With 79% of enrolled voters counted nationally, “no” has won the Voice referendum by a 60.7–39.3 margin. “No” has easily won in every state and territory except the ACT.
Read more: Voice to Parliament referendum has been heavily defeated nationally and in all states
The Guardian reported Sunday that analyst Simon Jackman said that in polling booths where Indigenous Australians made up at least 50% of the population, there was an average 63% “yes” vote.
This is in line with a Resolve poll that had “yes” leading by 59–41 among Indigenous Australians, but well down on polls conducted early this year showing 80% “yes” support from the Indigenous.
In Lingiari, where 40 of the population is Indigenous, “no” leads by a 56–44 margin. Analyst Ben Raue said that remote booths, which are overwhelmingly Indigenous, voted “yes” by 73–27, but other areas of that seat, which are non-Indigenous, voted heavily “no”.
The large wins for “no” in Lingiari and other seats with high Indigenous populations are caused by non-Indigenous people in those seats voting heavily “no”.
Of 78 total Labor-held seats, the ABC has called 16 for “yes”, three where “yes” is currently ahead, two with “no” currently ahead and 57 called for “no”. Most Labor seats have substantial support for right-wing parties, so this doesn’t mean “no” won Labor voters.
The final Voice Newspoll, which gave “no” an accurate 20-point lead, had Labor voters supporting “yes” by 58–37 and Greens by 74–21, but Coalition voters were voting “no” by 81–15 and Other voters (which includes One Nation) by 69–21.
Modest “yes” support from Labor voters in most of their seats was overwhelmed by strong “no” voting from Coalition and other right-wing voters. Bradfield in New South Wales is the only Coalition-held seat to vote “yes”.
The final Newspoll also gave “yes” a 51–44 lead among those with a university education, but “no” led by 62–33 among TAFE/college educated and 62–31 among those without a tertiary education.
I have covered the education divide before and said that non-university educated people outside the cities are turning against the left. The major problem for “yes” is that they also heavily lost non-university educated people in the cities. But this divide explains the huge margins for “no” in rural seats, with 21 mostly rural seats giving “no” over 75%.
Read more: Will a continuing education divide eventually favour Labor electorally due to our big cities?
I previously covered a Resolve poll for Nine newspapers that was conducted September 22 to October 4 from a total sample of 4,728. “No” led by 56–44, understating the actual “no” margin. Additional questions on the Voice were asked of 3,116 respondents.
This poll found that key “no” campaigners in general had better net likeability ratings than key “yes” campaigners. The big exceptions were Peter Dutton, Pauline Hanson and Lidia Thorpe. Dutton and Thorpe are negatively perceived for reasons other than the Voice, and Thorpe was opposing the Voice from the left.
Labor improved in pre-referendum Newspoll as Dutton sank
A Newspoll, conducted October 4–12 from a sample of 2,638, gave Labor a 54–46 lead, a one-point gain for Labor since October 3–6. Primary votes were 36% Labor (up two), 35% Coalition (down one), 12% Greens (steady), 6% One Nation (up one) and 11% for all Others (down two).
Anthony Albanese’s ratings were 46% satisfied (up one) and 46% dissatisfied (steady), for a net zero approval. Dutton’s net approval fell five points to -18. Albanese led Dutton by 51–31 as better PM (50–33 previously).
Despite the heavy defeat for the Voice, Labor’s vote has held up well in the lead-up to this referendum. It will be interesting to see what happens on voting intentions after the referendum result.
Essential poll: Albanese’s ratings steady, Dutton down
Essential have not updated their voting intentions graph with the latest poll that was conducted October 11–15 from a national sample of 1,125. Albanese’s ratings were steady since September at 46% approve, 43% disapprove (net +3), while Dutton’s net approval dropped two points to -7.
Essential has a Voice question that had “no” ahead by 53–38, out from 49–43 in early October. But I will not be including that in my assessment of polls as it was released three days after referendum day.
Given four choices, 74% thought the government’s most important priority was cost of living, 15% climate change, 6% international relations and 5% workplace rights.
On the Israel-Palestine conflict, 64% thought Australia should stay out of it, 23% provide active assistance to Israel and 13% active assistance to Palestine.
By 57–20, respondents supported the UK’s plan to end smoking by raising the legal age of smoking by one year every year, so that those aged 14 or younger will never be able to legally buy cigarettes.
Victorian Resolve poll: Coalition gains but Labor still far ahead
A Victorian state Resolve poll for The Age, conducted with the federal Resolve polls in September and October from a sample of 1,103, gave Labor 39% of the primary vote (steady since August), the Coalition 32% (up four), 12% Greens (down one), 10% independents (down three) and 7% others (steady).
While Resolve doesn’t give a two party estimate until near elections, I estimate this poll would give Labor a 57–43 lead, a three-point gain for the Coalition since August.
New Labor Premier Jacinta Allan had a 38–19 lead over Liberal leader John Pesutto as preferred premier from the October sample of 553. Former premier Daniel Andrews had a 41–32 lead in September (sample 550), a drop from 44–29 in August.
By 58–19, respondents would support a Victorian inquiry into the state government’s handling of the COVID pandemic.
Liberal conservative alliance to replace authoritarian party in Poland
I covered Sunday’s Polish election for The Poll Bludger. Poland does not have a major centre-left party. The authoritarian incumbent Law and Justice was defeated by a liberal conservative alliance. Strong results for the far-right AfD at German state elections and national polls were also covered.
Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
