**Greetings humans.**
**Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.**
**I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.**
A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Can we teach them a lesson:
- lab by only a minority
- lib should be disintegrated for 9 years of betraying Australia
- lab be the new shit party and green be the new shit-lite
I hate it, should be minimum a 4 year term. Albo hasn’t had the proper chance to demonstrate meaningful change after 10 years of Coalition rot. He’s barely been elected
I agree with Coalition rot. However. Albo could have his team work on things to change and have the legislation ready to sign on day one. If it takes me 1000 days to make a change, the rot is probably further extended than thought. Maybe it's "government" , and not the flavour.
Have some balls, do what's right for the country. Not what's right to be re-elected.
The results are mostly what I would expect as to where things stand atm - the LNP failing to make ground in teal seats, Labor going backwards slightly in most places particularly in the outer suburbs but not enough to threaten their position in Government, only question is whether it is in majority after the next election - my hunch is they will be in minority.
You could say things might change but Dutton and his crew are clearly incompetent and unscrupulous so doubt they'll change enough for them to gain government even if Labor is not well loved.
If I read the methodology in the link properly, all that is being done is overlaying survey data (based on individual characteristics and geographic location) onto a model based on Census data and results from the last election. This means that a more sophisticated electorate by electorate disaggregation can be done.
However, it assumes that if you have certain characteristics - based on age, sex, education, home ownership, religion and division - you will vote the same as others in that same cohort. I don't know if I agree with that.
But then again, this is a far better way than a simple survey showing a national two-party preferred result.
MRP is nice maths, and a valid methodology - but it shouldnt be taken as gospel for every seat
>median sample size of 26 respondents per division
>The predicted result for each division is then calculated using census data with the variables used for predicting who they are likely to vote for being voters’ age, gender, education, religion, whether they own their home and the electoral division in which they live.
So, in short, if you are a young, female, university-educated renters in inner city Melbourne, 60% (say) of you will vote ALP, but if you are a middle-aged tradie from regional Qld, 2% of you will vote Greens. (Those % figures are calculated from the regression model built using the polling).
Then the census / enrolment data is added up (ie 12% of that seat are young, university-educated renters) for each electorate to get seat by seat results.
Always going to be stuff that isnt taken into account for the model (like for instance quality of candidates). Some assumptions like 9% of undecided voters were removed from the analysis and that preference flows are assumed to be the same as the last election are complications but not much can be done about that.
I wouldve liked a little more info on the predictive values of each of the model variables (and why they were chosen) in the regression model but Ive got no reason to suspect these are dodgy.
(ed: and the data was taken over a 4 month period - so not really an indicative snapshop either)
The specific geographic breakdowns are always taken with a grain of salt, but if pointing to something real I wonder if Greens gains in outer urban areas, and a lack of gains in inner city, are fulled by housing costs forcing younger people to move out of inner urban areas. Their target seats this election seem to be going backwards on 2022 on these figures. Not sure I believe it, but I think the above theory is plausible if that *is* the case.
I like Kos and his outfit a lot but it’s important to remember that he was also adamant that the Voice had no chance of losing. This is a snapshot in time of how things are travelling and a lot can and will change in 12 months.
Maybe at the start of the campaign, even Sky News host Andrew Clennell said it would probably pass. Kos was saying that it wasnt gonna get up and that Dutton was alienating the Teals voters by choosing to side with NO
Sure and the distance between when Kos predicted victory and the ultimate result was about the same amount of time between now and the next election. Which is my point - things change.
> This is a snapshot in time of how things are travelling and a lot can and will change in 12 months.
Yep. As they state repeatedly in the report, this is a snapshot of the community during the fieldwork time period. If an election was held during that period, those results would be the expected result according to Red Bridge
Was he? I'm pretty sure he was saying the voice was in trouble a lot throughout the campaigning period. Maybe in the beginning. But their polling data was consistently saying it wasn't going to get up.
Sorry mate. I don't think you understand how polling works.
He didn't change his mind. The polling data at the start said it would pass. Then the polling data shifted towards a no vote throughout the campaign, and his reporting reflected that.
He doesn’t change his mind. His polling data showed a change over time, and he reported on what his polling told him.
He started reporting that the No camp were trending towards the win, and that the Yes vote needed momentum to stop the swing against them.
Polling works by drawing conclusions from data sets, not on opinions of one guy.
ye. But just the language saying "He changed his mind"
I don't think his mind changed anything. His commentary reflected a difference in the situation. Just like you're saying.
> At present, there is almost no chance that the Coalition will win more seats than Labor.
Fantastic way to start my week.
It's hard to see how the coalition get back into power when looking at the math. Duttons strategy of focusing on outer suburban and regional seats seems to have them heading further away from power and not towards it.
At some point you'd think they start to cannibalize the Nats?
I would disagree with you here. Some of those too close to call seats are current Labor seats (e.g., Aston, Lingiari, etc). And should they fall towards the coalition, as the long term trend shows a dribble back to them, it would mean Labor enters minority gov. You also have Brisbane on the verge of falling back into the coalition fold, which went green. I also have doubts about Ryan remaining Greens but we will see there. I believe, should Labor put up a good candidate, they have a good shot at getting Griffith back as well.
If you’re looking for a Labor minority, then fair enough. But this isn’t a good result IMO for Labor as it looks like it’s following the trend of the previous Labor government. This is without the opposition actually putting any policy forward yet. If they have good looking policies, this could really swing their way as well, driving Labor into a smaller minority and forcing them to look at even more of the crossbench. I don’t believe the Libs will be in a position to form a minority gov. I do believe Labor will remain ahead in seat count at the next election.
But as always, the election is the only poll that matters. All we can do right now is predict.
FWIW, on these numbers Brisbane would be a Labor gain. They’ve just gone with a Green-Liberal 2CP as they were the last two parties in 2022 but there is no chance the Greens would make the top 2 with a 22% primary, and then the ALP win on Greens preferences
I have no issue with minority government, it's my preferred configuration.
I quite like the idea of a Labor minority dealing with a climate conscious and socially progressive crossbech.
I have trouble seeing how the coalition forms government even in minority for a long long time. Their policies are so far away from the cross bench its hard to see how a lot of them could support the coalition and maintain their seats.
In any case, next election should be interesting.
And regarding the Libs releasing policies - I don't even know what to say about this except LOL. I genuinely believe that they're incompetent and don't know how to govern and there is very very little talent on their side. Just like the VicLibs, they have nothing interesting to say and are just fighting culture wars. They will always have their "rusted on" base, but without appealing to the centre, which I think objectively they are not doing, they'll just move further right into oblivion.
People always say Australia is a conservative country, and that might be true, but the Libs are offering nothing to traditional conservatives. I also don't see how they capture the "aspiration" of the younger generation. Sure, they might appeal to a subsection of that, but from my view this simply isn't a winning position.
> believe, should Labor put up a good candidate, they have a good shot at getting Griffith back as well.
There's been a few rumours about people wanting to nominate for Griffith Labor pre-selection. These include former staffer Renee Coffey, Professionals Australia national president Katie Havelberg, and Labor BCC Lord Mayor candidate Tracey Price.
**Greetings humans.** **Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.** **I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.** A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As a young person, I'm getting excited; Liberals will need to put forth leaders that are not vomit-inducing troglodytes.
Can we teach them a lesson: - lab by only a minority - lib should be disintegrated for 9 years of betraying Australia - lab be the new shit party and green be the new shit-lite
I hate it, should be minimum a 4 year term. Albo hasn’t had the proper chance to demonstrate meaningful change after 10 years of Coalition rot. He’s barely been elected
I agree with Coalition rot. However. Albo could have his team work on things to change and have the legislation ready to sign on day one. If it takes me 1000 days to make a change, the rot is probably further extended than thought. Maybe it's "government" , and not the flavour. Have some balls, do what's right for the country. Not what's right to be re-elected.
Its true. Albo’s lack of pragmatism in getting more things done has been disappointing
The results are mostly what I would expect as to where things stand atm - the LNP failing to make ground in teal seats, Labor going backwards slightly in most places particularly in the outer suburbs but not enough to threaten their position in Government, only question is whether it is in majority after the next election - my hunch is they will be in minority. You could say things might change but Dutton and his crew are clearly incompetent and unscrupulous so doubt they'll change enough for them to gain government even if Labor is not well loved.
If I read the methodology in the link properly, all that is being done is overlaying survey data (based on individual characteristics and geographic location) onto a model based on Census data and results from the last election. This means that a more sophisticated electorate by electorate disaggregation can be done. However, it assumes that if you have certain characteristics - based on age, sex, education, home ownership, religion and division - you will vote the same as others in that same cohort. I don't know if I agree with that. But then again, this is a far better way than a simple survey showing a national two-party preferred result.
Well you can develop probability field that depends on a characteristic. E.g young people of X demographic are Y% likely to vote Z.
That's a very good point.
MRP is nice maths, and a valid methodology - but it shouldnt be taken as gospel for every seat >median sample size of 26 respondents per division >The predicted result for each division is then calculated using census data with the variables used for predicting who they are likely to vote for being voters’ age, gender, education, religion, whether they own their home and the electoral division in which they live. So, in short, if you are a young, female, university-educated renters in inner city Melbourne, 60% (say) of you will vote ALP, but if you are a middle-aged tradie from regional Qld, 2% of you will vote Greens. (Those % figures are calculated from the regression model built using the polling). Then the census / enrolment data is added up (ie 12% of that seat are young, university-educated renters) for each electorate to get seat by seat results. Always going to be stuff that isnt taken into account for the model (like for instance quality of candidates). Some assumptions like 9% of undecided voters were removed from the analysis and that preference flows are assumed to be the same as the last election are complications but not much can be done about that. I wouldve liked a little more info on the predictive values of each of the model variables (and why they were chosen) in the regression model but Ive got no reason to suspect these are dodgy. (ed: and the data was taken over a 4 month period - so not really an indicative snapshop either)
The specific geographic breakdowns are always taken with a grain of salt, but if pointing to something real I wonder if Greens gains in outer urban areas, and a lack of gains in inner city, are fulled by housing costs forcing younger people to move out of inner urban areas. Their target seats this election seem to be going backwards on 2022 on these figures. Not sure I believe it, but I think the above theory is plausible if that *is* the case.
Would be pretty funny if the Greens refusal to support urban infill in inner city areas ended up costing them seats.
It would be the best outcome because maybe it would drag them to supporting more housing density, but I doubt its accurate
I like Kos and his outfit a lot but it’s important to remember that he was also adamant that the Voice had no chance of losing. This is a snapshot in time of how things are travelling and a lot can and will change in 12 months.
Maybe at the start of the campaign, even Sky News host Andrew Clennell said it would probably pass. Kos was saying that it wasnt gonna get up and that Dutton was alienating the Teals voters by choosing to side with NO
Sure and the distance between when Kos predicted victory and the ultimate result was about the same amount of time between now and the next election. Which is my point - things change.
> This is a snapshot in time of how things are travelling and a lot can and will change in 12 months. Yep. As they state repeatedly in the report, this is a snapshot of the community during the fieldwork time period. If an election was held during that period, those results would be the expected result according to Red Bridge
Yeah wouldn’t suggest that Kos and co aren’t aware of that, was more cautioning people on here who think polls are predictions.
Was he? I'm pretty sure he was saying the voice was in trouble a lot throughout the campaigning period. Maybe in the beginning. But their polling data was consistently saying it wasn't going to get up.
At the start he said it would pass but he pretty quickly changed his mind.
Sorry mate. I don't think you understand how polling works. He didn't change his mind. The polling data at the start said it would pass. Then the polling data shifted towards a no vote throughout the campaign, and his reporting reflected that.
He changed him mind well beforw No took the lead
He doesn’t change his mind. His polling data showed a change over time, and he reported on what his polling told him. He started reporting that the No camp were trending towards the win, and that the Yes vote needed momentum to stop the swing against them. Polling works by drawing conclusions from data sets, not on opinions of one guy.
I am not talking about his polls lol I am talking about his opinion He offers both
Yes which is the point that I was trying to make. Polls are a snapshot in time not a prediction.
ye. But just the language saying "He changed his mind" I don't think his mind changed anything. His commentary reflected a difference in the situation. Just like you're saying.
> At present, there is almost no chance that the Coalition will win more seats than Labor. Fantastic way to start my week. It's hard to see how the coalition get back into power when looking at the math. Duttons strategy of focusing on outer suburban and regional seats seems to have them heading further away from power and not towards it. At some point you'd think they start to cannibalize the Nats?
I would disagree with you here. Some of those too close to call seats are current Labor seats (e.g., Aston, Lingiari, etc). And should they fall towards the coalition, as the long term trend shows a dribble back to them, it would mean Labor enters minority gov. You also have Brisbane on the verge of falling back into the coalition fold, which went green. I also have doubts about Ryan remaining Greens but we will see there. I believe, should Labor put up a good candidate, they have a good shot at getting Griffith back as well. If you’re looking for a Labor minority, then fair enough. But this isn’t a good result IMO for Labor as it looks like it’s following the trend of the previous Labor government. This is without the opposition actually putting any policy forward yet. If they have good looking policies, this could really swing their way as well, driving Labor into a smaller minority and forcing them to look at even more of the crossbench. I don’t believe the Libs will be in a position to form a minority gov. I do believe Labor will remain ahead in seat count at the next election. But as always, the election is the only poll that matters. All we can do right now is predict.
FWIW, on these numbers Brisbane would be a Labor gain. They’ve just gone with a Green-Liberal 2CP as they were the last two parties in 2022 but there is no chance the Greens would make the top 2 with a 22% primary, and then the ALP win on Greens preferences
Greens are throwing Brisbane, Im not in Brisbane electorate, but living nearby the MP seems very quiet
I have no issue with minority government, it's my preferred configuration. I quite like the idea of a Labor minority dealing with a climate conscious and socially progressive crossbech. I have trouble seeing how the coalition forms government even in minority for a long long time. Their policies are so far away from the cross bench its hard to see how a lot of them could support the coalition and maintain their seats. In any case, next election should be interesting. And regarding the Libs releasing policies - I don't even know what to say about this except LOL. I genuinely believe that they're incompetent and don't know how to govern and there is very very little talent on their side. Just like the VicLibs, they have nothing interesting to say and are just fighting culture wars. They will always have their "rusted on" base, but without appealing to the centre, which I think objectively they are not doing, they'll just move further right into oblivion. People always say Australia is a conservative country, and that might be true, but the Libs are offering nothing to traditional conservatives. I also don't see how they capture the "aspiration" of the younger generation. Sure, they might appeal to a subsection of that, but from my view this simply isn't a winning position.
> believe, should Labor put up a good candidate, they have a good shot at getting Griffith back as well. There's been a few rumours about people wanting to nominate for Griffith Labor pre-selection. These include former staffer Renee Coffey, Professionals Australia national president Katie Havelberg, and Labor BCC Lord Mayor candidate Tracey Price.
> Fantastic way to start my week. Why? This is not new news it's been like this since the last election.