Australian federal election poll tracker: Labor v Coalition latest opinion polls results

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"2025 Australian Federal Election Poll Tracker: Current Insights on Party Support and Voter Demographics"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 8.0
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

As the 2025 Australian federal election draws closer, a variety of political polls are being conducted to gauge public sentiment towards the main parties, Labor and the Coalition, as well as independents and other smaller parties. A poll averaging model created by political scientists at the University of Sydney serves as the foundation for these assessments, taking into account factors such as sample sizes, historical results, and specific biases associated with different pollsters. This model aims to provide a clearer picture of party support while acknowledging the inherent uncertainties in polling data. The latest findings indicate that the combined primary vote share for Labor and the Coalition has reached a historic low of 68.5%, a significant drop from the 98% they collectively received as recently as 1951. Notably, nearly a third of voters opted for independents or other parties in the last election, highlighting a shift in the political landscape that traditional two-party support metrics may not fully capture.

The article also emphasizes the importance of demographic data in understanding voting intentions. Pollsters collect detailed information on respondents' age, sex, location, and education levels to create a representative sample of the Australian electorate. The data reveals varying levels of support for the major parties across different demographics, which can provide insights into changing political dynamics. The Guardian Australia's poll tracker utilizes a rolling average method to track these trends, acknowledging that demographic data may not always be consistent across polls. Importantly, the tracker does not predict election outcomes but rather aggregates public polling to reflect current voting intentions. By employing a 95% credibility interval, the tracker aims to convey the uncertainty inherent in polling, ensuring that users understand the potential variability in support for each party as the election approaches. This approach underscores the complexity of electoral forecasting and the evolving nature of Australian political preferences.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article provides a comprehensive overview of the current political landscape in Australia as the 2025 federal election approaches. It highlights the importance of polling data while acknowledging its inherent uncertainties. The details presented aim to inform the public about party support trends, particularly emphasizing the rise of independents and minor parties in the electoral system.

Purpose of the Article

The primary goal seems to be to inform readers about the shifting dynamics in Australian politics. The focus on polling data, particularly the decline of the traditional two-party system, suggests an attempt to raise awareness of the growing support for independents and smaller parties, which could influence voter behavior in the upcoming election.

Public Perception

By emphasizing the historical low in primary vote shares for Labor and the Coalition, the article may create a perception of a significant political shift. This could lead to increased engagement from voters who feel their preferences align more closely with independents or minor parties, potentially reshaping electoral strategies.

Information Omission

While the article provides valuable insights, it does not delve deeply into the reasons behind the decline of the major parties or the factors driving the rise of independents. This omission could lead to a lack of understanding among readers about the broader implications of these trends.

Manipulative Elements

The article's framing of the data could be seen as manipulative if it intentionally downplays the achievements of major parties or exaggerates the significance of independents. The use of polling averages and demographic breakdowns may also serve to highlight specific narratives while neglecting counterarguments.

Trustworthiness of the Information

The article appears to be grounded in credible polling methodologies, such as the model developed by political scientists at the University of Sydney. However, the inherent uncertainties in polling data mean that readers should approach the findings with caution, recognizing that they represent a snapshot rather than definitive outcomes.

Target Audience

The article seemingly targets politically engaged individuals, particularly those interested in electoral trends and the changing landscape of Australian politics. It may resonate more with younger voters or those with less traditional views who are seeking alternatives to the major parties.

Impact on Markets

While the article primarily addresses political trends, any significant shifts in public sentiment towards independents or minor parties could influence market stability, particularly in sectors closely tied to government policy. Stocks related to industries that are sensitive to political changes, such as healthcare, education, and renewable energy, may experience volatility based on electoral outcomes.

Global Relevance

The discussion of the Australian political landscape reflects broader trends seen in various democracies, where traditional party systems are being challenged by emerging movements. This context could resonate with global audiences as they observe similar shifts in political sentiments in their own countries.

Potential Use of AI

While it is unclear if AI was explicitly used in crafting this article, the structured presentation of polling data and trends suggests an analytical approach that could be enhanced by AI models. Algorithms could analyze vast datasets to identify trends and generate visual representations, potentially influencing the narrative conveyed in the article.

Overall, the article offers a useful overview of Australian political sentiments leading up to the 2025 election. However, readers should remain critical of the data presented and consider the broader context of these trends.

Unanalyzed Article Content

As the2025 Australian federal electionapproaches, political polls are coming thick and fast. This page will be regularly updated so you can track who is polling up, how the independents are faring and how the parties stand with different demographics.

This first chart is based on a poll averaging model developed by political scientists at the University of Sydney. It factors insample sizes, previous results and “house effects” (bias towards a party)of each pollster.

There is a lot of uncertainty in political polling and modelling and these charts show a range that likely contains the support for each party. You can read more in our methodology at the end of the page.

The next shows a timeline of the two-party preferred (2pp) vote since 2022:

Looking at two-party support alone can obscure one of the biggest stories of the last election: almost a third of votes were for independents and other parties.

The 68.5% primary votes share for Labor and the Coalition is anall time lowand the continuation of a steady decline since the two parties claimed 98% of votes in 1951.

The chart below shows the primary votes for Labor, theCoalition, Greens and others/independents. It is based on the same model as our main tracker, starting with the vote share at the last election. Use the drop-down menu to see what has changed over different periods since the election.

To get a sample that reflects the nation at large, pollsters collect a lot of demographic information, including age, sex, location and education.

Polling companies occasionally release two-party preferred measures for these sub-demographics.

The following charts use simple rolling averages to try to find the underlying trend in two-party support. There has been no adjustment for sample size, house effects, weighting or release date.

The first shows support by the age group of the respondent.

The next chart groups respondents by education – those with no tertiary education, those with a Tafe or technical education, and those with university education.

The chart below groups respondents by sex – male or female. As the numbers are rolling averages, they will not always add up to 100.

The final demographic category is state. Data is not available for all states, largely because of their size. Tasmania, for instance, makes up about 2% of the population. A representative sample of 1,000 Australians would have far too few Tasmanians to provide a robust estimate.

The final table shows the two-party preferred share for all of the polls that feed into our models.

What does Guardian Australia’s poll tracker actually do?

Most Australian political polls have a sample size of a little over 1,000 respondents. There’s only so much any one of these polls can tell you. And the fluctuations between polls and for the same pollster across time can often just be statistical noise.

The poll tracker pools all of the polls using a model developed by political scientists at the University of Sydney. It assumes political intentions yesterday are similar to today and today is like tomorrow, but with small random changes.

The model starts, and is anchored to, the actual 2022 election results. And it assumes polling organisations’ bias is fixed. This iswhat was observed in previous elections, such as in 2019.

Why does the polling model draw a line below Labor’s actual poll numbers (the circles) while the Coalition’s line goes right through their polling numbers?

As noted above - the model begins with the last election results and assumes voting intentions evolve over time. The model indicates the polls are overestimating the Labor vote. This patternwas also observedbetween the 2016 and 2019 elections. In that period the model was correcting for the pollsters’ systematic bias between those elections.

Is the Guardian Australia tracker a prediction of who is going to win the election?

No. It is simply an aggregation of the public polls. It is a snapshot in time of people’s stated voting intentions, which can change.

Why have we changed the poll tracker format/What is the range we are showing?

Every time we update the poll tracker the model runs thousands of simulations. The first version of this page only showed the average of these simulations – a single number. Our charts did include a credibility interval - sometimes also known as a margin of error. But highlighting just one number implied greater certainty than the data warranted.

The refresh to the page puts the emphasis on the credibility interval. We are using a 95% credibility interval - there is a 95% chance that the actual support for each party is inside this range. We are aiming toemphasise that there is a degree of uncertainty to both the results of any one poll and an aggregate of polls.

Why are we using a rolling average for some things instead of the same poll average model?

The demographic data is not consistent. Not every pollster releases demographic breakdowns, and the ones that do don’t necessarily release it with each poll. There can be months in between releases for some demographic variables, such as voting intention by level of education.

But this data is still useful and should be included in some form. Given we can’t model the data in the same way, we are instead using a simple rolling average to track it over time.

Notes and methods

The main poll tracker is based on work by Dr Luke Mansillo and Prof Simon Jackman. You can find their paperhere.

The model in different disciplines is called a hidden Markov model or a state space model and employs aKalman filteralgorithm that uses a series of measurements over time, including statistical noise and other inaccuracies, to produce estimates.

These types of models are often used in fields such as robotics, economics and medicine to create estimates from noisy measurements.

Each newly published poll is treated as a new measurement, with the model factoring in new data in the context of what has come before.

The model begins with (is anchored to) the vote share for each party at the last federal election.

Only polls with a defined sampling procedure, reported sample size and fielding dates have been included in our dataset. Polls are sliced over the days that they are in the field.

Sample sizes are adjusted to account for non-response, with effective sample size fed into the model.

The model calculates house effects for each pollster dynamically, by finding systematic differences to what would be expected, given the current average.

The two-party preferred vote is adjusted to remove unknowns or nonresponses, leaving only Labor and Coalition shares.

The model is run 1,000 times for each update

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian