tip off

Newspoll: 57-43 to Coalition

The Australian reports the latest Newspoll (the first in three weeks, following a break for the long weekend) has Labor recovering three points from their record low primary vote last time, but continuing to languish on 29 per cent. The Coalition also picked up a point on the primary vote, to 49 per cent, and maintains a two-party preferred lead of 57-43, down from 58-42 last time. The Greens have dropped a point to 12 per cent, with “others” taking most of the damage from the higher major party vote. The Prime Minister’s personal ratings remain dismally low, with approval up a point to 28 per cent and disapproval down one to 60 per cent. Tony Abbott is up slightly, by two points on approval to 36 per cent with disapproval down a point to 53 per cent. The preferred prime minister is unchanged with Abbott leading 40 per cent to 35 per cent. Newspoll has also has responses for best party to handle various issues: these have Labor going back on all measures since the question was last asked before the election, which is entirely predictable given the normal pattern of these responses following in the direction of voting intention.

This follows today’s Essential Research poll which had the Coalition lead steady at 55-45, from primary votes of 33 per cent for Labor and 48 per cent for the Coalition (both steady), and 10 per cent for the Greens (down one). Further questions suggest the public has trouble distinguishing between the four independents: those who back the government, Rob Oakeshott, Tony Windsor and Andrew Wilkie, all have approval ratings of 23 per cent or 24 per cent and disapproval ratings of between 32 per cent to 34 per cent. Bob Katter performs slightly better, with 27 per cent approval and 36 per cent disapproval. The broad hostility to the independents individually is reflected by the unpopularity of the balance of power arrangement overall. Only 22 per cent consider it to have been good for Australia – a substantial worsening since polls in the early part of the year, the more recent of which (on June 6) had it at 28 per cent. The bad rating is up from 39 per cent to 50 per cent.

Questions on poker machine reform suggest that while Clubs Australia’s grand finals advertising blitz may have had some impact, the public remains strongly in favour of mandatory pre-commitment on poker machines. The level of support is down to 61 per cent from 67 per cent four weeks ago, which opposition up five points to 30 per cent. Respondents were also asked to nominate a figure which “reflects the social cost of problem gamblers in Australia”, and opponents seemed reluctant to do so: 42 per cent opted for don’t know compared with 25 per cent among supporters. Those that did name a figure tended to come in at well below the $4.7 billion indicated by the Productivity Commission, with options of $1 billion or lower chosen by 44 per cent ($100 million being the most favoured), compared with 9 per cent for $5 billion and 5 per cent for $10 billion. Once appraised of the Productivity Commission result, support for pokies reform returned roughly to the level it was at four weeks ago. Respondents were also advised that 2.7 per cent of poker machine revenue was invested into the community, and it seems that for some this was enough: support for reform then came down to 57 per cent, with opposition at 31 per cent.

Misha Schubert of the Sydney Morning Herald has also brought tidings of a Galaxy poll of the electorate of Melbourne which shows Greens incumbent Adam Bandt headed for an easy victory regardless of what the Liberals do with their preference recommendation. Bandt’s primary vote is at 44 per cent against 29 per cent for Labor and 23 per cent for the Liberals, which compares with respective results at last year’s election of 36.2 per cent, 38.1 per cent and 21.0 per cent. This would translate into a 65-35 win for Bandt if Liberal and other preferences were allocated as per the 2010 election result: an anti-Labor swing of 9 per cent in Labor-versus-Greens. We are told that if the Liberals put Labor ahead of the Greens on their preference recommendation, as they did to such devastating effect at the Victorian state election, Bandt would still emerge 56-44 in front – exactly the result he achieved at the election. This result appears to have been arrived at by splitting Liberal preferences 60-40 in Labor’s favour rather than the usual 80-20, which seems soundly based on results from the state election. The poll was conducted two weeks ago from an unspecified sample size, and I’m guessing was conducted for a corporate or peak body client (UPDATE: It’s been pointed out to me that the article notes it was conducted for the Greens).

5297
  • 1
    grey
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:34 am | Permalink

    Have you ever read a more disgustingly biased Coalition-mouthpieced essay as this?

    Only when Evan posts.

  • 2
    This little black duck
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:34 am | Permalink

    William,

    From which you conclude?

  • 3
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:35 am | Permalink

    Im calling it

    Newspoll is whacky

    How can a party improve its vote?

    but slip in all the cats?

    IT DOES NOT COMPUTE

  • 4
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:36 am | Permalink

    That nothing much has changed, TLBD.

  • 5
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:36 am | Permalink

    3

    gusface

    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:35 am | Permalink

    Im calling it

    Newspoll is whacky

    How can a party improve its vote?

    but slip in all the cats?

    IT DOES NOT COMPUTE

    Indeed – would love to see the age breakdowns in the Cats section.

  • 6
    Leroy
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:38 am | Permalink

    Herald Sun take on it. More reasonable actually (compared to that Oz article0, mainly just reports the results.

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/labor-bounces-back-from-record-low/story-fn7x8me2-1226163458103

    Also this as seperate article on Pokies re Essential Poll. Note the headline.

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/liberal-voters-like-pokies-laws/story-fn7x8me2-1226163393107

  • 7
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:41 am | Permalink

    Gusface, the comparison on the issue categories is not with the Newspoll three weeks ago – it’s with the last Newspoll that posed the questions to respondents, which I don’t think they have done since the election campaign. So it stands to reason that Labor would have gone backwards on issues as they have most certainly gone backwards on voting intention, and the latter invariably drives the former.

  • 8
    Leroy
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:42 am | Permalink

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/thomson-should-save-his-family-pain/story-fn6b3v4f-1226139893553

    Apart from the Herald Sun article on Thomson, the main DT article is similar. But there is this. Astonishing.

    Thomson should save his family pain
    Catherine Cusack The Sunday Telegraph September 18, 2011 12:00AM

    JULIA Gillard should allow Craig Thomson to resign.

    Yes, the federal member for Dobell and former union leader deserves to be investigated over allegations he misused union funds.

    But in these situations, politicians and their families are entitled to exit.

    Labor put Thomson into the parliament and Labor should have the guts to face the consequences of its own stupidity.

    Instead, the full brunt is being borne by Thomson's family, including his heavily pregnant wife.

    ............... (more in the article)

    I believe Thompson ought to resign and he ought to be allowed to resign. End this drama, free this family and let the cards fall where they will.

    ----------

    Catherine Cusack is a Liberal member of the NSW Legislative Council and backbencher

  • 9
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:42 am | Permalink

    sorta understand

    :(

    but is it a “real time” view or an aggregartion of this and the last result?

  • 10
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:45 am | Permalink

    leroy

    time to reveal a secret

    the fibs regard dobell as the bellweather

    they have wriiten off eden monaro

    somehow they have this almost evangelical view that if they take dobell, they take gvt

    dickheads

    :(

  • 11
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:46 am | Permalink

    It’s a comparison of one point in time and another. Labor happens to be doing worse than they were during the election campaign. They may well be doing better than a few weeks ago, but this doesn’t give us a measure of that.

  • 12
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:47 am | Permalink

    thank you

    It would be instructive perhaps to see if other pollsters have maintained similar measures

    perhaps some would be more ahem consistent?

  • 13
    Leroy
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:47 am | Permalink

    The Libs have revealed that they will join in increasing pressure on family with a pregnate wife.

  • 14
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:51 am | Permalink

    leroy

    they hit the wrong target

    dobell is my stomping ground

    ;)

  • 15
    James J
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:51 am | Permalink

    http://www.smh.com.au/national/mp-to-abandon-labor-if-gillard-goes-20111010-1lhmb.html

    A GOVERNMENT MP clinging to the most marginal Labor seat in Queensland says he will quit politics and force a byelection should Julia Gillard be dumped as prime minister.
    In a threat which has the potential to bring down the government, Graham Perrett told the Herald Labor was wrong to remove a prime minister last year and he would not be a party to such an act again.
    Despite holding his Brisbane seat of Moreton by 1.1 per cent, meaning he would be wiped out if the polls did not improve, Mr Perrett said dumping Kevin Rudd had been a breach of faith with his voters.

  • 16
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:52 am | Permalink

    I don’t think other pollsters do exactly this with any regularity. But like I I said, if Labor’s vote has slumped – and all pollsters agree that it has – it’s issue ratings will have gone down as well.

  • 17
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:54 am | Permalink

    I’d have thought it was a “threat which has the potential to prop up Julia Gillard” rather than a “threat which has the potential to bring down the government”.

  • 18
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:54 am | Permalink

    Ok

    so its fair to say this an aggregated figure as opposed to a real time figure

    hence its measure is more of a moving average as opposed to a particular point in time

  • 19
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:54 am | Permalink

    A GOVERNMENT MP clinging to the most marginal Labor seat in Queensland says he will quit politics and force a byelection should Julia Gillard be dumped as prime minister.
    In a threat which has the potential to bring down the government, Graham Perrett told the Herald Labor was wrong to remove a prime minister last year and he would not be a party to such an act again.
    Despite holding his Brisbane seat of Moreton by 1.1 per cent, meaning he would be wiped out if the polls did not improve, Mr Perrett said dumping Kevin Rudd had been a breach of faith with his vote

    That makes no sense whatsoever.

  • 20
    Leroy
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:56 am | Permalink

    James J

    I recall GG said on this site a while ago that a few MPs were thinking about this, long before any media on it. There was a passing mention of this possibility in at least one report in the last week or so. I guess one has decided to make it public.

  • 21
    Redneck
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:57 am | Permalink

    How I love poll Bludger.

    Newspoll started doing Fortnightly (or close enough) polls in 2001. Between then and yesterday they had released 218 polls. Of those 218 polls, 216 have the Liberals at a lower Primary vote than this one. Just one had them higher.

    How anyone could possibly infer Labor has “won” this weeks Newspoll is beyond me. The Liberal vote has never been higher than under the “unelectable” Abbott. Go figure.

  • 22
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:58 am | Permalink

    http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/nsw-mp-catherine-cusack-to-take-leave-for-clinical-depression/story-e6frfku0-1226141013747

    there is way more to this than meets the eye

    I will say no more

  • 23
    imacca
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:58 am | Permalink

    So an improvement of 3% in the PV is actually pretty good. A few more polls like that and things will be looking rosy!! :)

  • 24
    ShowsOn
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 12:59 am | Permalink

    A GOVERNMENT MP clinging to the most marginal Labor seat in Queensland says he will quit politics and force a byelection should Julia Gillard be dumped as prime minister.

    I’ve been waiting for a Labor MP to say this.

    In a hung parliament every House MP has an effective veto over who is PM.

  • 25
    Leroy
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:00 am | Permalink

    Graham Perrett has decided it seems, that the only way to put an end to all this nonsense is to point out what could happen with any change. An immediate loss of govt. Surprised he did not do it in private. Perhaps he already did, and this is actually aimed at the media, not the caucus.

  • 26
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:02 am | Permalink

    Leroy

    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:00 am | Permalink

    Graham Perrett has decided it seems, that the only way to put an end to all this nonsense is to point out what could happen with any change. An immediate loss of govt. Surprised he did not do it in private. Perhaps he already did, and this is actually aimed at the media, not the caucus.

    But this bit contradicts it -

    Despite holding his Brisbane seat of Moreton by 1.1 per cent, meaning he would be wiped out if the polls did not improve, Mr Perrett said dumping Kevin Rudd had been a breach of faith with his voters

    Isn’t he doing this agaist the wishes of his electorate ?

  • 27
    James J
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:02 am | Permalink

    Certainly throws a spanner in the works for Kevin 11

  • 28
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:04 am | Permalink

    No, I don’t believe that’s right, Gusface. The 1000 or so respondents Newspoll surveyed this weekend were asked to name the best party to handle various issues. They were asking this quite a lot in the lead-up to the last election, but stopped thereafter. So when The Australian says Labor has gone backwards, it is in comparison with a poll of another 1000 or so respondents conducted just before the election. There’s no “moving average” – just two polls conducted at different points in time.

  • 29
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:05 am | Permalink

    btw

    the libs opposed the raisng of the tax free threshold from $6k to $18k

    abbott wants australians to live in poverty

    :(

  • 30
    rishane
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:06 am | Permalink

    So, this is interesting: http://www.smh.com.au/national/malaysia-a-better-option-for-asylum-seekers-says-un-20111010-1lhm8.html

  • 31
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:07 am | Permalink

    There’s no “moving average” – just two polls conducted at different points in time.

    the salient point is that the same peeps werent polled, I presume

    so its worth is ahem questionable?

  • 32
    grey
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:07 am | Permalink

    I’ve been waiting for a Labor MP to say this.

    In a hung parliament every House MP has an effective veto over who is PM.

    And?

  • 33
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:08 am | Permalink

    rishane

    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:06 am | Permalink

    So, this is interesting: http://www.smh.com.au/national/malaysia-a-better-option-for-asylum-seekers-says-un-20111010-1lhm8.html

    The UNHCR hacve always been in favour of Malaysia.

  • 34
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:08 am | Permalink

    No, the same people were not polled. Every Newspoll is conducted from a random sample. I don’t think this is questionable.

  • 35
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:10 am | Permalink

    I am not nquestioning the methodology

    just the outcomes re the cats come from completely different peeps

    the ppm etc is valid

    the cats….. well

  • 36
    rishane
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:10 am | Permalink

    Have you ever read a more disgustingly biased Coalition-mouthpieced essay as this?

    That is indeed awful reporting. But again, its the timing. Nothing the Coalition has done has seen off Gillard as her critics have predicted endlessly. In less than 48 hours, Australia will basically have the carbon price guaranteed. We may be seeing the start of an upturn in Labor polling. So with these factors in mind, of course the media reportage is going to be even more shrill than before.

  • 37
    Leroy
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:11 am | Permalink

    Frank – I think he’s saying if it was a mistake to change PM’s once, its an even bigger mistake to do it twice. Stick to your guns is fair argument. Its also refusing to get into a discussion about “who’s better”, defusing it by saying its irrelevant and its about policy.

  • 38
    rishane
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:11 am | Permalink

    The UNHCR hacve always been in favour of Malaysia.

    You’d barely know it from how its been reported. I’m not saying its an ideal ‘solution’ or anything, but its been spun in the same relentlessly negative way as anything Labor proposes.

  • 39
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:12 am | Permalink

    The PPM comes from completely different people from one poll to the next as well. Why would that be “valid”, but the issue categories not be?

  • 40
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:14 am | Permalink

    Gillard: Approval 28 (+1) Disapproval 60 (-1)

    Abbott: Approval 36 (+2) Disapproval 53 (-1)

  • 41
    rishane
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:14 am | Permalink

    Yet more vested interests: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/no-holds-barred-as-industry-lobby-fights-tax-20111010-1lhmc.html

  • 42
    imacca
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:14 am | Permalink

    In a hung parliament every House MP has an effective veto over who is PM.

    Something true that has been lost on people as pretty much everyone has focused on Rudd. I mean, the conversation late last year was that Rudd had a lot of power since if he left, the Govt would not survive a by-election. Obviously, some of the other ALP MP’s have woken up to the fact that they have the same power in this way as Rudd and are willing to contemplate MAD to hold him off.

    I mean seriously, is Rudd going to take the chance of at best, becoming a hated opposition back bencher pretty fast if he gets rid of Gillard?? He wouldn’t last as LOTO for long under those circumstances i reckon.

    And always, it comes back to whether or not the ALP want to be in opposition sooner than they need to be, or make the best fight in 2013 that they can, and maybe win it. No matter how badly they look in the polls at the moment, its really a no-brainer.

  • 43
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:15 am | Permalink

    They were asking this quite a lot in the lead-up to the last election, but stopped thereafter. So when The Australian says Labor has gone backwards, it is in comparison with a poll of another 1000 or so respondents conducted just before the election.

    Thats why.

  • 44
    Puff, the Magic Dragon.
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:17 am | Permalink

    Frank,
    It is one way of shutting down the J v K crud, just get the most marginal seat-holder to threaten resignation if J is removed. That makes all the speculation moot,

  • 45
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:17 am | Permalink

    ie

    there is a set basket of Q’s each poll

    iyw it was pointed out the cats are less sporadic

  • 46
    rishane
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:17 am | Permalink

    And always, it comes back to whether or not the ALP want to be in opposition sooner than they need to be, or make the best fight in 2013 that they can, and maybe win it. No matter how badly they look in the polls at the moment, its really a no-brainer.

    My (unrealistic) hope is that this news will finally get the media to shut up a bit about Ruddstoration.

  • 47
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:20 am | Permalink

    iyw it was pointed out the cats are less sporadic

    I meant less frequent

    :(

  • 48
    Jackol
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:22 am | Permalink

    Throwing mandatory detention in Australia in the mix makes it a bit of a bad comparison since the Greens etc will argue (reasonably) that we shouldn’t have mandatory detention for anything beyond a very short initial processing period.

    However, the big thing about the statements is that the UNHCR sees merits in the Malaysian plan even without it being likely to happen. If they truly saw no merit in the plan now would be the time to say it – if there was any chance of the amendments passing, the UNHCR dumping on it would kill it off for good.

    So many have been making the Malaysia deal out to be this massive evil political fix with no redeeming features that is inhumane and irredeemably cruel.

    The UNHCR actually has to manage the situation across the region, and they see that there are decent reasons to proceed with the plan despite the hyperbole from many commentators.

  • 49
    scorpio
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:25 am | Permalink

    Looks like the Liberal Party Campaign team is operating and being coordinated by them out of news ltd premises.

    They seem to be throwing everything bar the kitchen sink at trying to bring the government down before the upcoming bills can get presented to and voted on in Parliament.

    I smell desperation.

    A TEAM of Liberal Party luminaries, including Alexander Downer and Santo Santoro, has been formed to fast-track a multimillion-dollar war chest for a snap federal poll.

    The Liberal Party is also mimicking the strategy of Barack Obama and will establish a "grassroots" fundraising program targeting small amounts of $20 or $40.

    As Tony Abbott puts his MPs on alert for the possible return of Kevin Rudd, senior Coalition frontbenchers are criss-crossing Australia to hold fundraising events.

    Shadow treasurer Joe Hockey is understood to have done three dinners, two cocktail functions and a fundraising lunch across three states in the past week alone.

    Deputy Liberal leader Julie Bishop has also racked up thousands of kilometres in flights to New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Queensland for fundraising events.

    The Coalition has brought forward election planning by a year in case the Government loses the confidence of Parliament - or Julia Gillard loses the support of her colleagues.

    Mr Abbott and his senior team believe Mr Rudd is actively campaigning for the Labor leadership - and would call a snap election to exploit a honeymoon period. The party's federal executive signed off on the fundraising strategy at a meeting in Canberra last month.

    The fundraising team will target the "big end of town" and includes Mr Downer, the long-serving foreign minister, and Mr Santoro, a former minister for ageing.

    Liberal Party vice-president Tom Harley, a well connected Melbourne businessman, is also a member, along with Danielle Blain from West Australia.

    But the Liberal Party has also given the go-ahead to a "low-value, high-volume" fundraising program, based on a similar scheme established by the US president ahead of his 2008 campaign.

    Both the Liberal and National parties have brought forward their campaign planning by a year, with sitting MPs instructed to ensure their campaign structures are ready for a snap poll.

    http://www.news.com.au/national/liberal-party-prepare-war-chest-for-snap-poll/story-e6frfkvr-1226162594092

  • 50
    rishane
    Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:27 am | Permalink

    I’ve quoted it before, but I like to think of FDR:

    “”. . . For twelve years this Nation was afflicted with hear-nothing, see-nothing, do-nothing Government. The Nation looked to Government but the Government looked away. Nine mocking years with the golden calf and three long years of the scourge! Nine crazy years at the ticker and three long years in the breadlines! Nine mad years of mirage and three long years of despair! Powerful influences strive today to restore that kind of government with its doctrine that that Government is best which is most indifferent.

    For nearly four years you have had an Administration which instead of twirling its thumbs has rolled up its sleeves. We will keep our sleeves rolled up.

    We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace‹business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.

    They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.

    Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me, and I welcome their hatred.”

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...