Paul Norton observed here at LP yesterday that we’re in uncharted psephological waters, with both major parties on low primaries and both leaders relatively unpopular. A host of questions have therefore arisen: about the likely flow of preferences from The Greens and ‘Others’, about the distribution of the anti-ALP swing, and about what 2PP would ensure victory. It’s interesting, therefore, to see some marginal seat polling, something that parties normally conduct privately via tracking polls of a sample drawn from several marginal, but which are rarely done by public pollsters.
The Australian has duly delivered.
I want to enter some further caveats, but I’d like to start by saying that the polling data stands aside from its misinterpretation by Newspoll’s owners (egregious comments from Dennis Shanahan implying that the three marginals surveyed in Queensland could be translated into a state wide swing are just the start). Nor is the conclusion drawn from it implied by the poll itself. We can set aside the questions about Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard’s relative popularity, for instance, as meaningless given their lack of relationship to any probable set of circumstances between now and the election (and Peter Van Onselen must have finally recognised this, segueing into the next media narrative, a series of tedious and tendentious questions about whether Gillard will commit to supporting Rudd’s leadership in the next term).
But what does the polling actually tell us?
(a) As Possum suggests, we can set aside the Lindsay survey as undoubtedly contaminated by the concurrent Penrith campaign and by-election, and observe also that Labor’s primary in the poll of federal voting intentions is higher than that in the by-election;
(b) The 3 Queensland marginals do suggest that the swing against Labor is translating to a swing to the Coalition rather than The Greens in at least those seats (noting that the margin of error is approximately 4%). But, as Possum observes also, seats swing to greater and lesser degrees, as indicated by the result in Page.
(c) If some Labor MPs are right, it may be that the ETS issue is biting in some seats, and issues about asylum seekers in others. Of course, that’s not all that’s going on.
Having said all that, the polling wouldn’t bring any great delight to the government or to Labor supporters. But we should also beware of assuming that the political situation is static, and will remain so until the election. Of interest here is William Bowe’s point about the softness of The Greens’ vote. And Laura Tingle rightly observed in today’s Fin that the government is still the government and can get on with governing. Parental leave and the NBN-Telstra deal are no small matters, and nor is the signing of $10 billion worth of contracts with China, an event which tends to disrupt the narrative about the evils of the RSPT.
And unemployment and interest rates are low. Nor, as Tingle argues, can Tony Abbott continue his disappearing act for much longer. And Coalition supporters really should be asking what sort of leader they have when Abbott has to be hidden to avoid his unpopularity pulling down the party’s vote in the polls. That’s what they’ve been up to.
Nor am I sure that Abbott’s bouts of triumphalism when he does appear are all that helpful to his cause.
Elsewhere: Guy Beres’ take on the Lindsay poll.