Updated aggregation

With Essential coming in at 47-53 in Labor's favour, it is time to update the aggregation. Both Essential and Newspoll are pegging a two percentage point recovery for the Coalition over the past four weeks. I have tweaked the TPP model to allow for a more rapid changes in public opinion over the period immediately following the recent disruption event.

Turning to the primary vote model ...

Poll aggregation update

There were two new polls published last week, from Newspoll and Essential, both of which estimated the Coalition has 48 and Labor has 52 per cent of the two-party preferred (TPP) vote share. The aggregation of all polls has the Coalition on 47.9 and Labor on 52.1.

Cross checking this result against some simple moving averages, constrained such that house effects sum to zero, yields the following. Most of these moving averages are still factoring in the up-swing since November last year. I have mentioned before that these moving averages are less reliable around the endpoints than the Bayesian model.

My suspicion is that the Coalition's up-swing since late last year has run its course and we have seen fairly stable numbers for a month and a half or so now at around 48 per cent TPP for the Coalition. 

Turning to the primary vote estimates we have ...

In separate analysis, we can look at the Pauline Hanson One Nation Party results, which are included in the Other Parties primary vote chart immediately above ...

The TPP estimate from the logit primary vote model is less favourable to the Coalition than the published polls, using the preference flows from the most recent elections.

Essential

The most recent Essential poll 49 to 51 in Labor's favour (a two point move in the Coalition's favour in a fortnight) is a little surprising. It is not in line with the other polls. And it has affected the PollBludger's BludgerTrack. This difference can be seen in the right hand side of the next chart.

I am not sure this recent movement in the Essential poll series is anything but noise. But it is worth keeping an eye on.

While we are here, it is worth looking at how the Essential primary vote estimates are tracking against the Dirichlet aggregates (which, like the TPP aggregate above do not include the Essential polls).

Perhaps of most interest in the Essential primaries, is the Greens. Essential is not seeing the growth in the Green vote over this Parliamentary term the way others have seen it.

Essential

Following the 2013 election, polls from Essential jumped to the right politically (jumped upwards in the chart below). I wondered whether this was a correction for their position prior to the 2013 election. Most polling houses had over-estimated the Greens and under-estimated the Coalition in the Primaries. Anyway, the last six months has seen Essential move back in line with my TPP trend estimate. 

Coalition TPP by Polling House

The Henderson Moving Average (HMA) has some significant limitations. Technically, it should only be used when the data points come in equally spaced periods of time, and it has no mechanism for dealing with missing data.

In what is not quite kosher analysis, I have applied a HMA to the houses that poll fairly regularly. Essential usually produces a weekly estimate. Morgan and Newspoll typically produce a fortnightly result. And ReachTEL yields a monthly estimate.

To obtain a rough six month moving average across these houses, I have applied a 25-term HMA to Essential, a 13-term HMA to Morgan and Newspoll, and a 7-term HMA to ReachTEL. The results follow. Only Morgan saw the post 2014 Budget as the more significant slump for the Coalition. The other three pollsters had the late January come early February 2015 slump as the more significant. All agree the Coalition has been improving since the early 2015 slump, but an election winning position in the polls will require further improvement.

Monday evening update

Essential has released its latest poll data (recasting the four previous rolling fortnights as weekly data). While the pathway differs a little, the endpoint is in the middle of the pack.

Turning to the betting market: in aggregate, today's result (on a favourite-wins basis) is unchanged on Saturday's update.

	Coalition	Labor	Other
Seat count	91	57	2

The individual seat probabilities follow (expressed as a percent). Of note: Cathy McGowan (Independent) seems to be improving her odds in Indi.

	State	Labor	Coalition	Other	current	favourite	change
Lingiari	NT	46.9	45.6	7.5	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Brand	WA	46.1	49.9	4.0	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Kingsford Smith	NSW	50.5	45.3	4.3	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Lyons	TAS	42.8	51.7	5.5	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Lilley	QLD	52.6	43.6	3.7	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Hindmarsh	SA	53.8	42.3	3.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Blair	QLD	54.2	42.6	3.3	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Petrie	QLD	54.8	42.1	3.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Capricornia	QLD	56.3	37.9	5.7	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Page	NSW	56.7	38.2	5.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
McEwen	VIC	57.1	38.5	4.3	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Werriwa	NSW	57.4	38.7	3.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Franklin	TAS	59.4	33.8	6.8	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Barton	NSW	60.2	34.2	5.6	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Brisbane	QLD	34.5	60.8	4.7	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Parramatta	NSW	31.8	62.6	5.6	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Moreton	QLD	32.1	63.1	4.7	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
McMahon	NSW	64.2	32.7	3.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Bendigo	VIC	64.2	29.9	5.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Eden-Monaro	NSW	30.4	65.3	4.3	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Indi	VIC	4.0	65.3	30.7	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Richmond	NSW	66.1	26.8	7.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Flynn	QLD	24.8	68.9	6.3	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Chisholm	VIC	69.4	24.8	5.8	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Bruce	VIC	72.1	21.6	6.3	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Griffith	QLD	72.8	21.9	5.3	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Melbourne	VIC	73.0	2.6	24.5	Other	Labor	TRUE
Rankin	QLD	73.5	22.0	4.5	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Bonner	QLD	22.1	73.6	4.3	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
La Trobe	VIC	20.5	74.0	5.5	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Hasluck	WA	22.3	74.4	3.3	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Newcastle	NSW	74.9	18.0	7.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Dobell	NSW	16.5	75.8	7.7	Other	Coalition	TRUE
Greenway	NSW	21.1	75.8	3.1	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Solomon	NT	18.3	76.5	5.1	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Wakefield	SA	76.6	17.5	5.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Dawson	QLD	17.5	76.6	5.9	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Melbourne Ports	VIC	76.9	16.4	6.8	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Adelaide	SA	77.4	16.5	6.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Perth	WA	77.8	15.6	6.6	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Robertson	NSW	12.0	77.9	10.1	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Forde	QLD	16.7	78.3	5.0	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Longman	QLD	16.7	78.3	5.0	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Oxley	QLD	78.7	18.0	3.3	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Throsby	NSW	78.9	14.4	6.7	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Fisher	QLD	12.2	79.0	8.8	Other	Coalition	TRUE
Leichhardt	QLD	14.5	79.2	6.3	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Swan	WA	16.9	79.2	3.9	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Fowler	NSW	79.4	16.9	3.7	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Chifley	NSW	79.9	14.6	5.5	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Fairfax	QLD	5.1	80.4	14.5	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Reid	NSW	14.8	80.5	4.8	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Braddon	TAS	14.8	80.5	4.7	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Fremantle	WA	80.7	13.4	5.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Makin	SA	81.2	14.9	4.0	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Casey	VIC	10.8	82.1	7.1	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Dunkley	VIC	10.8	82.1	7.1	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Ryan	QLD	10.1	82.2	7.8	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Herbert	QLD	12.7	82.2	5.1	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Hunter	NSW	82.2	12.6	5.2	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Macquarie	NSW	12.6	82.3	5.1	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Jagajaga	VIC	82.6	11.6	5.8	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Wright	QLD	5.6	83.0	11.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Hinkler	QLD	6.5	83.1	10.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Blaxland	NSW	83.3	12.7	3.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Bass	TAS	11.8	83.5	4.7	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Fadden	QLD	7.7	83.5	8.7	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Ballarat	VIC	83.9	10.3	5.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Isaacs	VIC	83.9	11.0	5.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Batman	VIC	83.9	5.7	10.4	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Sydney	NSW	84.3	5.7	10.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Denison	TAS	10.6	5.0	84.4	Other	Other	FALSE
Deakin	VIC	9.2	84.5	6.4	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Watson	NSW	84.6	11.1	4.4	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Stirling	WA	8.6	84.7	6.7	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Banks	NSW	11.1	84.7	4.2	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Corangamite	VIC	9.2	84.8	6.0	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Shortland	NSW	85.2	9.7	5.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Cunningham	NSW	85.4	8.7	5.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Aston	VIC	8.7	85.4	5.9	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Kooyong	VIC	6.6	85.5	7.9	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Bowman	QLD	9.3	85.6	5.1	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Lalor	VIC	85.7	7.2	7.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Bennelong	NSW	9.9	85.7	4.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Canning	WA	9.9	85.7	4.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Gilmore	NSW	8.0	85.8	6.3	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Berowra	NSW	6.7	85.8	7.5	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Kingston	SA	86.0	9.3	4.7	Labor	Labor	FALSE
McMillan	VIC	8.0	86.0	6.0	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Lyne	NSW	8.8	86.1	5.2	Other	Coalition	TRUE
Canberra	ACT	86.1	8.0	5.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Dickson	QLD	8.8	86.1	5.1	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Hume	NSW	7.3	86.3	6.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Corio	VIC	86.4	7.3	6.4	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Flinders	VIC	6.7	86.5	6.8	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Cook	NSW	6.7	86.5	6.8	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Lindsay	NSW	9.4	86.7	3.9	Labor	Coalition	TRUE
Wentworth	NSW	5.1	86.7	8.2	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Maribyrnong	VIC	86.8	7.3	5.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Cowan	WA	8.9	86.8	4.3	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Sturt	SA	8.0	86.8	5.1	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Higgins	VIC	6.7	86.8	6.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Paterson	NSW	8.0	86.9	5.1	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
McPherson	QLD	6.8	86.9	6.3	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Grey	SA	6.8	87.0	6.3	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Gippsland	VIC	6.8	87.0	6.2	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Barker	SA	6.8	87.1	6.2	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Calare	NSW	7.3	87.1	5.6	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Boothby	SA	8.1	87.1	4.8	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Bradfield	NSW	5.9	87.2	6.9	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Grayndler	NSW	87.2	5.2	7.6	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Mackellar	NSW	5.2	87.2	7.6	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
North Sydney	NSW	5.9	87.2	6.9	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Goldstein	VIC	6.8	87.3	5.9	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Scullin	VIC	87.3	6.8	5.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Moore	WA	6.8	87.3	5.9	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Holt	VIC	87.5	7.4	5.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Hotham	VIC	87.5	7.4	5.1	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Hughes	NSW	8.1	87.5	4.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Macarthur	NSW	8.1	87.5	4.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Forrest	WA	6.6	87.7	5.7	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Wide Bay	QLD	5.9	87.7	6.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Mallee	VIC	6.8	87.7	5.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Warringah	NSW	5.2	87.8	7.0	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Charlton	NSW	87.8	2.6	9.6	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Moncrieff	QLD	6.9	87.9	5.2	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Calwell	VIC	88.0	6.8	5.2	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Gorton	VIC	88.0	6.8	5.2	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Fraser	ACT	88.1	5.9	6.0	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Curtin	WA	4.2	88.1	7.7	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Murray	VIC	6.8	88.1	5.0	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
New England	NSW	4.2	88.2	7.5	Other	Coalition	TRUE
Gellibrand	VIC	88.3	5.2	6.4	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Menzies	VIC	5.3	88.4	6.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Cowper	NSW	7.5	88.6	3.9	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Mayo	SA	5.3	88.7	6.0	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Mitchell	NSW	6.9	88.7	4.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Parkes	NSW	6.9	88.7	4.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Tangney	WA	6.0	88.8	5.2	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Port Adelaide	SA	89.1	6.0	4.9	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Riverina	NSW	6.9	89.1	4.0	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Pearce	WA	5.2	89.2	5.6	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Maranoa	QLD	5.3	89.4	5.2	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Farrer	NSW	6.0	89.5	4.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Wills	VIC	89.9	3.5	6.6	Labor	Labor	FALSE
Groom	QLD	6.1	90.5	3.4	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Kennedy	QLD	4.1	5.1	90.8	Other	Other	FALSE
Wannon	VIC	4.4	91.5	4.1	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
O'Connor	WA	3.3	93.0	3.7	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE
Durack	WA	3.3	93.9	2.8	Coalition	Coalition	FALSE

If, rather than count favourites, we add probabilities to see the likely outcome (and make the odd adjustment), we get the following outcome:

	Coalition	Labor	Other
Seat count	95	53	2

And (for transparency) my adjusted calculations for adding probabilities (again expressed as percentages) follow:

	Labor	Coalition	Other
Lingiari	50.7	49.3	0.0
Brand	48.0	52.0	0.0
Kingsford Smith	52.7	47.3	0.0
Lyons	45.3	54.7	0.0
Lilley	54.7	45.3	0.0
Hindmarsh	56.0	44.0	0.0
Blair	56.0	44.0	0.0
Petrie	56.6	43.4	0.0
Capricornia	59.8	40.2	0.0
Page	59.7	40.3	0.0
McEwen	59.7	40.3	0.0
Werriwa	59.7	40.3	0.0
Franklin	63.7	36.3	0.0
Barton	63.8	36.2	0.0
Brisbane	36.2	63.8	0.0
Parramatta	33.7	66.3	0.0
Moreton	33.7	66.3	0.0
McMahon	66.3	33.7	0.0
Bendigo	68.2	31.8	0.0
Eden-Monaro	31.8	68.2	0.0
Indi	0.0	68.0	32.0
Richmond	71.2	28.8	0.0
Flynn	26.5	73.5	0.0
Chisholm	73.7	26.3	0.0
Bruce	76.9	23.1	0.0
Griffith	76.9	23.1	0.0
Melbourne	74.9	0.0	25.1
Rankin	77.0	23.0	0.0
Bonner	23.1	76.9	0.0
La Trobe	21.7	78.3	0.0
Hasluck	23.1	76.9	0.0
Newcastle	80.6	19.4	0.0
Dobell	0.0	100.0	0.0
Greenway	0.0	100.0	0.0
Solomon	0.0	100.0	0.0
Wakefield	100.0	0.0	0.0
Dawson	0.0	100.0	0.0
Melbourne Ports	100.0	0.0	0.0
Adelaide	100.0	0.0	0.0
Perth	100.0	0.0	0.0
Robertson	0.0	100.0	0.0
Forde	0.0	100.0	0.0
Longman	0.0	100.0	0.0
Oxley	100.0	0.0	0.0
Throsby	100.0	0.0	0.0
Fisher	0.0	100.0	0.0
Leichhardt	0.0	100.0	0.0
Swan	0.0	100.0	0.0
Fowler	100.0	0.0	0.0
Chifley	100.0	0.0	0.0
Fairfax	0.0	100.0	0.0
Reid	0.0	100.0	0.0
Braddon	0.0	100.0	0.0
Fremantle	100.0	0.0	0.0
Makin	100.0	0.0	0.0
Casey	0.0	100.0	0.0
Dunkley	0.0	100.0	0.0
Ryan	0.0	100.0	0.0
Herbert	0.0	100.0	0.0
Hunter	100.0	0.0	0.0
Macquarie	0.0	100.0	0.0
Jagajaga	100.0	0.0	0.0
Wright	0.0	100.0	0.0
Hinkler	0.0	100.0	0.0
Blaxland	100.0	0.0	0.0
Bass	0.0	100.0	0.0
Fadden	0.0	100.0	0.0
Ballarat	100.0	0.0	0.0
Isaacs	100.0	0.0	0.0
Batman	100.0	0.0	0.0
Sydney	100.0	0.0	0.0
Denison	0.0	0.0	100.0
Deakin	0.0	100.0	0.0
Watson	100.0	0.0	0.0
Stirling	0.0	100.0	0.0
Banks	0.0	100.0	0.0
Corangamite	0.0	100.0	0.0
Shortland	100.0	0.0	0.0
Cunningham	100.0	0.0	0.0
Aston	0.0	100.0	0.0
Kooyong	0.0	100.0	0.0
Bowman	0.0	100.0	0.0
Lalor	100.0	0.0	0.0
Bennelong	0.0	100.0	0.0
Canning	0.0	100.0	0.0
Gilmore	0.0	100.0	0.0
Berowra	0.0	100.0	0.0
Kingston	100.0	0.0	0.0
McMillan	0.0	100.0	0.0
Lyne	0.0	100.0	0.0
Canberra	100.0	0.0	0.0
Dickson	0.0	100.0	0.0
Hume	0.0	100.0	0.0
Corio	100.0	0.0	0.0
Flinders	0.0	100.0	0.0
Cook	0.0	100.0	0.0
Lindsay	0.0	100.0	0.0
Wentworth	0.0	100.0	0.0
Maribyrnong	100.0	0.0	0.0
Cowan	0.0	100.0	0.0
Sturt	0.0	100.0	0.0
Higgins	0.0	100.0	0.0
Paterson	0.0	100.0	0.0
McPherson	0.0	100.0	0.0
Grey	0.0	100.0	0.0
Gippsland	0.0	100.0	0.0
Barker	0.0	100.0	0.0
Calare	0.0	100.0	0.0
Boothby	0.0	100.0	0.0
Bradfield	0.0	100.0	0.0
Grayndler	100.0	0.0	0.0
Mackellar	0.0	100.0	0.0
North Sydney	0.0	100.0	0.0
Goldstein	0.0	100.0	0.0
Scullin	100.0	0.0	0.0
Moore	0.0	100.0	0.0
Holt	100.0	0.0	0.0
Hotham	100.0	0.0	0.0
Hughes	0.0	100.0	0.0
Macarthur	0.0	100.0	0.0
Forrest	0.0	100.0	0.0
Wide Bay	0.0	100.0	0.0
Mallee	0.0	100.0	0.0
Warringah	0.0	100.0	0.0
Charlton	100.0	0.0	0.0
Moncrieff	0.0	100.0	0.0
Calwell	100.0	0.0	0.0
Gorton	100.0	0.0	0.0
Fraser	100.0	0.0	0.0
Curtin	0.0	100.0	0.0
Murray	0.0	100.0	0.0
New England	0.0	100.0	0.0
Gellibrand	100.0	0.0	0.0
Menzies	0.0	100.0	0.0
Cowper	0.0	100.0	0.0
Mayo	0.0	100.0	0.0
Mitchell	0.0	100.0	0.0
Parkes	0.0	100.0	0.0
Tangney	0.0	100.0	0.0
Port Adelaide	100.0	0.0	0.0
Riverina	0.0	100.0	0.0
Pearce	0.0	100.0	0.0
Maranoa	0.0	100.0	0.0
Farrer	0.0	100.0	0.0
Wills	100.0	0.0	0.0
Groom	0.0	100.0	0.0
Kennedy	0.0	0.0	100.0
Wannon	0.0	100.0	0.0
O'Connor	0.0	100.0	0.0
Durack	0.0	100.0	0.0

Two 50/50 polls

Over the past 24 hours, we have seen three new polls:

• Essential at 50/50 moved a point in Labor's favour since the previous Essential poll
• AMR at 50/50 moved a point in the Coalition's favour since the previous AMR poll
• Lonergan at 48-52 in the Coalition's favour and a movement of two points to the Coalition since the previous Lonergan poll.

I will look at these polls more closely in my next update. 

Weekly aggregation

The first day of the 2013 election campaign saw opinion polls that were more favourable to the Coalition than Labor:

• Essential was unchanged at 49-51 in the Coalition's favour.
• Morgan had moved a point to the Coalition to be 49.5-50.5 in the Coalition's favour (using the preference flows from the 2010 election).
• Newspoll was unchanged at 48-52 in the Coalition's favour.
• ReachTEL has moved a point to the Coalition to be 48-52 in the Coalition's favour.

In aggregate, the polls are suggesting that Labor is at its lowest point since the restoration of Mr Rudd some five weeks ago.

At this point it's time for a caveat. The zero line in this chart is the average bias across the six polling houses I am tracking. You need to come to a view about where the actual level of systemic bias across the polls actually lies. At the 2010 Election (with a different set of pollsters), the population voting intention was about one percentage point more in the Coalition's favour than the pollster average (see here).

Unsurprisingly, an aggregated poll of 49.2 per cent TPP (on a universal swing basis) would see a small Coalition win.

However, as the 2010 campaign demonstrated, the opinion polls can move by at least three percentage points over a five week campaign. The 2013 election is still very much a contest.

Weekly aggregation

This week's polls:

• Galaxy was 50-50, which was a one point movement in Labor's favour.
• Essential was 49-51, which was the same as last week, but a one point movement to Labor on the pevious fortnight.
• Morgan was 50.5 to 49.5 (with preferences distributed as they were at the last election), which was a 1.5 point movement to the Coalition.

 All of which sees an aggregation that is largely unchanged on last week.

Weekly aggregation: Labor on 50.5 per cent

Three polls came out in the past 24 hours:

• Newspoll is at 50-50
• Morgan has Labor well in front at 52.5 to 47.5 (using the preferences flows from the last election)
• Essential has the Coalition well in front on 48-52

Graphically, this looks like.

Turning to the Bayesian aggregation.

Correction to weekly aggregation

Yesterday I excluded this week's Essential poll because I mistakenly thought the poll included some of Julia Gillard's prime ministership. A few people emailed me with the simple news: I was wrong. The one-week sample from Essential is solely from the second Rudd period.

So this is me eating humble pie. I have added in the weekly Essential report into the dataset and re-run the Bayesian model. Rather than Labor a touch ahead (on 50.1 per cent TPP as I reported erronously yesterday), the model now has the Coalition on 50.2 per cent TPP. Not a lot of difference.

The Rudd Resurrection Effect is looking like 5.6 per cent. Still substantial, and still a potential game changer.

A uniform national swing has us back at the hung Parliament. However, as we noted yesterday, the swing to Labor is unlikely to be uniform. Everyone expects a larger swing in Queensland where Coalition seats would fall in quick succession.

Weekly aggregation

While the gender splits in yesterday's Nielsen poll were unfavourable for the government. The splits in the most recent Morgan poll were favourable. According to Morgan:

Analysis by Gender this week shows both genders swinging towards the ALP but with a wide divergence between men and women. Women are now evenly split on a two party preferred basis with the ALP (50%, up 4%) level with the L-NP (50%, down 4%) while men still strongly favour the L-NP (56.5%, down 2%) cf. ALP (43.5%, up 2%).

One of the reasons I aggregate polls is to filter out the noise and reveal the underlying signal. My suspicion is that the most recent movement to the Coalition in Nielsen, and the recent movement to Labor in Morgan are both reflective of the normal variability in polling data. Behind the stochastic perturbations from individual polling houses, I suspect the underlying population voting intention parameter is largely unchanged on last week.

While the poll aggregation (see below) is better news for the Government than a plain-face reading of yesterday's Nielsen poll, it still points to a comprehensive loss at the September election.

 

Weekly aggregation