Opinion

Voters show up a nation divided

Australia is a nation dramatically divided - with voters fracturing sharply along regional lines, and that means the outcome hangs on a geographic precipice.

And one of Julia Gillard's nightmare outcomes - a hung parliament - is now a very real possibility.

While the latest opinion polls show the national vote is on a knife-edge, digging deeper into how the polling numbers are shaping up around the states shows there is no single national mood.

Rather, there are conflicting impulses on the minds of voters, depending on where they live.

Newspoll's latest state-by-state analysis of voting intentions shows Labor has a lock in the south and centre, in the states of Victoria and South Australia - where Newspoll puts its two-party preferred vote at 59 and 56 per cent respectively.

By contrast, the Coalition is well in front in Queensland and Western Australia, sitting on a two-party preferred vote of 54 per cent in both of these frontier states.

In the biggest state of all, NSW, voters are more evenly divided, but the Coalition has edged ahead of Labor by 51 to 49 per cent of the two-party preferred vote.

This is a big turnaround in NSW compared with the last election in 2007 when Labor secured 54 per cent of the two-party vote.

Newspoll arrives at these state by state numbers by analysing the results from its last two national polls which surveyed 3437 voters nationwide late last month and this month.

The geographic breakdowns are based on samples of about 660 voters in each of the states (Tasmania and the two territories are excluded because the samples are too small to generate meaningful results).

The smaller sample sizes mean the state polling numbers are not as statistically reliable as national polls.

Yet the findings tally with anecdotal evidence about Labor being in trouble in Queensland and with the Coalition's dominance in Western Australia.

So if we take the latest state voting intention numbers and translate them into swings for and against Labor around the country, what would be the outcome on election day?

There would be swings against Labor of 5.2 per cent in NSW and 4.4 per cent in Queensland.

If the swings were uniform across both states that would translate into Labor losing eight seats in each of the two big states.

In Western Australia, Labor did so poorly in 2007 that the swing would be smaller, just under 1 per cent, meaning it could lose another one or two seats there.

By contrast there would be swings to Labor of 4.7 per cent in Victoria and 3.6 per cent in South Australia. This would see the government picking up three or four seats from the Liberals in Victoria and two in South Australia.

The combined effect of these electoral swings and roundabouts would be a net loss of between 11 and 13 seats nationwide for Labor – and that would lead to either a hung Parliament or Julia Gillard scraping back into power with a majority of just one or two seats in the House of Representatives.

Mark Davis is the national editor for The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.

Page:

single page

Posted By: MARK DAVIS on 4/08/2010 12:17:00 PM | Comments (5)

National Times

Source: http://www.smh.com.au/federal...

© SMH

Share on
Facebook

Tweet on
Twitter

Email to
a friend

comments

Date: Newest first | Oldest first

What ever happened to the good old days when you were either Labour or the other side, whatever they were called because over the decades there have been many machinations of the conservatives. You didn't need to bother about hung parliaments or balance of power resting with fringe groups who screw the rest of us for their little piece of glory. Remember Brian Harradine, now we have his replacement Brown and a few more unknowns, who have taken the broader electorate for a ride with their whacko ideas. Oh take me back to the good old days when personalities counted for little and it was the party ideology that won the day. But then it wouldn’t work anymore we are all too selfish and will get in to bed with the highest bidder.

Posted by Lara, 4/08/2010 4:06:38 PM

ACT voters are badly served by the major parties. Voters should examine their navels and become swinging voters, rather than rusted on ones. Narrowing the margin between parties would hopefully attract some marginal seat attention by the parties.

Posted by Corbett, 5/08/2010 7:29:06 AM

Thinking about Mark Davis reported poll numbers, I'm reminded about "work choices" and the words of R. H. Tawney who wrote: "... The man who employs, governs, to the extent of the number of men employed. He has jurisdiction over them. He occupies what is really a public office. He has power, not of pit and gallows... but of overtime and short time, full bellies and empty bellies, health and sickness..." If you elect the Liberal Party with Abbott as PM, you'd better get used to it quickly!

Posted by Ralf, 5/08/2010 10:47:31 AM

Victoria & SA will lose lose their bias as the behaviour and poor performance of Ms Gillard is scrutinised,eg: Security. All Australians, especially those in the frontline protecting the security of Australia, place their trust in those who were elected to govern to make strategic and tactical decisions about national security. That trust demands those elected representatives to be fully committed and accountable to answer for their actions. National security is a higher priority than even the economy. The National Security Committee (NSC) is the focal point of decision making on national security. It is chaired by the Prime Minister and consists of six or more senior ministers and secretaries of the key departments of the Australian Government, plus the Chief of the Defence Force plus others. That, both Prime Minister Rudd and Prime Minister Gillard did not attend meetings of NSC, sending unelected underlings to make up the numbers showed they are not fully committed. Such behaviour is a gross breach of trust with those in the field and the Australian people, demeans the NSC and its Members, and prejudices Australian security.

Posted by NRH, 5/08/2010 10:48:17 AM

Mark, Dramatically divided? Piffle! There's nothing dramatic about it - just historical reality. I'm also not sure we should be reading too much into statistically invalid samples a few weeks out from an election. After all, most of we punters only start focussing on which side to back a few days out from the election - having pondered extensively on the promises and potential of the protaganists. In the intervening period, we like to tell the pollsters who call us that we have yet to decide one way or the other. In truth, however, most of us are part of the rusted-on base of either Labor or the Coalition, having been shaped by an array of powerful influences throughout our lives. Whichever way it goes, I consider myself fortunate to live in a country like Australia with a strong two-party system. Much better than the fractious coalitions in places like the Netherlands and Israel, where micro parties achieve an influence well beyond their mandate - just because they are able to tip one multiplicitous coalition or another above the magic 51% barrier. Australian democracy - you beauty!

Posted by Andrew, 5/08/2010 11:34:04 AM

Here is the place for you to vent on any national or world news and lifestyle stories on the YourGuide websites. If there is anything you see or hear that you like or don't like, tell us. Don't keep it to yourself!