What was wrong with the polls?

When you get poll figures the pollster generally excludes the undecided voters. This is because you have no way of knowing how they will vote, and therefore ignore them, or at the most note their percentage.

This has the effect of distributing them in proportion to how the rest of the sample is voting.

But what if they break heavily for one side or the other?

Say you have 90 per cent of a sample split 50/50 with 10 per cent undecided. If that 10 per cent splits 60/40, the end result will be 51/49. A 70/30 split will make the end result 52/48.

It is also difficult to know how many uncommitted voters there really are. A declared undecided voter may just be telling you the truth, while there may be others who express a preference, but change their minds before the election.

Add to that the tall poppy syndrome, where voters will adjust voting intention when they think a party is going to win too easily. It is quite possible that what we are really seeing here is a late swing, undetectable by any poll, apart from the one on the day.

Certainly, early on climate change was a bipartisan issue that reached into the Liberal voting bloc, but on the basis of our, as yet unpublished, exit poll, it had retreated, and the economy was a more important issue with right wing voters.

Climate change favoured Labor, and the economy the Libs. The issue top-of-mind will have an effect on how you vote.

It is much more likely therefore that undecided voters, and a late swing to the government, rather than problems with methodologies, explain the failure of the polls to predict the result on the day. As far as we know they may have reported voting intentions, as distinct from voting actuals, entirely accurately.

And then there was Labor’s arrogance and indolence. Bill Shorten pulled-up stumps early and went for a beer on Friday, while Morrison was still working hard, just as people were making their final decision. These visual images can have a real impact on voting intentions.

After all, this was an election with large votes for independents and minor parties because voters were unenthusiastic about either side (we know the polls were accurate enough on this last question) so it wouldn’t have taken much to shift a voter’s intention.

The future is uncertain, and no matter how many polls you take, it will still be uncertain. Blaming pollsters for failing to be fortunetellers says more about the state of political commentary in Australia than it does polling.

If we reported elections on the issues and policies, rather than as though they were horse races, polling would be less relevant. But that would be too hard for journalists and politicians who love the false security of round numbers.