Comments on: Same conclusion, different spin http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/ Observations from Carlton's Lone Classical Liberal Wed, 07 Jan 2009 07:04:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Andrew Leigh http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-1096 Andrew Leigh Thu, 26 Oct 2006 04:32:33 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2006/10/24/same-conclusion-different-spin/#comment-1096 David/Matt, you're quite right - poll estimates for minor parties have smaller standard errors than poll estimates for major parties. Apologies for causing confusion, and thanks for correcting my mistake. David/Matt, you’re quite right - poll estimates for minor parties have smaller standard errors than poll estimates for major parties. Apologies for causing confusion, and thanks for correcting my mistake.

]]> By: hc http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-1095 hc Tue, 24 Oct 2006 07:03:31 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2006/10/24/same-conclusion-different-spin/#comment-1095 Andrew, I think there is widespread popular opposition to pokies at all levels - 86% of Labor voters oppose them. Surely not a bad policy to at least emphasise. The Greens are doing well with this policy. The water policy is a dud and the free fares policy not that wonderful. Andrew, I think there is widespread popular opposition to pokies at all levels - 86% of Labor voters oppose them. Surely not a bad policy to at least emphasise. The Greens are doing well with this policy.

The water policy is a dud and the free fares policy not that wonderful.

]]> By: Matthew Finlay http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-1094 Matthew Finlay Tue, 24 Oct 2006 05:26:02 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2006/10/24/same-conclusion-different-spin/#comment-1094 David, you are correct that the standard error is lower for minor parties. That said, most polls are still not very good for estimating minor party vote shares as they have a much higher standard error relative to their size, i.e. it is much more likely for the Greens vote to be twice as large in reality than it is for the Liberal vote. Out of interest we can calculate the 95% CIs for each party (if all those pesky assumptions are met): Labour 42% David, you are correct that the standard error is lower for minor parties. That said, most polls are still not very good for estimating minor party vote shares as they have a much higher standard error relative to their size, i.e. it is much more likely for the Greens vote to be twice as large in reality than it is for the Liberal vote.

Out of interest we can calculate the 95% CIs for each party (if all those pesky assumptions are met):

Labour 42%

]]> By: Andrew Norton http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-1093 Andrew Norton Tue, 24 Oct 2006 04:49:53 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2006/10/24/same-conclusion-different-spin/#comment-1093 Harry - I'm not sure that pokies are a big vote switcher. After all, people are already against them and Labor has a comfortable lead. Governments can get away with many unpopular policies provided they are still better than the Opposition in a few major areas. Harry - I’m not sure that pokies are a big vote switcher. After all, people are already against them and Labor has a comfortable lead. Governments can get away with many unpopular policies provided they are still better than the Opposition in a few major areas.

]]> By: David Walsh http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-1092 David Walsh Tue, 24 Oct 2006 04:36:29 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2006/10/24/same-conclusion-different-spin/#comment-1092 [blockquote]Andrew Leigh Says: October 24th, 2006 at 10:33 am The 3.5% margin of error is calculated for a party with 50% of the vote. It [blockquote]Andrew Leigh Says:

October 24th, 2006 at 10:33 am
The 3.5% margin of error is calculated for a party with 50% of the vote. It

]]> By: hc http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-1091 hc Tue, 24 Oct 2006 04:22:23 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2006/10/24/same-conclusion-different-spin/#comment-1091 Andrew, I noticed the inconsistency in <i>The Age</i> report - the major point however was than 87% of voters (including 86% of Labor voters) support the anti-gambling stance of the Liberals. Pursuing this might turn the tables on Bracks. I commented on this here: http://kalimna.blogspot.com/2006/10/stunning-poll-on-pokies.html Andrew, I noticed the inconsistency in The Age report - the major point however was than 87% of voters (including 86% of Labor voters) support the anti-gambling stance of the Liberals. Pursuing this might turn the tables on Bracks.

I commented on this here:

http://kalimna.blogspot.com/2006/10/stunning-poll-on-pokies.html

]]> By: PollWatcher http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-1090 PollWatcher Tue, 24 Oct 2006 02:57:04 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2006/10/24/same-conclusion-different-spin/#comment-1090 p.s I'm guessing that Galaxy don't read out the Greens. I stand to be corrected. p.s I’m guessing that Galaxy don’t read out the Greens. I stand to be corrected.

]]> By: PollWatcher http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-1089 PollWatcher Tue, 24 Oct 2006 02:51:28 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2006/10/24/same-conclusion-different-spin/#comment-1089 I would wager that the difference in the Green numbers comes from the fact that ACNielsen reads them out and Galaxy doesn't. When the Greens are read out then the disaffected Labor vote goes Green on primary, then returns to Labor on 2PP. When Greens aren't read out disaffected Labor voters just go to the Coalition. The Greens received 9.8% at the last election - its implausible to think their vote will drop (although 13% is probably stretching it a bit as well). I would wager that the difference in the Green numbers comes from the fact that ACNielsen reads them out and Galaxy doesn’t.

When the Greens are read out then the disaffected Labor vote goes Green on primary, then returns to Labor on 2PP. When Greens aren’t read out disaffected Labor voters just go to the Coalition.

The Greens received 9.8% at the last election - its implausible to think their vote will drop (although 13% is probably stretching it a bit as well).

]]> By: Kim http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-1088 Kim Tue, 24 Oct 2006 02:40:50 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2006/10/24/same-conclusion-different-spin/#comment-1088 <a href="http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/24/political-links-post/" rel="nofollow">Trackback</a>. Trackback.

]]> By: Bring Back EP http://andrewnorton.info/2006/10/same-conclusion-different-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-1087 Bring Back EP Tue, 24 Oct 2006 02:32:28 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2006/10/24/same-conclusion-different-spin/#comment-1087 Is there someting in the water down there that makes people vote Green? Is there someting in the water down there that makes people vote Green?

]]>