Nielsen: 61-39 to Coalition
GhostWhoVotes tweets that the first post-carbon tax announcement poll from Nielsen, presumably conducted between Thursday to Saturday from a sample of 1400, has the Coalition’s lead out from 59-41 to 61-39. Further comment superfluous, but primary votes and leadership figures, and presumably also some attitudinal stuff, to follow.
UPDATE: After falling a point short of overtaking Julia Gillard in last month’s poll, Tony Abbott has rocketed to an 11-point lead as preferred prime minister, up five points to 51 per cent with Gillard down six to 40 per cent.
UPDATE 2: Labor primary vote down a point to 26 per cent …
UPDATE 3: Michelle Grattan in the Sydney Morning Herald:
In results that will send waves of fear through the government, approval for Ms Gillard’s performance has tumbled another 3 points to 34 per cent, while her disapproval rating has jumped 3 to 62 per cent. The carbon plan has been given an unequivocal thumbs down, with 56 per cent of respondents opposed to a carbon price, 52 per cent rejecting the government’s carbon price and compensation package, and 53 per cent believing it will leave them worse off. More than half (56 per cent) say Ms Gillard has no mandate for her plan, and the same proportion want an early poll before the plan is introduced. Nearly half (47 per cent) think Bob Brown and the Greens are mainly responsible for the government’s package. More than half (52 per cent) say an Abbott government should repeal the package while 43 per cent believe it should be left in place under a new government. Ms Gillard yesterday denied she had been ringing around to gauge backbench support for her failing leadership.
The Coalition’s primary vote is up 2 points to 51 per cent, while the Greens’ is down 1 point to 11 per cent. Approval of Mr Abbott has risen a point to 47 per cent. His disapproval is down 2 points to 48 per cent … Ms Gillard’s approval rating is her worst so far and the lowest for a PM since Paul Keating’s 34 per cent in March 1995.
UPDATE (18/7/2011): Essential Research is kinder for the government, showing a slight improvement from last week’s worst-ever result for them: the Coalition’s lead is down from 57-43 to 56-44, with the Coalition down a point to 49 per cent, Labor up one to 31 per cent and the Greens steady on 11 per cent. Essential being a two-week rolling average, this was half conducted immediately before and half immediately after the carbon tax announcement, with the latter evidently having provided the better figures. I have noted in the past that, for whatever reason, Essential seems to get more favourable results for the carbon tax than phone pollsters: as well as being consistent with the voting intention findings (albeit not to the extent of statistical significance), the Essential survey also finds direct support for the carbon tax has increased since the announcement, with approval up four points to 39 per cent and disapproval down four to 49 per cent.
This raises at least the possibility that the phone polling methodology behind the recent Morgan and Nielsen results, as well as next week’s Newspoll, is skewed somewhat against the carbon tax – unless of course the internet-based Essential (or perhaps some other aspect of Essential’s methodology) is skewed in its favour. It should also be noted that Essential’s recovery only returns support to the level it was at in the June 14 survey, before a dive on July 11. For all that, respondents are just as pessimistic about their own prospects under the tax as were Morgan’s: 10 per cent say they will be better off against 69 per cent worse off, and 46 per cent believe it will be bad for Australia against 34 per cent good. Further questions inquire about respondent’s self-perceived level of knowledge about the tax, and their reactions about a range of responses to it.
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
I think I’d like to have the title of Professor. I’ve never held the position of professor, but it sounds kinda authoritative, and I think it would suit me.
by confessions on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:46 pm
Ah my dear Jackol but since your plan reduces temperatures by only 1/14000th of a degree then you are denialist and a do-nothing too since your plan will make no difference to climate change
by Glen on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:46 pm
Lod = Lord. However, little black duck says he can call himself anything he likes…
by lizzie on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:46 pm
Professor Confessions
by lizzie on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:47 pm
BK
Maaate Lord Monkeyshine’s numbers scream “Hogwarts” with a side dish of HoJo and a dash of Barnacle.
by poroti on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:47 pm
daretotread @3161.
Disagree, many people in the US also regard the events outlined as defaults on debt, ie currency.
An undertaking to exchange dollars for gold, then defaulting on that is, a default.
As for the current devaluating US dollar, I’m sure the Chinese regard it as a default, particularly as the yanks are *actively* adopting policies to devalue their currency while at the sametime maintaining they have a strong dollar policy.
Also retirees in the US getting paid bugger all interest on their retirement nest eggs would regard a basic *zero interest rate policy* as a default of types. Its also a transfer payment system from the middle class to the bastard banks who stuffed up.
But the default connected to the exchange of dollars for gold are clear cut events of default.
by dave on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:48 pm
Ah Glen
Should seal you in airtight container of plant food
by Kinkajou on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:48 pm
Sorry; he is Viscount Monckton, not Earl Monckton.
However, Viscounts are known as “Lord” X, so the concept is the same.
by Danny Lewis on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:49 pm
Danny Lewis
We’re on the same page.
I don’t deny his has an heriditary title.
I dispute him using his passport as proof that he is a member of the house of lords.
He lied on his passport application.
I guess the Home Office (or whoever processes passport applications in the UK) would never think to question a Peer of Realm stating he was a member. That’s all.
by Misfit on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:49 pm
what are the names of the non murdoch papers in the us, like to read a couple
by my say on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:49 pm
I think it was a sheltered workshop.
by confessions on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:51 pm
Sorry Lizzie; I saw your comment after I had posted and checked mine.
You are right that he is a Viscount and not a Lord, but according to my copy of Debrett, he can and should use the title “Lord”, since his is a hereditary peerage.
by Danny Lewis on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:51 pm
I would really like to see the PM to be a bit firmer with these ill-mannered people. She doesn’t need to take the same leaf out of Hawke’s or Keating’s book, but she shouldn’t allow people to get away with blatant rudeness. For instance, she might have done well to answer that woman thus: I DID not lie. This policy is a PRICE on carbon – a fixed price for 3 years before it becomes an ETS. or she could have said: Oh dear, how many times must I explain that I DID not lie, nor did I intend to deceive. This carbon tax is a temporary fixed price on carbon for a period of 3 years before going to an ETS.
by janice2 on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:52 pm
Okay so I’ve been told to be gassed like those in the Holocaust??
How low can you people get!
by Glen on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:52 pm
BK,
Nested square brackets don’t work. The parser hits the first one and says “let’s start a quote”, hits the next one and says “oops, shouldn’t have started a quote” and goes back to sulking.
by This little black duck on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:53 pm
lizzie:
It has a certain ring to it, doesn’t it?
by confessions on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:53 pm
Danny Lewis
Don’t have my Debrett handy. Nobody in my family qualifies.
I just think he’s an egotistic tosser.
by lizzie on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:54 pm
Thanks ducky
by BK on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:54 pm
That’s true; but many still inherently believe that a title equates to intelligence & that’s why his view is accepted by many.
If he were plain old Mr. Monckton, few would believe his misthruths.
Even though I try to fight that view, viewing the Queen’s coronation on pay TV today I temporarily turned into a monarchist, buy quickly regained my senses.
How one overcomes such perceptions it beyond me.
by charlton on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:54 pm
You were once an intelligent human being, no? You’ve lost all credibility for what was it.. the 3rd.. no 4th time.. in as many days. Good going! You came here telling us how much you loved Turnbull and hated Abbott yet now what? How much can one person embarrass themselves in defense of the indefensible.
by cud chewer on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:54 pm
tell me how that garden of yours is going on Venus then
by MickGCollins on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:54 pm
Crikey today:
Australia Network deal: is Mark Scott really in trouble?
http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/07/19/abc-australia-network-deal-mark-scott/
by Cuppa on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:55 pm
lizzie
Ask David Flint.
by BK on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:56 pm
It is not a price on CO2
It’s a price on carbon
What is the chemical formula of methane?
by Misfit on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:56 pm
Misfit: he is still a Peer of the Realm.
It’s just that adjustments made to who can and can’t sit in the House of Lords meant that his family (I’m not sure why, but I am assuming it is because it was a recently-created peerage) is no longer eligible.
He can, should, and is totally entitled to use the title “Lord”.
What he ISN’T entitled to do is to claim to have the right to sit in the House of Lords. These are now entirely separate concepts, thanks to the law change of 1999. His pants are on fire only in relation to this.
He is a Viscount and can call himself a Lord (therefore his passport is correct).
He is NOT, however, eligible to sit in the House of Lords. He knows this and has known it since his father was rendered ineligible in 1999, so his pants have been on fire for the past 12 years (presuming he has been making this claim all this time).
by Danny Lewis on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:56 pm
Only with a harmless non-polluting gas
by cud chewer on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:56 pm
It was Steve Lewis who read it out. Lewis of the mocked up GrechGate email which the DT used for its coverage. Ironically the email ‘to’ address Lewis used had Godwin Grech’s name wrong, using a combination of one of his names, and the name of the car dealer in Brisbane.
by confessions on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:57 pm
Lizzie @ 3314: you are certainly right about that
by Danny Lewis on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:57 pm
Accoring to this http://www.debretts.com/forms-of-address/titles/viscount-and-viscountess.aspx Monckton is a fourth-grade peer
by This little black duck on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:57 pm
IMHO all this peerage stuff is anachronistic, snobby crap!
by BK on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:59 pm
His passport says Right Honourable.
Is this correct?
by confessions on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:59 pm
glen
Mate all that plant food will make you and your fellow neeps positively thrive.
by poroti on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:01 pm
Danny Lewis
fer kerrrists sake!
I know he’s a peer of the f*cking realm.
I’m arguing ….. oh, what’s the use!
by Misfit on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:01 pm
Confessions: He knows it’s not true and he is relying on people’s ignorance to not know the difference between owning a “title” and having a legal right to take advantage of that title in a parliamentary sense.
Why use your passport as proof? No one has suggested it isn’t his name; they are merely suggesting he has no right to sit in the House of Lords.
Typically, he is misrepresenting and creating confusion in order to deflect from the real issue. It is, I’m afraid, his raison d’etre.
by Danny Lewis on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:02 pm
Was that Monckton in a debate on climate science today?
I would have pointed out the window and said “have a look at the weather out there you mug”, you need to be wearing an extra pair of undies for goodness sake”.
by Centre on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:02 pm
Enough about Monckton. Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viscount#Viscounts_in_the_United_Kingdom_and_the_Commonwealth
by This little black duck on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:02 pm
3328: Viscounts are entitled to the Rt Hon honourific.
by James J on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:03 pm
BB @ 3255
Surely the ALP has not lost the knowledge of how to deal with this and all other manner of situations that can occur when the PM is out in public?
Easy stuff! Where were the minders that should have moved in and allowed the PM to move on while they entertained the Fib plant?
That’s what we used to do when I was more active in campaigns. Street walks 101.
by bemused on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:04 pm
Because it said on his passport that he is a member of the house of lords!
by Misfit on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:04 pm
Sorry ducky
Just had to say it one more time.
by Misfit on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:04 pm
Misfit: I thought you were arguing about his right to use his peerage on his passport.
From what I gather, what he has said is perfectly legal. That is the only point I was making.
I appreciate we are on the same page in relation to his actually being a Peer of the Realm. I’m just unsure as to what you point was regarding his passport …
by Danny Lewis on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:04 pm
You people are disgusting trying to defend someone saying I should be gassed to death.
FFS I dont think the PB Labortariat could reach such depths but they have.
Shame on the lot of you for defending such awful comments!
by Glen on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:04 pm
Glen, thats an extremly offensive statement
by MickGCollins on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:04 pm
Whether Monckton is a Lord or a hereditary member of the House of Lords is entirely and utterly irrelevant. Monckton raises it as an ‘appeal to authority’ where he has no scientific or representative authority. There is no reason why we should pay any more attention to the climate change opinions of Monckton than we do to those of Bert Newton.
The media should be ashamed for treating him as any sort of important source in this debate.
by Jackol on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:06 pm
In how many ways can Monckton be a fraud?
by BK on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:07 pm
AAAARGH!!!
My sincere apologies. I didn’t realise it said that. I thought it said he was “Lord” Monckton and that was the sticking point.
If he says he is a member of the House of Lords on his passport then his pants have now positively exploded.
That really is a total fabrication. Like I said before, he would have known that even before he inherited the peerage.
Wow. That has entered an entirely new territory of lie-abilty. The man really does have no shame.
by Danny Lewis on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:07 pm
Glen,
Faux outrage from our residnet phony.
Point to the post that says that about you.
by Greensborough Growler on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Thanks James J. That settles it then.
by confessions on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Thefinnigans The Finnigans
Sack me? He he he, i got Plan B. i’ll move to China Wendi has already triggered her #Quanxi go & eat yr Peking Duck you fuackwits #NewsCorpse
14 seconds ago
by The Finnigans on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Enough already . FCUCK the discussion re lords and Viscounts or whatever. Hereditary titles are an insult to us all and belong in the dustbin of history. Bow before me, tug thy forelocks in my presence becuse my great great great great grand mother was the “bit on the side” for King whoever or my ggggg grandfather bailed out the hard up monarch.
by poroti on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:08 pm