In our development of our
Western Australian forecast, one thing I noticed was that state voting-intention polls (state polls from here on out) of WA tend to be quite favourable for the party in power. On a two-party-preferred (2pp) basis, the incumbent government in WA has tended to perform 1.8% worse in their election-day result as compared to their final pre-election polling: Western Australian state governments have tended to underperform their polling
Election Incumbent Polling avg. Result Error 1986 Labor 56% 54.1% -1.9% 1989 Labor 50.5% 47.6% -2.9% 1993 Labor 44.4% 44.5% +0.1% 1996 Coalition 56.5% 55.2% -1.3% 2001 Coalition 50% 47.1% -2.9% 2005 Labor 54% 52.3% -1.7% 2008 Labor 50% 48.1% -1.9% 2013 Liberal 59.5% 57.3% -2.2% 2017 Liberal 46% 44.5% -1.5% Average -1.8%
Polling averages and results refer to the incumbent government’s 2-party-preferred. Italicised polling averages refer to those where the pollsters did not produce their own 2pp estimate; the estimate listed here was calculated using the pollsters’ published first-preference vote and last-election preference flows. Credits to
Dr Kevin Bonham for providing us with his historical polling data.
Going back to 1986 (the first election we can find state voting-intention polls for WA), the incumbent has only outperformed their polling average on one election (1993). With just 9 state elections in our sample, might that be an artifact of the small sample size and noisy data?
Most state governments underperform their polling
Election State Incumbent Polling average Result Error 1986 WA Labor 56% 54.1% -1.9% 1989 WA Labor 50.5% 47.6% -2.9% 1992 QLD Labor 55% 53.7% -1.3% 1993 WA Labor 44.4% 44.5% 0.1% 1995 QLD Labor 51.5% 46.7% -4.8% 1996 WA Coalition 56.5% 55.2% -1.3% 2001 WA Coalition 50% 47.1% -2.9% 2004 QLD Labor 59% 55.5% -3.5% 2005 WA Labor 54% 52.3% -1.7% 2006 VIC Labor 54.7% 54.4% -0.3% 2006 QLD Labor 54% 55% 1% 2006 SA Labor 59% 56.8% -2.2% 2007 NSW Labor 55.2% 52.3% -2.9% 2008 WA Labor 50% 48.2% -1.8% 2009 QLD Labor 49.9% 50.9% 1% 2010 SA Labor 48% 48.4% 0.4% 2010 VIC Labor 48.9% 48.4% -0.5% 2011 NSW Labor 35.9% 35.8% -0.1% 2012 QLD Labor 39.1% 37.2% -1.9% 2013 WA Liberal 59.5% 57.3% -2.2% 2014 SA Labor 47.7% 47% -0.7% 2014 VIC Coalition 48.4% 48% -0.4% 2015 NSW Coalition 55.1% 54.3% -0.8% 2015 QLD LNP 50.1% 48.9% -1.2% 2017 QLD Labor 51.8% 51.3% -0.5% 2017 WA Liberal 46% 44.5% -1.5% 2018 SA Labor 50.8% 48.1% -2.7% 2018 VIC Labor 54.1% 57.3% 3.2% 2019 NSW Coalition 50.5% 52% 1.5% 2020 QLD Labor 51.5% 53.2% 1.7% Average -1%
Polling averages and results refer to the incumbent government’s 2-party-preferred. Italicised polling averages refer to those where the pollsters did not produce their own 2pp estimate; the estimate listed here was calculated using the pollsters’ published first-preference vote and last-election preference flows. Tasmania was excluded as they use a proportional system which doesn’t produce 2pp figures. Credits to
Dr Kevin Bonham for providing us with his historical polling data.
On average, state governments in states with single-winner lower houses have underperformed their polling by about 1%, doing so in just over two-thirds of state elections (23/30). This pattern is something which is definitely statistically significant (p < 0.005, using a
one-sample t-test); meaning that it’s very unlikely we could have gotten results like these if polls truly did not over/under-estimate the incumbent government’s 2pp.
So, case closed, right? We should adjust the polls we get for this tendency in our state election forecast, and reduce Labor’s chance of winning in WA by some fraction of a percentage point?
Well, looking back at the table, it seems that polling has actually underestimated the incumbent in the three most recent state elections (2018 VIC, 2019 NSW and 2020 QLD). In fact, it does seem like the skew to incumbents has been gradually decreasing over time, which is borne out in a simple graph:
Positive values means the incumbent over-performed on election day compared to their polling, while negative values mean the incumbent underperformed on election day compared to their polling.
While some of the correlation seems to be driven by the VIC 2018 outlier, it seems relatively clear that the polling skew to incumbents has been declining over time. In particular, I would note that the most recent pandemic general election in Australia (QLD 2020) saw the state’s Labor government overperform its polled 2pp by 1.5%. Furthermore, across the Tasman Sea, New Zealand’s Labor government (which went to re-election in a very similar position to where WA Labor is in today)
2 outperformed their final polls by about 4%. x
A further pattern in the polling errors is that the skew to incumbents tends to be slightly larger when an incumbent is ahead in the polling average:
However, the relationship here is not statistically significant (p = 0.314), meaning that this might well be an artifact of how few elections we have where the incumbent was behind in the final pre-election polling average (9). In particular, we have no precedent for the polling lead which WA Labor has amassed (> 10%) at time of writing, meaning that we have no idea if there will be any relationship between the size of their polling lead and possible polling skew to/against the incumbent.
I can think of a few hypotheses for a skew in either direction (warning: just hypotheses, not necessarily true):
Some voters like having checks and balances on the government of the day, and will vote for the other side if they sense that one party is going to win big. This isn’t impossible; note how Labor’s 2pp declined in the final weeks of the 2007 campaign (even though not much had changed), or how (at time of writing) the most Labor-leaning and 3rd most Labor-leaning states (Tas and SA) both have Liberal state governments, (I bring up Tas and SA because both seem to fly in the face of the federal drag theory) If this is the case, WA Labor will almost certainly lose a few percentage points off its vote on election day. However, this point doesn’t explain why recent state polling has become less likely to favour the incumbent; not to mention the polling error with the biggest skew against the incumbent is in VIC 2018, where the state Labor government was tipped for a hefty win anyway. Some issue with the representativeness of polling samples has been fixed/resolved/reversed itself. There’s really not much evidence to prove or disprove this, as we don’t have enough online vs robocall vs in-person phone polls to be certain of how the shifts in methodology have affected incumbent skew (especially given how little transparency there is in Australian polling). If it is correct, WA Labor might not see any drop-off on election day, and might even make a few gains (similar to how the LNP overperformed their polling against QLD Labor in 2012 by about 1 ~ 2% even though QLD Labor was already down by > 10%) The pandemic might make voters less willing to take a chance on a new government. This is a very specific explanation that only explains very recent incumbency skews (QLD 2020, NZ 2020); however, it does seem like incumbent governments are doing fairly well for themselves across the globe (full analysis coming later as part of our Pandemic Politics series) even on top of the polling surges they’ve gotten. If this is the case, WA Labor is likely to do about as well as their polling suggests, or perhaps even better.
Bringing this back to our WA state election forecast:
Given the fact that we don’t really know which of these hypotheses is most applicable to the 2021 WA state election, in developing the 2pp vote model, I opted to use a slightly different prior in our Bayesian updating process.
In our updating process, we use data collected from as wide a range as possible (e.g. all state polling) to form what is known as the
prior, or the “default” belief before new evidence is added into the mix. We then update this prior based on more evidence (for example, updating a prior about how skewed all state polling is to incumbents with polls specifically from WA) to get a posterior, or what our expectations should be with the new evidence included in.
Normally, our prior for how skewed state polls are would be calculated as a simple average of all state poll skews in our database. However, to reflect the uncertainty
3 as well as the statistically significant decline in incumbent skew (p = 0.01) I have opted to use a weighted average of state poll skews to calculate the prior instead, in which more weight is given to the polling skews of more recent elections. x
This produces a prior of +0.3% skew to incumbents instead of +1.0%; which means that after the Bayesian updating process we expect polls to only be skewed to the incumbent by +0.6% instead of +1.4%.
Obviously, if Labor massively underperforms its polling on election day, this decision will look rather silly, but I do think that it’s the right decision when considering current trends and the uncertainty in the electoral environment. Only time (and the voters of WA) will tell.