After giving Labor its worst poll result of the Rudd government era a month ago, ACNielsen has now returned to the field. This month’s survey has Labor’s lead up from 52-48 to 56-44, from primary votes of 46 per cent for Labor (up five) and 39 per cent for the Coalition (down three). Remarkably, both leaders’ approval ratings are up 10 points, Kevin Rudd’s to a personal best 71 per cent and Malcolm Turnbull’s to 55 per cent. However, Rudd has blown out to big lead on preferred leader, 64 per cent (up eight) to 26 per cent (down seven). Further detail on attitudes to the financial crisis from Michelle Grattan at The Age.
UPDATE: The weekly Essential Research survey has an unusually sharp two-point move in favour of Labor, who now lead 59-41 on two-party preferred. Kevin Rudd’s lead as preferred prime minister has also blown out to 55-20 from 45-25 a month ago. Interestingly, respondents are more confident the economy can withstand the financial crisis than they were a week ago. Also included are questions on the government stimulus package, the emissions trading scheme and more.
1,812 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 32 33 [34] 35 36 … 37 » Show All
as Latho sez ” the public is always right!”.
Incidentally, that a freefall decline on PPM for Talcum.
61-39: Goodness me. Vox populi, vox Dei, eh GP?
Are we getting a Newspoll tonight as well as Essential research?
Apparently so.
I reckon high 50’s for Labor in Newspoll. 57 or 58.
“Preferred prime minister has gone from 45-25 on 22/9 to 55-20 last week to 60-19 this week.”
So the punters once again see through the rubbish peddled by allbull, the oo and various other media dullards who were trying to ramp up a major crisis on the bank G/- issue for short term political gain.
Just when you thought common sense had died along comes essential research.
Socrates @ 1631 -
People more tech savy than me tell me that the real internet criminal element will be around such restrictions before the ink is dry on the legislation. That leaves you with the alternative of a chinese style fire-wall,
I regularly communicate with people behind China’s fire-wall and both they and I are rarely inconvenienced. An Australian government of whatever persuasion would likely be even less successful.
About the best this may do is prevent some kids inadvertently stumbling on things they shouldn’t be seeing, but it won’t stop those who deliberately set out to view it. Whether that small success is worth the hassle and expense is dubious.
I never thought commonsense had died. I’ve thought for the last two weeks that Turnbull was heading for a fall. The public do not blame Rudd for this crisis, they blame Bush, the banks and/or the capitalist system (same thing to most people). They see Rudd and Swan making an earnest effort to cope with a mess they did not create. Even if Rudd and Swan get it wrong in some respects, they get credit for good intentions. The public see Turnbull as a windbag, a poseur and a saboteur, talking up the crisis for his own benefit. That’s why they’re punishing him.
The internet filter thing would be slightly less stupid if there was any evidence there was a real problem with the internet that can be solved by a filter. But as usual, the ‘evidence-based policy’ line is just that, a line.
On the poll… a good sign for the Government. Whilst I’m still not sold overall on the accuracy of Essential Research it certainly shows a trend towards the government since the onset of the ‘crisis’, which I think is believable.
Newspoll seems to be the only poll the “commentators” think is real. If Malcolm. B takes a big hit (which in my view is certain). What next?
Will the Libs allow their two amateur politicians (Turnbull and Bishop) to continue to run the show? I doubt it.
The next few weeks will start the “leadership question” all over again.
US futures market looking pretty ugly for tonight and has been getting worse all arvo.
Dow Jones, S&P 500 and Nasdaq currently down 4 – 5 % ranges.
Asia flogged again today….
If parents don’t want their kids to be seeing certain things it’s up for them to implement rules to do so. Not the government.
How about parents actually take up the job of parenting instead of letting the computer do the baby-sitting and then complaining that their bored 13 year old son “stumbled’ upon pornography.
Speaking of AA and AAA-rated objects, as this thread nears it inevitable conclusion, I would like to make the following off-topic comment:
“Remote controllers are the product of a conspiracy of battery makers and electronics giants”
Discussion
When you’d swear that the remote controller takes AAA batteries, you go and buy them, only to find out that it takes AA batteries. This happens every time to yours truly.
This leads me to state Bushfire’s “Light Bulb” Corollary:
“If you purchase a bayonet-mount light bulb, the socket you are going to plug it into will always be an Edison Screw mount.”
Finally we have Bill’s “Dolphin Torch” Phenomenon:
“Any time you go and source a battery for your Dolphin Torch, your grandkids will get a hold of it and send the battery flat within 24 hours.”
I am glad I got that off my chest.
Thank youse.
There used to be a saying “it’s as safe as a bank”. There never has been a saying “it’s as safe as a mortgage trust fund”. I think that sums up this whole matter. Incidentally part of my superannuation is with a mortgage trust fund.
It depends. Three things lined up against Nelson; A divided party, poor polling and a hostile media hammering him (rightly) every chance they got. The media sort of brought the first two things together in a digestible and immediate manner.
Turnbull’s got to deal with the first two, but the media keep holding out this hope that he’s a political messiah and are still slavishly writing puff pieces on him. Until they actually accept that he’s a poor choice for leader, tensions in the party won’t come to a head. He definitely isn’t going to bring up a spill to shore up support, he won’t risk losing power.
I said this when he was elected leader, when we look back on his time as a leader, there will be a lot of comparisons made to Latham along the lines of “Peaked too soon”.
enjaybee
I saw reports on the weekend that super funds with unlisted property exposure will have to revalue (down) those holdings as at the end of November ? This will effect those still in allocations with property components as of that date.
Listed property investments have of course taken their hits already. The unlisted sector are required by law to revalue to effect current value.
How about “safe as a Rudd government”?
Oz
You are right, but you miss the way the media works. They are like a pack of sharks, if they smell blood it will be relentless.
No 1663
Oz, Turnbull is no Latham.
No 1665
The Rudd Government won’t be too safe if they censor the internet and reduce its performance by 86%.
That’s what I thought, but you would have expected them to jump on Turnbull when it became obvious there was no bounce. Analysis of Newspoll in the papers tomorrow will be a good indicator. Not that I expect Shanahan etc. to start singing a different song.
I never suggested he was a “Mark Latham”. I said that in hindsight, similar things will be written about Turnbull as were written about Latham. Specifically about them taking the leadership too early.
True, Turnbull believes in gay marriage.
Turnbull will lead them to the election I’d imagine. Surely they have noone else to turn to yet.
GP
If you think an internet filter will get your side any votes you are wrong. The politics is easy – we are doing something to protect your kids from the nasty intertubes.
But the Libs have been playing dumb politics recently, so maybe they will oppose it
tip is just sitting there waiting for allbull to fall over.
You watch over the several years
That sounds great in theory, but in practice is nigh on impossible. You could say the same about TV… why not have television stations show anything they like at any time of the day and leave it up to parents to control the remote? Copious swearing and nudity at 3.30pm… why not?
The reality is that many parents want a system they can use to protect their children without looking over their shoulder 24/7. Given how many parents simply aren’t capable of setting up nanny software to protect their own PCs (many kids would know more than their parents about computers), providing ISP-level protection makes a lot of sense. Of course, a clean feed is also needed for those who don’t want the protection or don’t have kids, but the idea is right. Now it’s just up to Conroy to loosen this up a bit (as I think he will) and give households the option of no filter being applied.
I hope they oppose it. It’s bad policy. There’s no evidence that kids need to be protected from the internet.
Taking the worst performed test of many is just silly, and you know better
I don’t think this practice of comparing Turnbull/Nelson etc. to recent Labor leaders has any point. Crean/Latham/Beazley/Rudd were part of an ALP transforming to something else. The Libs are going nowhere.
Who’s tip?
Costello
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQdVJL2CO9o
61-39!! Not surprised by that!! lets remember that apart from several funds freezing in general the Government has won the past two weeks.
If the Government can overcome the funds problem and avoid a recession I would expect Rudd to remain a long way in front!!
Newspoll should be more narrow but not by much!! I wrote the otherday that Malcolm’s biggest strenght in normal times actually could turn out to be his biggest weakness he is a Banker and everyone knows Bankers caused this downturn.
ltep
No but there is plenty of crud about it. There are votes in the “to keep the rabbits out” mob. It is dumb politics to oppose it.
No they don’t. Only 134,000 downloaded the free net-filtering software and only a few thousand are still using it.
There are a number of Australian ISP’s that already offer ISP-level filtering. The majority of people in Australia do not use those services offered by those ISP’s. But if they want to, they are there. There is absolutely no reason to mandate this for every single Australian.
Oz, Turnbull is no Latham.
Indeed, Latham made it to the end of an election campaign.
An amusing take on NetAlert:
http://www.netalarmed.com/
I can only sit in awe of one of the posters here. Up to post 1669, that person had chalked up a prodigous count of 106 posts on this thread. Or over 6.3%. The century came up at 5.42 this afternoon (waves keyboard in direction of dressing room). Today’s effort (between work lunch at work stumps) is 35. Even though there weren’t any runs until 1.21pm, this works out at a post every 6.8 minutes. And there were similar big stays at the crease during the afternoons of 22/10 and and 24/10. I dips me lid. It’s almost like it’s a job in itself. In some ways, I hope it is. Because I wouldn’t want to be an employer paying for this…
roy
envy becomes you
Just watching some dimwits complaining about their super funds, and the rush to redeposit in banks, from market funds.
EARTH TO DIMWITS: Banks are currently returning +8%. Market super is currently returning -10%. And that was before the crisis.
Where’s the problem?? The money’s voting with its feet.
Roy I dips me lid too. Even a few talking points that weren’t on the Libs official talking points list got a run. Funny that censorship was the hot issue to push, I wouldn’t have thought the Libs cared about such things.
Yeah I’m watching the 7:30 Report.
Apparently only 100,000 people have invested money in these trusts. Some lady is saying “The government should guarantee all investments made my Australians”.
…………………..
And then you say “Don’t bring up the stockmarket example!!! It’s unrelated!!!”.
My foot it’s unrelated. Market-linked investments. Both of them.
Adam @ 1665. What I intended to say was. There used to be a saying “its as safe as a bank.” Thanks to the Rudd government this saying still applies.
The filter should be a concern to all. I’m actually surprised anyone is defending it.
- It blocks not only pornography, but also content MA15+ (this is mandatory and not opt-out)
- Tests conducted by the Government itself have shown that it will slow speeds by between 21 and 86%
- It will block websites that contain material such as anti-abortion websites
- Xenophon has signalled he would consider amending the legislation to block gambling websites
To make the issue even more shameful for the government, a member of Senator Conroy’s staff has sent threatening emails to members of ISP who have spoken out against the ISP plan:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/10/23/1224351430987.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
I would question the constitutionality of such a scheme. Surely it would have the possibility in restricting the right to political communication that is implied in our Constitution.
Even members of the Labor Party should be voicing concerns over this. It’s bad policy and should be binned.
the mother in law is suffering,cos she listened to a shonky fin advisor (actually it was her late hubby’s idea) born 1940’s
mum is fine,everything in banks born 1920’s
maybe there is a link to mum having experienced the great depression,though the mother in law went through the rationing post ww2 in the UK
I honestly think that right now the Government is working on some way to back out of it without looking like complete geese. Hopefully that won’t involve a “watered down” filter that still includes the really bad parts. ie. ISP-level.
Couldn’t agree more ITEP. The ALP will be hammered from left and right on this basic freedom of speech issue, with no mates but Fielding – and they will lose
Might as well save themselves the embarrassment and drop it now.
It’s extremely unlikely to happen but imagine if the filter was used as a double dissolution trigger.
I’m cracking up at the idea.
“The government collapsed because of porn?!?!”
O.K. Itep @ 1692. I’ll bite. What would you propose be done about websites that encourage anorexic behaviour and post encouraging strategies for how to avoid being detected? I actually agree there are significant problems with the proposed legislation, but think there are problems for which we don’t have solutions. Bit like the global economic crisis really.
How about an opt-in system?
There, problem solved. Not hard.
What makes you think that a website that encourages anorexia will be blacklisted?
Why do you suggest that the answer to anorexia is a compulsory ISP level internet filter?
Why do you think that attempting to ‘ban’ the supposed websites would actually have any effect whatsoever on anorexia?
Which, conveniently, already exist. At a number of levels. Software, both free and costing money, hardware solutions and a number of ISP’s offer it at server level.
Pages: « 1 … 32 33 [34] 35 36 … 37 » Show All