From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age. This is inside politics. I'm Jacqueline Maley. It's Friday, April 25th. This week we're doing a special podcast about our complicated relationship with political poles. As journalists, we like them because maybe, just maybe, they can tell us something about what voters are really thinking. But we are a bit wary of them, too, especially after the federal election in 2019 where the polls were wrong. That caused a massive rethink in how polling is done and how we in the media rely on it. So let's get into it. How are polls actually conducted? How are participants recruited? How are the questions formulated? And are they right this time around? Today, as always, we are joined by our chief political correspondent David Crowe. And today our special guest is Jim Read, who conducts the Resolve Political Monitor poll for our papers. Welcome, both.

From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age. This is inside politics. I'm Jacqueline Maley. It's Friday, April 25th. This week we're doing a special podcast about our complicated relationship with political poles. As journalists, we like them because maybe, just maybe, they can tell us something about what voters are really thinking. But we are a bit wary of them, too, especially after the federal election in 2019 where the polls were wrong. That caused a massive rethink in how polling is done and how we in the media rely on it. So let's get into it. How are polls actually conducted? How are participants recruited? How are the questions formulated? And are they right this time around? Today, as always, we are joined by our chief political correspondent David Crowe. And today our special guest is Jim Read, who conducts the Resolve Political Monitor poll for our papers. Welcome, both.

Thanks. Great to be back on.

Thanks. Great to be back on.

And it's great to be here. And it's also really good to be face to face in in the studio, isn't it?

And it's great to be here. And it's also really good to be face to face in in the studio, isn't it?

I know it's so old school, I love it. And we're being filmed, so everybody's on their best behaviour. Jim, I want to start with you. First. We're going to do a deep dive into polling and how it works, what it's looking like for this election. But can you just talk to us a little bit about how the sausage is made? What exactly is a poll? How do you find the people and how do you make sure that the sample is representative?

I know it's so old school, I love it. And we're being filmed, so everybody's on their best behaviour. Jim, I want to start with you. First. We're going to do a deep dive into polling and how it works, what it's looking like for this election. But can you just talk to us a little bit about how the sausage is made? What exactly is a poll? How do you find the people and how do you make sure that the sample is representative?

Sure, there's the the how the poll is done, but also the why. I guess the why we do polling is which dictates the how is that we really want to inform readers and listeners about what's going on and hopefully inform the commentary. So it's not just one person's opinion, you know, there's a sort of safety in numbers, if you like, by by assessing public opinion. So it's important that we get it right. And the way you do that in research is by asking the right questions of the right people in the right way. And that's the same with any market research, regardless of whether it's political polling, you know, so the the first thing we do is make sure we're asking the right people. And increasingly we're doing that with online research panels rather than calling people up. And that gives us a pretty cost effective way of getting to a representative bunch of people nationally. And we set minimum quotas by state, by area, by age, by gender. So we make sure we've got a good bunch of people and we can, you know, fiddle about with the back end a little bit with what we call weighting factors. So if we're slightly down on females, for example, we may upweight them a little bit in our sample. So it's representative. And then we asked them the right questions in the right way. So you know very obviously that's vote. But also we go a bit deeper into some of those diagnostic measures like what issues are important. How committed are you in your vote. How likely are you to change? What do you think of the leaders? What do you think of this policy, that policy, etc.? And I think that's one of the great strengths of our approach is we we go deeper and talk about policy and issues and events, and we've got very particular ways, for example, of asking vote. Um, after the 2019 polling episode, we came in and we thought, you know, how do we change this? And one of the major things, I guess, that we did is to take out an undecided option. So most polls give an undecided option. We took that out right. Simply because it doesn't appear on the ballot paper. So we thought let's you know, let's emulate the real decision as it is in the in the election box.

Sure, there's the the how the poll is done, but also the why. I guess the why we do polling is which dictates the how is that we really want to inform readers and listeners about what's going on and hopefully inform the commentary. So it's not just one person's opinion, you know, there's a sort of safety in numbers, if you like, by by assessing public opinion. So it's important that we get it right. And the way you do that in research is by asking the right questions of the right people in the right way. And that's the same with any market research, regardless of whether it's political polling, you know, so the the first thing we do is make sure we're asking the right people. And increasingly we're doing that with online research panels rather than calling people up. And that gives us a pretty cost effective way of getting to a representative bunch of people nationally. And we set minimum quotas by state, by area, by age, by gender. So we make sure we've got a good bunch of people and we can, you know, fiddle about with the back end a little bit with what we call weighting factors. So if we're slightly down on females, for example, we may upweight them a little bit in our sample. So it's representative. And then we asked them the right questions in the right way. So you know very obviously that's vote. But also we go a bit deeper into some of those diagnostic measures like what issues are important. How committed are you in your vote. How likely are you to change? What do you think of the leaders? What do you think of this policy, that policy, etc.? And I think that's one of the great strengths of our approach is we we go deeper and talk about policy and issues and events, and we've got very particular ways, for example, of asking vote. Um, after the 2019 polling episode, we came in and we thought, you know, how do we change this? And one of the major things, I guess, that we did is to take out an undecided option. So most polls give an undecided option. We took that out right. Simply because it doesn't appear on the ballot paper. So we thought let's you know, let's emulate the real decision as it is in the in the election box.

That certainly makes sense. David, how do you use polls? I mean, you report the polls that we publish the Resolve Political Monitor polls, but how do you use them more broadly in your work.

That certainly makes sense. David, how do you use polls? I mean, you report the polls that we publish the Resolve Political Monitor polls, but how do you use them more broadly in your work.

Really as a way to find out the mood of the electorate across a whole range of fronts. And so we ask the personal questions because we're interested in how people view the performance of the Prime minister and the opposition leader. Sometimes we've asked questions about the likeability of different leaders. We're always conscious of asking a question as pointed as possible about an issue that's running in the community, whether it's Donald Trump or whether it's health policy or education policy and so forth. So we're looking for ways to really explain to our readers what the mood of the electorate is, because each of us can can be in our own bubble in politics in a way, because sometimes there's a self-reinforcing thing that happens in communities where you you're more inclined to read the stories that reinforce your own opinion. So sometimes we well, we we can use the poll to reflect a better sense of what the wider community feels. And sometimes this leads to polling stories that people disagree with. You know, if if Peter Dutton is making inroads into Labour support by by seizing on complaints about the cost of living. Our polling reflects that. And that's an important sort of statement about where the community is at. And it counters some of the spin that might be coming out of Canberra. Actually, it's it serves quite a useful function in that way.

Really as a way to find out the mood of the electorate across a whole range of fronts. And so we ask the personal questions because we're interested in how people view the performance of the Prime minister and the opposition leader. Sometimes we've asked questions about the likeability of different leaders. We're always conscious of asking a question as pointed as possible about an issue that's running in the community, whether it's Donald Trump or whether it's health policy or education policy and so forth. So we're looking for ways to really explain to our readers what the mood of the electorate is, because each of us can can be in our own bubble in politics in a way, because sometimes there's a self-reinforcing thing that happens in communities where you you're more inclined to read the stories that reinforce your own opinion. So sometimes we well, we we can use the poll to reflect a better sense of what the wider community feels. And sometimes this leads to polling stories that people disagree with. You know, if if Peter Dutton is making inroads into Labour support by by seizing on complaints about the cost of living. Our polling reflects that. And that's an important sort of statement about where the community is at. And it counters some of the spin that might be coming out of Canberra. Actually, it's it serves quite a useful function in that way.

Yeah. It's a corrective to political spin. Jim, how do you find the people that you poll and do you pay them?

Yeah. It's a corrective to political spin. Jim, how do you find the people that you poll and do you pay them?

We do. Usually when they're collected by online polls, they're usually offered an incentive for their time. We sometimes also mix a bit of telephone polling in with that, simply because we find that if you want to, you know, be as inclusive as possible. There are certain people, you know, for example, the, you know, people aged over 80, um, you know, younger people with better things to do or more affluent groups who simply don't go on online panels, or at least not in the numbers that you'd like. So targeting them with mobile phone calls and other things, you know, helps to to balance that. But certainly with online panels, it's pretty normal that you provide an incentive for, for their time. Um, the great thing about online panels is they're very easy to reach, but they're online panels and online panels. So the most important thing is that they're recruited properly, because if they're just a sort of opt in consumer panel, I think you tend to get skews and biases in there. And I think that was part of the 2019 problem with the polls that were around then. The best polls are the ones where you recruit them randomly off the back of telephone surveys and other things like that, and you get a random sample of people.

We do. Usually when they're collected by online polls, they're usually offered an incentive for their time. We sometimes also mix a bit of telephone polling in with that, simply because we find that if you want to, you know, be as inclusive as possible. There are certain people, you know, for example, the, you know, people aged over 80, um, you know, younger people with better things to do or more affluent groups who simply don't go on online panels, or at least not in the numbers that you'd like. So targeting them with mobile phone calls and other things, you know, helps to to balance that. But certainly with online panels, it's pretty normal that you provide an incentive for, for their time. Um, the great thing about online panels is they're very easy to reach, but they're online panels and online panels. So the most important thing is that they're recruited properly, because if they're just a sort of opt in consumer panel, I think you tend to get skews and biases in there. And I think that was part of the 2019 problem with the polls that were around then. The best polls are the ones where you recruit them randomly off the back of telephone surveys and other things like that, and you get a random sample of people.

And you make sure that they're sort of serious people who are going to take the exercise seriously. I mean, how do you do that? And just, you know, you don't have some young kid, you know, yeah, a donkey vote or.

And you make sure that they're sort of serious people who are going to take the exercise seriously. I mean, how do you do that? And just, you know, you don't have some young kid, you know, yeah, a donkey vote or.

You know, it's one of the things as a pollster sort of keeps you awake at night. I guess so. We, you know, the best polls. And I'm sure there are lots of polls, not just mine do this, but you have very rigorous quality control and security checks. So you make sure things aren't bots or AI by doing little, you know, those little checks that we're all used to and you do internal consistency checks. So you might ask the same question twice, right? You know, throughout the survey. And if they answer differently between those two times you start to get a bit suspicious.

You know, it's one of the things as a pollster sort of keeps you awake at night. I guess so. We, you know, the best polls. And I'm sure there are lots of polls, not just mine do this, but you have very rigorous quality control and security checks. So you make sure things aren't bots or AI by doing little, you know, those little checks that we're all used to and you do internal consistency checks. So you might ask the same question twice, right? You know, throughout the survey. And if they answer differently between those two times you start to get a bit suspicious.

Yeah, right. The voice referendum was an interesting example of, I think, the use of polling and the rigorous way in which it was done. Jim's work showed by the middle of 2023 that the majority were against the indigenous voice. And this was a very uncomfortable finding for people in the indigenous community and in labor. About. And I often think back to that moment and think because the polling became very consistent all the way through to the actual referendum. And I think back on that and wonder why people didn't act on the signal would have been a hard thing for people to do to say, okay, this is clearly headed for defeat. So we're going to have to come up with a different proposal to take to the referendum. For instance, take out. Putting the voice into the Constitution and maybe just focusing on recognition instead. But I often think back to the polling at that time and wonder about whether a different pathway could have been found, given what the poll was showing.

Yeah, right. The voice referendum was an interesting example of, I think, the use of polling and the rigorous way in which it was done. Jim's work showed by the middle of 2023 that the majority were against the indigenous voice. And this was a very uncomfortable finding for people in the indigenous community and in labor. About. And I often think back to that moment and think because the polling became very consistent all the way through to the actual referendum. And I think back on that and wonder why people didn't act on the signal would have been a hard thing for people to do to say, okay, this is clearly headed for defeat. So we're going to have to come up with a different proposal to take to the referendum. For instance, take out. Putting the voice into the Constitution and maybe just focusing on recognition instead. But I often think back to the polling at that time and wonder about whether a different pathway could have been found, given what the poll was showing.

I mean, that was one example where the polling was spot on. Previously, we've had examples where the polling has been very misleading. So I'm talking about 2019 election, which obviously showed that Labour under Bill shorten was going to win government, and they most certainly did not to the extent where Scott Morrison called it, you know, a miracle.

I mean, that was one example where the polling was spot on. Previously, we've had examples where the polling has been very misleading. So I'm talking about 2019 election, which obviously showed that Labour under Bill shorten was going to win government, and they most certainly did not to the extent where Scott Morrison called it, you know, a miracle.

I have always believed in miracles.

I have always believed in miracles.

So what happened? Why didn't the polling pick up the miracle?

So what happened? Why didn't the polling pick up the miracle?

Well, I think there's really no excuse for it, because we had polls that were published on the Friday and even the Saturday. You know, we were saying the opposite result. The results were a few percent out. You know, it just it became very important because they called the the result the outcome incorrectly, I think. But it's not unusual for, for for polls to be a few percent. The most important thing is that it's within your margin of error, which is usually a couple of percent. And therefore we usually get it right. I think the polling industry did a lot of navel gazing and a lot of soul searching after that resolve was brought in, partly because of that, you know, after that 2019 result and we've, you know, had a pretty good record since then. We've done, I think, four elections in a referendum for the age and the SM. So, you know, which is proven to be accurate within our margins of error. To be fair to other pollsters, we didn't have those legacy issues of, you know, using a certain panel, using a certain question format and having those trends. So we we were able to start afresh. But I think the other thing we made a conscious effort to do was to look afresh at the vote question. And one of the things, because the polls were saying a certain thing right up until Election day, one of the uncertainties was where the 5 or 10% undecided actually went on the day. So they usually excluded from polls in their in their voting result. And so we've decided to get rid of that. And we forced people, much like when they go into the voting booth and they're forced to tick an option or, you know, scribble a message on the vote paper and spoil it, or just do a donkey vote, we allow them to do that same thing in our in our vote choice. And regardless of, you know, us usually doing a poll about a week out from from Election day, it's still proven to be pretty accurate. I think really because of that.

Well, I think there's really no excuse for it, because we had polls that were published on the Friday and even the Saturday. You know, we were saying the opposite result. The results were a few percent out. You know, it just it became very important because they called the the result the outcome incorrectly, I think. But it's not unusual for, for for polls to be a few percent. The most important thing is that it's within your margin of error, which is usually a couple of percent. And therefore we usually get it right. I think the polling industry did a lot of navel gazing and a lot of soul searching after that resolve was brought in, partly because of that, you know, after that 2019 result and we've, you know, had a pretty good record since then. We've done, I think, four elections in a referendum for the age and the SM. So, you know, which is proven to be accurate within our margins of error. To be fair to other pollsters, we didn't have those legacy issues of, you know, using a certain panel, using a certain question format and having those trends. So we we were able to start afresh. But I think the other thing we made a conscious effort to do was to look afresh at the vote question. And one of the things, because the polls were saying a certain thing right up until Election day, one of the uncertainties was where the 5 or 10% undecided actually went on the day. So they usually excluded from polls in their in their voting result. And so we've decided to get rid of that. And we forced people, much like when they go into the voting booth and they're forced to tick an option or, you know, scribble a message on the vote paper and spoil it, or just do a donkey vote, we allow them to do that same thing in our in our vote choice. And regardless of, you know, us usually doing a poll about a week out from from Election day, it's still proven to be pretty accurate. I think really because of that.

Um, well, I mean, we're going to we're going to find out in nine days, aren't we? Um, Jim, in the interest of transparency, can you tell us more about the relationship between your company resolve strategic polling and whoever commissions the polling, Like our newspaper, newspapers. I mean, what are the expectations of you from The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald? And how do you make sure that the sort of final set of questions doesn't accidentally or inadvertently reflect somebody's bias along the way?

Um, well, I mean, we're going to we're going to find out in nine days, aren't we? Um, Jim, in the interest of transparency, can you tell us more about the relationship between your company resolve strategic polling and whoever commissions the polling, Like our newspaper, newspapers. I mean, what are the expectations of you from The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald? And how do you make sure that the sort of final set of questions doesn't accidentally or inadvertently reflect somebody's bias along the way?

Well, again, I think there's safety in numbers. We're interviewing usually 1600 people. Sometimes it's more than that. Our last poll will be 2000 people. So as long as you pick that sample and analyse that sample carefully, I don't think it shouldn't be biased. I think also there's a how should I put it, an expectation of fidelity. So yes, we want interesting results. But they've also got to be balanced and fair and true. And I think one of the problems that that polling has in terms of, you know, fidelity and balance, or at least the perception of it, is that, you know, you might be any polling company is usually working for other entities as well, you know, industry bodies, companies, etc.. And there's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing illegal in that, but I think transparency is a big thing as well. So if you're a pollster and you have an interest in working for a company or an industry, as long as you declare that it allows people to, you know, decide what they make of the poll.

Well, again, I think there's safety in numbers. We're interviewing usually 1600 people. Sometimes it's more than that. Our last poll will be 2000 people. So as long as you pick that sample and analyse that sample carefully, I don't think it shouldn't be biased. I think also there's a how should I put it, an expectation of fidelity. So yes, we want interesting results. But they've also got to be balanced and fair and true. And I think one of the problems that that polling has in terms of, you know, fidelity and balance, or at least the perception of it, is that, you know, you might be any polling company is usually working for other entities as well, you know, industry bodies, companies, etc.. And there's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing illegal in that, but I think transparency is a big thing as well. So if you're a pollster and you have an interest in working for a company or an industry, as long as you declare that it allows people to, you know, decide what they make of the poll.

Jim's being very polite about the way it's all done, I think. Let's, um, we're very happy with using resolve. We did learn from the experience of 2019. Back then, the consensus, and there was a report done about this by some independent agency. After the 2019 election. The consensus across the polls seemed to be labor ahead, 5149. The actual result was the mirror image of that. For a lot of the polls, the difference was within the margin of error. But a lot of the focus on the two party preferred number boiling poles down to two numbers only created this impression of a Labour certainty, misleading impression. And one of the lessons for us out of that was let's not emphasize only those two numbers. So we've broadened the polling and we've tried to emphasize things like the primary vote for for the major parties, which is so important, especially in this fragmented electorate where about a third of the voters are not choosing Labour or Liberal, they're choosing all these other options. And so Labour and Liberal rely on the preferences. So this was really important. Jim is not working for any of the political parties. That's important to us as well. If there's any change to that, we would declare it so that everybody knows where they stand. And people have to bear in mind the margin of error for us, for Jim is 2.4%. So if it's 51, 49, remember the margin of error. It's real. But we're very happy with the polling because every month Jim is polling 1600 people. A lot of others are doing 1100 people or 1200 people, and their margin of error is greater because of that. You know, these are just the technical things where we've got to be as good as we can, but we acknowledge that it is not as precise as perfectionists might like, and it's not a predictor. It's a poll of a particular view across the electorate at a point in time, like last weekend, not May 3rd.

Jim's being very polite about the way it's all done, I think. Let's, um, we're very happy with using resolve. We did learn from the experience of 2019. Back then, the consensus, and there was a report done about this by some independent agency. After the 2019 election. The consensus across the polls seemed to be labor ahead, 5149. The actual result was the mirror image of that. For a lot of the polls, the difference was within the margin of error. But a lot of the focus on the two party preferred number boiling poles down to two numbers only created this impression of a Labour certainty, misleading impression. And one of the lessons for us out of that was let's not emphasize only those two numbers. So we've broadened the polling and we've tried to emphasize things like the primary vote for for the major parties, which is so important, especially in this fragmented electorate where about a third of the voters are not choosing Labour or Liberal, they're choosing all these other options. And so Labour and Liberal rely on the preferences. So this was really important. Jim is not working for any of the political parties. That's important to us as well. If there's any change to that, we would declare it so that everybody knows where they stand. And people have to bear in mind the margin of error for us, for Jim is 2.4%. So if it's 51, 49, remember the margin of error. It's real. But we're very happy with the polling because every month Jim is polling 1600 people. A lot of others are doing 1100 people or 1200 people, and their margin of error is greater because of that. You know, these are just the technical things where we've got to be as good as we can, but we acknowledge that it is not as precise as perfectionists might like, and it's not a predictor. It's a poll of a particular view across the electorate at a point in time, like last weekend, not May 3rd.

Yeah. How do we make sure that the polls serve a democratic purpose or a journalistic purpose? And they're not just a horse race, you know, almost for their entertainment value.

Yeah. How do we make sure that the polls serve a democratic purpose or a journalistic purpose? And they're not just a horse race, you know, almost for their entertainment value.

It's really hard because I get feedback from people saying, why aren't you writing about more about policy? But when I write about polls, there's huge engagement. And just to be really frank about this, when I write about polls, I get more feedback from politicians than I do when I write about policy.

It's really hard because I get feedback from people saying, why aren't you writing about more about policy? But when I write about polls, there's huge engagement. And just to be really frank about this, when I write about polls, I get more feedback from politicians than I do when I write about policy.

The same politicians who say that they never look at the polls, they don't read the polls. The only poll that counts is the one on Election day.

The same politicians who say that they never look at the polls, they don't read the polls. The only poll that counts is the one on Election day.

Breaking news.

Breaking news.

Yep.

Yep.

I mean, this is the thing. They're deeply engaged in this stuff because they're professional politicians and they've they've worked with numbers all their professional lives. And it's all about the numbers. So they're deeply invested. When we say something one side doesn't like, they let us know. They think the poll's wrong. But over time, you know, we're creating a or providing a consistent picture of where people are at. And the most important thing is the trend. We found the trend against the government when the cost of living was biting. And certainly this year we've found a trend toward the government as Election Day gets closer. This is this is the trend to watch.

I mean, this is the thing. They're deeply engaged in this stuff because they're professional politicians and they've they've worked with numbers all their professional lives. And it's all about the numbers. So they're deeply invested. When we say something one side doesn't like, they let us know. They think the poll's wrong. But over time, you know, we're creating a or providing a consistent picture of where people are at. And the most important thing is the trend. We found the trend against the government when the cost of living was biting. And certainly this year we've found a trend toward the government as Election Day gets closer. This is this is the trend to watch.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And we've I think, you know, just to pick up on your point there about the two party preferred vote, we have tried to avoid that that horse race. And we have a particular way, I think, of looking at vote where we concentrate on primary vote, because there are a lot of minor party and independent candidates that, you know, make up around a third of the primary vote. Now, so the way we think about vote is that it's a measure, and it's a measure that doesn't move around a lot. So we we like to concentrate on policy and, and other things. But we do report it and we have to report it. Unless there's a leadership change it doesn't move around too much. But it is a very handy measure over time of the health of the parties, including the Greens and Independents and One Nation and other things. Two party preferred the binary measure kind of masks that. So we've we've treated though as an opinion measure for the vast majority of the term. When we get closer to the election, we start to talk more about two party preferred to to say, you know, this is where the the position is because otherwise you, you have people working out what seats would change hands from a two party preferred result, you know, two years out from an election.

And we've I think, you know, just to pick up on your point there about the two party preferred vote, we have tried to avoid that that horse race. And we have a particular way, I think, of looking at vote where we concentrate on primary vote, because there are a lot of minor party and independent candidates that, you know, make up around a third of the primary vote. Now, so the way we think about vote is that it's a measure, and it's a measure that doesn't move around a lot. So we we like to concentrate on policy and, and other things. But we do report it and we have to report it. Unless there's a leadership change it doesn't move around too much. But it is a very handy measure over time of the health of the parties, including the Greens and Independents and One Nation and other things. Two party preferred the binary measure kind of masks that. So we've we've treated though as an opinion measure for the vast majority of the term. When we get closer to the election, we start to talk more about two party preferred to to say, you know, this is where the the position is because otherwise you, you have people working out what seats would change hands from a two party preferred result, you know, two years out from an election.

Yeah. Too far, which is. Yeah.

Yeah. Too far, which is. Yeah.

Which is, which is silly.

Which is, which is silly.

Yeah.

Yeah.

There's a there's a great jazz standard. It don't mean a thing. It ain't got that swing. And I always think of that tune when I write in my stories. There's no such thing as a uniform swing. Um, I kind of hum it to myself because you cannot apply the national 52, 48 or 51, 49 to the seat of Chisholm in Melbourne, or the seat of Bennelong in Sydney. It does not work that way.

There's a there's a great jazz standard. It don't mean a thing. It ain't got that swing. And I always think of that tune when I write in my stories. There's no such thing as a uniform swing. Um, I kind of hum it to myself because you cannot apply the national 52, 48 or 51, 49 to the seat of Chisholm in Melbourne, or the seat of Bennelong in Sydney. It does not work that way.

I know, and I think sometimes when we're reporting federal politics, particularly from Canberra, we we forget about the local politics is everything. And, you know, seat to seat is is the only game in town. I just want to ask you both about how polling can affect the democratic process itself or can affect opinion. So, you know, it's supposed to be an objective measure. But sometimes, um, polls, if they go a certain way, will actually affect the way that people vote. And sometimes the parties will take pride in their underdog status or claim their underdog status in order to get ahead. I mean, what do we sort of do with that? Is that is that a risk?

I know, and I think sometimes when we're reporting federal politics, particularly from Canberra, we we forget about the local politics is everything. And, you know, seat to seat is is the only game in town. I just want to ask you both about how polling can affect the democratic process itself or can affect opinion. So, you know, it's supposed to be an objective measure. But sometimes, um, polls, if they go a certain way, will actually affect the way that people vote. And sometimes the parties will take pride in their underdog status or claim their underdog status in order to get ahead. I mean, what do we sort of do with that? Is that is that a risk?

Um, isn't there a scientific principle where the where the process of the experiment can affect the outcome?

Um, isn't there a scientific principle where the where the process of the experiment can affect the outcome?

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. Exactly.

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. Exactly.

The quantum observer.

The quantum observer.

Yeah. But okay, so I was talking to somebody in the union movement recently who made the point that labor is doing better, not just based on what we're finding with resolve, but also based on the union movement's own polling. Yeah. Does that then lead some people to think, oh, Labor's going to be in, I'll vote green. Yeah. Yes. That's a factor for some people. So there is there is an impact. But the alternative is to not ask, what is that? Don't ask, don't tell. You know, like, let's not ask people because it may influence people's judgment. Well, influencing people's view of politics is kind of what journalism is often about.

Yeah. But okay, so I was talking to somebody in the union movement recently who made the point that labor is doing better, not just based on what we're finding with resolve, but also based on the union movement's own polling. Yeah. Does that then lead some people to think, oh, Labor's going to be in, I'll vote green. Yeah. Yes. That's a factor for some people. So there is there is an impact. But the alternative is to not ask, what is that? Don't ask, don't tell. You know, like, let's not ask people because it may influence people's judgment. Well, influencing people's view of politics is kind of what journalism is often about.

We can't help it sometimes.

We can't help it sometimes.

Just reporting.

Just reporting.

What happens. Yeah, it is an interesting one, I think. What do you think on that point, Jim? That sort of idea of a feedback loop, because it must also affect the parties psychologically, even though they don't want to claim the win, if they know that the polls are going their way and their internal polling is going their way, they get a pep in their step. And you can see that happening in the Labour campaign.

What happens. Yeah, it is an interesting one, I think. What do you think on that point, Jim? That sort of idea of a feedback loop, because it must also affect the parties psychologically, even though they don't want to claim the win, if they know that the polls are going their way and their internal polling is going their way, they get a pep in their step. And you can see that happening in the Labour campaign.

Yeah, certainly. Um, Anthony Albanese has, um, you know, seemed a lot more confident. I think, you know, partly that's, you know, his position in the polls, I guess, but but also just running a, you know, a very decent campaign, a disciplined campaign. So they're on the ascendancy, if you like. But I think, you know, just reiterating really what David said, an informed electorate Is an electorate that's ready to vote, and we're just part of the informing process. Reading through some of the reader comments of of David's stories is, you know, which I occasionally do the most wonderful comments or I didn't know people thought this way, oh, I'll have to go and research this, etc.. So, you know, informing people about what's going on is important and, you know, you can't get around that. There's there's feedback loops everywhere. So you speak to your family, your friends about what's going on in the election. That's exactly the same thing as a poll. So I have no issue with that. The issue is, if polling were to get it wrong, there's only one thing worse than having no polling as a political party. And that's having the wrong polling. That is, it's getting it wrong. For some reason you're getting a wrong steer rather than no steer. So I think as long as we maintain our accuracy and our fairness and our balance in the way we present things, then it's it adds to the democratic process, not detracts.

Yeah, certainly. Um, Anthony Albanese has, um, you know, seemed a lot more confident. I think, you know, partly that's, you know, his position in the polls, I guess, but but also just running a, you know, a very decent campaign, a disciplined campaign. So they're on the ascendancy, if you like. But I think, you know, just reiterating really what David said, an informed electorate Is an electorate that's ready to vote, and we're just part of the informing process. Reading through some of the reader comments of of David's stories is, you know, which I occasionally do the most wonderful comments or I didn't know people thought this way, oh, I'll have to go and research this, etc.. So, you know, informing people about what's going on is important and, you know, you can't get around that. There's there's feedback loops everywhere. So you speak to your family, your friends about what's going on in the election. That's exactly the same thing as a poll. So I have no issue with that. The issue is, if polling were to get it wrong, there's only one thing worse than having no polling as a political party. And that's having the wrong polling. That is, it's getting it wrong. For some reason you're getting a wrong steer rather than no steer. So I think as long as we maintain our accuracy and our fairness and our balance in the way we present things, then it's it adds to the democratic process, not detracts.

We're not going to put a poll on our front page on Election Day. You know, I don't see it as my role to try and predict the outcome on the day of the election. I'll comment on the outcome on election night. But in the final days of the election campaign, I want to report to readers what the leaders are saying on either side, what the policies are saying on either side. If there are any developments that are newsworthy in the actual campaign, rather than do polling on the Friday or Saturday, that says we expect the result to be this way or that way. Yeah. Because I think at that point, voters, you know, might want us to tell them where things are at in the competing propositions and they'll make up their own mind.

We're not going to put a poll on our front page on Election Day. You know, I don't see it as my role to try and predict the outcome on the day of the election. I'll comment on the outcome on election night. But in the final days of the election campaign, I want to report to readers what the leaders are saying on either side, what the policies are saying on either side. If there are any developments that are newsworthy in the actual campaign, rather than do polling on the Friday or Saturday, that says we expect the result to be this way or that way. Yeah. Because I think at that point, voters, you know, might want us to tell them where things are at in the competing propositions and they'll make up their own mind.

We do, however, have a new poll coming out next week, don't we? Which is going to be the last one before the final day. I just want to ask you both very quickly what the polls are showing now, like what our last poll has showed.

We do, however, have a new poll coming out next week, don't we? Which is going to be the last one before the final day. I just want to ask you both very quickly what the polls are showing now, like what our last poll has showed.

It's essentially very close to where we we were in 2022 after lots of ups and downs. You know, Albanese started with a very, you know, strong honeymoon, which lasted for about a year. Then the long term trend was Labour went down, down, down, down, down. Those rate rises started to bite. The cost of living was biting more generally, and the feedback we had in focus groups and respondent comments was that Labour looked, you know, distracted by the voice and other things and not acting on cost of living. So they really suffered from that. They lost a great deal of their vote. And for, you know, the start of this year, it looked like the coalition were in with a chance of actually, you know, forcing Labour to be a first term government. But we've had this huge bounce back. Labour have gone from a two party preferred deficit to I think in our last poll it was 53.5% lead over the coalition, a very slight swing to them, which would seem to indicate, you know, a majority Labour government at that snapshot. But, you know, within our margin of error, as David said, we should always look at the margin of error. There's also the chance of a minority Labour government in there. So the polls are basically we're essentially middle of the pack at the moment, and the polls are basically telling us that that's the state of play, majority or minority Labour government at the moment. But as we've seen in in recent times, a week is a very long time in politics. So let's see, we go where we go over the next week and a half.

It's essentially very close to where we we were in 2022 after lots of ups and downs. You know, Albanese started with a very, you know, strong honeymoon, which lasted for about a year. Then the long term trend was Labour went down, down, down, down, down. Those rate rises started to bite. The cost of living was biting more generally, and the feedback we had in focus groups and respondent comments was that Labour looked, you know, distracted by the voice and other things and not acting on cost of living. So they really suffered from that. They lost a great deal of their vote. And for, you know, the start of this year, it looked like the coalition were in with a chance of actually, you know, forcing Labour to be a first term government. But we've had this huge bounce back. Labour have gone from a two party preferred deficit to I think in our last poll it was 53.5% lead over the coalition, a very slight swing to them, which would seem to indicate, you know, a majority Labour government at that snapshot. But, you know, within our margin of error, as David said, we should always look at the margin of error. There's also the chance of a minority Labour government in there. So the polls are basically we're essentially middle of the pack at the moment, and the polls are basically telling us that that's the state of play, majority or minority Labour government at the moment. But as we've seen in in recent times, a week is a very long time in politics. So let's see, we go where we go over the next week and a half.

I talked to a Labour MP the other day who said, I'm worried that we're getting complacent and the polls are telling us we're ahead. And you know, we shouldn't take that for granted because he was seeing people going into the early voting booths still grumpy about the cost of living. And I think that's worth mentioning. We don't just ask about leaders and, you know, primary vote when we ask who's better to keep the cost of living low? Labour were way behind on that 2 or 3 months ago. Now, 30% say Labour and Albanese are best to keep the cost of living low and 30%, say Coalition and Peter Dutton. So it's now neck and neck on that key question. But MPs are still on the government side, are getting this blowback on the cost of living still. So I think we've got to emphasise it's still close.

I talked to a Labour MP the other day who said, I'm worried that we're getting complacent and the polls are telling us we're ahead. And you know, we shouldn't take that for granted because he was seeing people going into the early voting booths still grumpy about the cost of living. And I think that's worth mentioning. We don't just ask about leaders and, you know, primary vote when we ask who's better to keep the cost of living low? Labour were way behind on that 2 or 3 months ago. Now, 30% say Labour and Albanese are best to keep the cost of living low and 30%, say Coalition and Peter Dutton. So it's now neck and neck on that key question. But MPs are still on the government side, are getting this blowback on the cost of living still. So I think we've got to emphasise it's still close.

It's still anybody's game. Yeah. We will have to check the price of the sausages on. The sausage sizzles on the day and see what's happening with inflation of the democracy sausage. Guys, thanks so much for joining us. That was really interesting. Thank you for coming in, Jim.

It's still anybody's game. Yeah. We will have to check the price of the sausages on. The sausage sizzles on the day and see what's happening with inflation of the democracy sausage. Guys, thanks so much for joining us. That was really interesting. Thank you for coming in, Jim.

Thanks for having.

Thanks for having.

Me. And good to see you in person.

Me. And good to see you in person.

David, wasn't it good? Thank you. Cheers.

David, wasn't it good? Thank you. Cheers.

Today's episode was produced by Julia Katzel with technical assistance from Josh Towers and Taylor Dent. Our executive producer is Tami Mills, and Tom McKendrick is our head of audio. To listen to our episodes as soon as they drop, follow Inside Politics on Apple, Spotify or anywhere you listen to your podcasts. And to stay up to date with all our election coverage and exclusives, visit The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald websites to support our journalism. Subscribe to us by visiting The Age or SMH. I'm Jacqueline Maley, thank you for listening.

Today's episode was produced by Julia Katzel with technical assistance from Josh Towers and Taylor Dent. Our executive producer is Tami Mills, and Tom McKendrick is our head of audio. To listen to our episodes as soon as they drop, follow Inside Politics on Apple, Spotify or anywhere you listen to your podcasts. And to stay up to date with all our election coverage and exclusives, visit The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald websites to support our journalism. Subscribe to us by visiting The Age or SMH. I'm Jacqueline Maley, thank you for listening.