"Only [Howard, Abbott and Rudd] as opposition leaders have been behind on the question of who would be the better prime minister and won the next election."
In Newspoll history they're the only Opposition Leaders who have won at all!
It's of course true Albanese is further behind on Better PM than any LOTO who has won. It's also true that there is a pandemic at the moment and that it seems to have done something weird to the historic relationship b/w polled leader scores and voting intention.
A little cautionary tale from state Newspolls about better leader scores:
All the state LOs who trailed massively on Better Premier but won did so when relatively new. But Rob Borbidge as an established LO trailed Wayne Goss as badly as 68-14 during the term that ended in Goss "winning" by one seat that he then couldn't keep.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Also re this, people who argue that #Newspoll voting intentions are wrong because of the same poll's leader ratings don't seem to consider the reverse. Or at least that at the moment the leader ratings may not mean quite what they usually do.
Bigger problem is that almost every Opposition gets to 50-50 somewhere along the line (indeed Labor already briefly was a bit ahead early last year) and yet most oppositions do not win. Even oppositions that are at some stage 55-45 up only win half the time.
Seven federal governments have lost in the history of polling. All of them bar Labor 1949 were at some stage being really badly smashed in polling. There wasn't that much polling back in 1949.
I very strongly recommend that anyone thinking of voting Greens above the line in Agricultural region (map here: parliament.wa.gov.au/WebCMS/webcms.…) do their research on Bass Tadros (Health Australia) and see if you really want your vote electing this guy.
In general I recommend everyone in WA seriously consider voting below the line (make sure you number every box without any mistake) to stop preference harvesters but this is an especially bad case.
Greens have directly preferenced views normally associated with the fringe right.
Greens have a lousy position in this region which includes Geraldton and Esperance. Virtually nobody has preferenced them above Health Australia. If the Druery preferencing spiral takes off the Greens will simply feed Tadros who is their preferred candidate in this region.
So I've been doing this for five minutes and have already found a possible scenario in the first region I looked at (E Met) in which Charles Smith polls 0.4% and retains his seat.
Also if I crash the One Nation vote in E Met it becomes rather hard to stop Australian Christians winning instead of ON or WAP, and in some cases this is at the expense of the Greens with a much higher primary. Unless the micro vote crashes in general.
If I hold all the votes at 2017 levels no micros win anywhere (unless you count SFF). But I am sceptical that will be anything much like the case.
Assuming he carries through, the Coalition's majority will fall from three seats to one, and it will no longer have a floor majority if it chooses to continue providing the Speaker.
The Speaker has a casting vote but has previously said he will use it in line with the Speakership conventions, and has done so at least once before. That will only be an issue when the entire crossbench including Kelly and Katter vote against the govt, if that ever occurs.
Unpinned tweet. Has been updated.
Annoying that Kelly is turning a false viral claim true but I suppose that's what he tries to do all the time.
Commissioned union poll just reported claiming dire results for Labor in Shortland and Paterson is apparently Chorus Consulting with Community Engagement theaustralian.com.au/nation/politic…
Chorus Consulting not known to me as a pollster but director is a director of Redbridge who have produced several similar polls. Community Engagement not much seen in Aus but inaccurate at 2016 election.
Of some interest here c. 80% of respondents saying Labor moving away from coal would affect their vote in some direction or other. That's very high though such Qs in isolation always vastly exaggerate the impact of particular issues.
How many Aus PMs had previously been state MPs? I get 11 (the first seven plus Lyons, Menzies, Fadden and Forde). None of the last 15. (Holt, McEwen, Gorton ran at state level but lost.)
Howard another one to have run unsuccessfully at state level