#Newspoll Dutton net -4 (37-41) and is the first non-previously-serving Opp Leader to start his career as such in net negatives (Peacock 2 also started with a negative netsat.)
#Newspoll Albanese net +35 (61-26). (corrected) Still not really a meaningful record high as Rudd was higher on net satisfaction (+48) in his first Newspoll as PM. Current Newspoll methods have lower don't know on satisfaction.
#Newspoll Better PM (skews to incumbents, oh yes including ALP ones) Albanese leads 59-25. Similar to Howard's leads over Beazley in first two months, way below Rudd over Nelson, way above Abbott over Shorten.
#Newspoll 33 is the Coalition's = 2nd lowest primary reading ever. A 31 and a 33 in 2008 under Nelson and a 33 under Morrison immediately post the departure of Turnbull were the only previous scores this low or lower.
The 31 under Nelson wasn't immediate either and it was almost certainly a rogue poll.
#Newspoll was the first poll since the release of the 2022 preference flows. I get the expected average 2PP off the published primaries (ALP 37 L-NP 33 GRN 12 ON 6 UAP 2 others 10) as 55.7 to ALP, so 56-44 is as expected.
Interesting to see the UAP vote drop off after the election again.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is the reason for it. 24A entails the committee includes "the whips of any minority groups" so singletons must appoint themselves Whip to be appointed.
(There's a debate about whether Pocock is a party Senator or an independent. The AEC recognises David Pocock as a parliamentary party (meaning the party stays registered without needing to prove 1500 members) but the Senate calls him an independent.)
The glorious day is here, the 2022 federal election results have been archived! I will be rolling out various goodies on my site in coming days.
Key preference flows (2019 in brackets)
Green 85.66 to ALP (record high) (82.21)
UAP 61.86 to L-NP (65.14)
PHON 64.30 to L-NP (65.22)
IND 63.77 to ALP (59.40)
The official 2PP is 52.13 to Labor. (Not sure what happened with the Willoughby NORTH SYDNEY PPVC apparent transposition issue but the numbers there have not changed.)
Subscribed to Crikey until about four years ago but its declining usefulness over time aside, never going back while it needlessly platforms such misguided trash.
The USA is reeling from a combination of a political judicial appointment process and never being a proper democracy in the first place. It's polluting everything, verging on being a self-perpetuating feedback loop but let's blame people who talk about pronouns.
Tweet I linked to (which I was agreeing with) was deleted for some reason. For anyone not sure what I was referring to, this:
For anyone thinking optional preferencing or FPTP would have helped the Coalition at this election, there's very little evidence of that. If anything there is evidence for a Queensland 2015 style effect where optional preferencing might have been even worse.
I previously calculated that Labor's 2PP for the semi-optional-preferencing Senate is 0.8% higher than their compulsory preferencing Reps 2PP. Underlying this is a large increase in the Senate 2PP exhaust rate among UAP voters in particular.
The Coalition lost the Senate 2PP in many seats it retained: I get Deakin, Moore, Bass, Casey, Leichhardt, Durack, Forrest, Banks, Canning (very nearly Bonner too). It won the Senate 2PP in Gilmore which Labor retained.
Oh no it doesn't. In FPP you can have parties winning large majorities off vote shares in the mid 30s without any evidence of what the remaining voters thought of them. Here we know Labor was the preferred party.
FPP is not a fair electoral system. Under FPP voters who prefer minor parties have to choose between voting tactically and wasting their vote while voters who prefer major parties generally don't. This massively distorts vote share and is discriminatory.
In fact the conservative side junked FPP over 100 years ago to get rid of absurd seat results where it was abundantly clear that the seat winner did not have a mandate, like this:
In fact the gap between election day and resumption is exactly the same as for the Abbott Liberal government in 2013 (66 days) and also the Fraser Liberal government in 1976. Is Canavan saying those governments had no plan and no agenda?
(Also I believe "longest possible time" is not quite true, albeit by 2 days.)
In 1950 the new Menzies govt took 74 days to resume post election and in 2008 the new Rudd govt took 80. The current govt wasn't even able to take that long if it wanted because of the compressed schedule left by the previous govt waiting til May 21.