Internal polling "leaks" often turn out to be nonsense as they can be (i) expectation management (ii) disgruntled elements (iii) tiny samples (iv) incorrectly analysed (v) in some cases simply fictitious. Nonetheless noted to see how it goes post-election.
Oakleigh is on 16% and without a high-profile non-classic contender so this is sounding like a #pollshapedobject
(The claimed losses are Hawthorn to Libs, Point Cook to IND, Albert Park to Green and Oakleigh to not stated.)
Thread by @KosSamaras (who has experience of ALP internal polling matters) declaring this "leak" to be bogus here:
A further indicator that this 'internal polling leak' is likely to be bulldust is that it refers to swings against ALP in Mildura. Mildura is an IND vs Nat seat where Labor needs a huge swing to make the final two, why on earth would Labor poll it? #pollshapedobject
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is disingenuous garbage from Premier Andrews. His own MPs on Electoral Matters passed the buck back to the Parliament to commission a review into GTV in the previous term and his own government then failed to start that review. #VicVotes
You could only think the matter of Group Ticket Voting was not in sharp focus after at least a fifth of the parliament was elected undeservedly in 2018 - resulting in a deluge of submissions - if you were a politician with severe vision problems.
It is also hypocritical for the Liberals to say they would refer Labor to IBAC as the Liberals should also be investigated over claims made in the video. In particular, whether a desire to avoid upsetting Druery resulted in them abandoning a previous anti_GTV position.
Tweet I quote-tweeted has disappeared but there are other reports that the teals have won their appeal against the VEC over how-to-vote cards. VCAT may have overturned 2018 Sheed ruling, will be interesting to see the judgement. #VicVotes
Pleased to see this because if the VEC and previous VCAT reading of the law was correct then the law would have been a donkey. No evidence the cards cause informal voting and even if they do it only hurts the candidate using them.
For a detailed discussion of why there is no evidence these cards shift the informal rate in either direction see my article here:
Very hard to know what sort of vote some parties will get, eg ON and UAP which polled substantially at the federal election but may not be making as much effort this time.
Also question of how much Legalise Cannabis might eat into any Green gains that would otherwise occur.
Already seeing reminders of what rubbish this system is. In SEM my first attempt elected Hinch. When I took 1% off the Greens he was replaced by Legalise Cannabis.
I mean, what more is Frederico supposed to do, her card already tells voters they must number all boxes *twice*, does she need to say it a third time and get her lawyer to send the VEC a copy of The Hunting Of The Snark?
As expressed this is a completely absurd statement by whoever said it since Labor seats going to the Greens will make absolutely no difference to who forms government and will categorically not boost the Liberals' chances - if they exist - in any way.
A more intelligent way to defend it would be to say that they were forcing Labor to fight harder to defend those seats. But even that's not all that logical since two of them looked like very serious fights anyway. #VicVotes
(Note these are only how to vote recommendations, not preferencing in the sense of the upper house, but in the case of Liberal how to votes it can make a sizeable difference. Not a huge difference since the Liberal vote in eg Northcote is barely double figures, but a few %.)