no substance -just shite
Two stupid questions get the bland non-answers they deserve.
Heh. PM just hands Riley’s backside to him on a plate.
Wow, Julia has lovely French nails, wonder if she does acrylic or gel? (Okay, I know, but I am sick of counting votes.)
What did Riley ask?
what did Reilly ask?
ptmd @ 415.
I, on the other hand, well both hands, have no nails left.
[What did Riley ask?]
I didn’t see it, but I’ll take a stab…
“Ms Gillard: in light of your claim that the 2PP preferred vote was the critical benchmark according to which all are judged, and in light of the fact that Prime Minister Abbott has now taken an unassailable lead on this measure, will you do the honorable thing and resign your post immediately and give Australia the Prime Minister it yearns for?
Riley asked why Tone shouldn’t be PM given coalition has more seats, higher primary vote and higher 2PP.
What did chinda63 ask?
What a sad, sick lot of “journalists” we have..
[I didn’t see it, but I’ll take a stab…
“Ms Gillard: in light of your claim that the 2PP preferred vote was the critical benchmark according to which all are judged, and in light of the fact that Prime Minister Abbott has now taken an unassailable lead on this measure, will you do the honorable thing and resign your post immediately and give Australia the Prime Minister it yearns for?]
Not quite that crude, but close.
The questions about whatever happened to Gillard’s QT reform plan are very reasonable. I assume Rudd killed it.
Those journalists look tired as hell.
same as you, Nate.
Great minds think alike. Or fools never differ. Take your pick 😉
cud chewer: And they are also very hostile towards her. They obviously think it’s all about them, bugger the politicians. Sheer arrogance in my view.
Psephos.. sadly they require more than bland non-answers because that “journalist” is going to go back to work and write the same Liberal spin as he always does. Labor has to get out into the community and hammer such lies wherever they can be found.
You’ve never responded when I’ve brought up the fact that the hacks in the Labor Party who think they are so clever and can pore over the entrails of focus groups, don’t seem to understand how to get out there and change the “big ideas” out there in the real world.. things such as “liberals are better with money” or all the assorted rubbish that came with the climate deniers.
Dunleavy whining that ‘public’ (meaning journos) not getting inside info given to indies.
some stronger than expected stats on economic activity. As usual, the “news” media then goes on to speculate on impact on interest rates. The Ian Varrander embedded audio makes the point that yesterdays very strong mining sector profits numbers and prospective investment levels, were at the very time the industry was bleating about the mining tax going to roon the country
[Stronger than expected retail trade and building approvals figures and a lower trade gap have ‘‘blitzed expectations’’, making a rate rise by the end of the year all but certain, economists say….
Retail trade rose 0.7 per cent in July to $20.4 billion, from an upwardly revised $20.25 billion in June, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) said today. The median market forecast was for retail sales to have risen by 0.4 per cent in the month.
Building approvals rose 2.3 per cent to 13,732 units in July, from an upwardly revised 13,425 units in June. In the year to July, building approvals were up 11 per cent. The market forecast was for a fall of 0.7 per cent in June.]
http://www.smh.com.au/business/rate-rise-looms-as-data-blitzes-expectations-20100831-14axb.html?autostart=1
Yes, confessions. Its beyond bias. Its personality cult and outright partisanship.
Uncharacteristically silly questions from Bongiorno.
Have journalists always been so stupid, or did we as a polity break some metaphoric equivalent of a mirror? The Oz has Labor ‘snatching back’ the 2PP lead. Where is the agency of the Labor Party involved in the counting of votes?
How is Gillard handling the shites?
Michelle Gratten wanting stuff released, gimme gimme gimme.
Ignorance from Bongiorno about a Senate election. He wasted what should have been his one question.
it is about time every one rang channel 7 news room on mass and complained about him
It is about time the news was taken more seriously.
I am still stunned that Newspoll, Nielsen, Galaxy, Essential have not released any polls since the election! One could argue that they don’t want to influence negotiations, but as purely for-profit organizations surely there would be a “buck” in it?
And the Ogilvy one in SMH – hilarious – “would effect the outcome” – but (hush, hush) we can’t tell you which way!!!
O ghostwhovotes, send this suppliant a morsel of a poll!
Dee,
As always, calm, methodical, flashes of humour; as you do talking to the kindie kids.
press wants julia to give,so they can twist,tone and advisor howard gives them nothing
Did La Grattan call the PM “Miss Gillard” while everyone else is saying “Prime Minister”?
I think La Grattan may be a trifle miffed about the female PM.
[Have journalists always been so stupid]
They’re not stupid, they’re lazy and conceited, with their egos puffed up by TV appearances and opinion columns with their names on. Some of them have been promoted because of their looks rather their acumen.
Not sure if this has already been posted. A New EMRS poll of Tasmanian State voting intentions.
[
A NEW opinion poll has delivered a devastating blow to the state Liberal team.
An EMRS survey of 1000 Tasmanian voters last week has recorded an 8 per cent plunge in support for the state Liberal Party in the past three months.
By contrast, voter backing for the Labor party has risen 6 per cent since May.
The results put overall backing for Labor and Liberal neck and neck, with about 30 per cent of all voters supporting each political side.
The same poll registers statewide support for the Tasmanian Greens at 23 per cent, down 1 per cent on the last survey.
The EMRS survey is the first poll taken since the new Labor minority government, governing together with two Greens MPs in Cabinet, had a chance to demonstrate on the floor of parliament the shape and stability of the new power-sharing government.
]
http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2010/08/31/169761_tasmania-news.html
Andrew Probyn must be a PB reguar, with his obsession with focus groups.
the msm are so vapid they would suit a vacuum
pseph
tom paine?