Three new poll results from Roy Morgan, if you please. Despite its modest sample of 543 and high margin of error of over 4 per cent, the phone poll conducted over the past two nights is the most interesting, both for its currency and for the fact that phone polling has a clearly superior track record to Morgan’s Labor-biased face-to-face polls. Averaging Morgan’s phone poll results back to May gives almost the exact same result as for Newspoll, although the smaller samples mean Morgan has been more erratic from poll to poll.
The latest result is within the margins of recent results from other pollsters, although slightly at the Coalition end of the scale: their two-party lead is 55-45 compared with most others’ 54-46, with primary votes of 31 per cent for Labor, 46.5 per cent for the Coalition and 12 per cent for the Greens. The phone poll does not replicate the issue I keep going on about of Morgan’s face-to-face polling producing wildly different results according to whether preferences are distributed as per the result of the last election or according to respondents’ stated intentions. It instead gives us 55-45 on respondent-allocated and 55.5-44.5 on previous-election, and thus chimes with this week’s Nielsen which in fact had Labor’s share of preferences slightly higher than at the election.
Speaking of which, Morgan has published not one but two sets of face-to-face figures. Normally Morgan either publishes results from its regular weekend polling the following Friday (or occasionally Thursday), but sometimes it holds off for a week and publishes a result a combined result from two weekends. This time they have held off for a week and published separate results for each weekend. The earlier poll, conducted on January 28/29 (Australia Day having been the preceding Thursday), was remarkably positive for Labor: not only did they maintain their lead on the previous-election (51-49) method from the result published a fortnight ago, they also opened a lead on the respondent-allocated measure (50.5-49.5), which for once looked similar to the previous election result. The primary votes were 39.5 per cent for Labor, 41.5 per cent for the Coalition and 10 per cent for the Greens.
However, the polling on February 4/5 told a somewhat different story, with the Coalition up four points to 45.5 per cent, Labor down one to 38.5 per cent and the Greens down half to 9.5 per cent. This panned out to a 53.5-46.5 lead to the Coalition on respondent-allocated preferences and 51.5-48.5 on previous election. The polls individually had a sample of 1000 and theoretically a margin of error of around 3 per cent. However, the more telling point is how much Morgan face-to-face results continue to differ from other series which have consistently proved nearer the mark. In 2011, the average primary vote for Labor in Morgan was 35.9 per cent, compared with 34.1 per cent for Essential Research, 30.7 per cent for Newspoll and 29.5 per cent for Nielsen. The gap between Essential and the latter two is partly accounted for by Essential having a consistently lower result for the Greens: on two-party preferred, Essential and Newspoll were fairly similar.
For a look at the bigger polling picture, Possum surveys a landscape of flat calm 54-46 polling going back to November.
UPDATE (13/2): Another week, another 54-46 Essential Research result. After losing a point on the primary vote over each of the two previous weeks, Labor is back up one to 34 per cent, with the Greens down one to 10 per cent and the Coalition steady on 47 per cent. Essential’s monthly measure of leadership approval finds both leaders’ personal ratings essentially unchanged – Julia Gillard down one on approval to 36 per cent and up one on disapproval to 53 per cent, Tony Abbott steady on 35 per cent and up two to 53 per cent – but Gillard has nonetheless made a solid gain as preferred prime minister, her lead up from 39-36 to 41-34. However, only 31 per cent expect her to lead Labor to the next election against 47 per cent who said they didn’t (hats off to the 22 per cent who admitted they didn’t know); while for Tony Abbott the numbers were 47 per cent and 25 per cent. A question on government control of media ownership has support for more control and less control tied on 24 per cent, with 34 per cent thinking it about right. There’s also a question on the impact of Gina Rinehart on the independence of Fairfax newspapers, which I personally find a little odd – the issue would mean little outside of New South Wales and Victoria. I also had my doubts about the question on whether Australia is “fair and just”, but the question asking for comparison with other countries is interesting: Canada and New Zealand are seen as Australia’s main partners in freedom, the UK does less well, Japan and France less well again, and the United States worse still. China however sits well below the rest of the field.
We also had a teaser last night from Newspoll, which had Abbott favoured over Gillard for economic management 43 per cent to 34 per cent, and Wayne Swan and Joe Hockey in a statistical dead heat for preferred Treasurer (38 per cent to 37 per cent).
4,682 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 47 48 [49] 50 51 … 94 » Show All
my say @ 2396
OK, I get it. You can’t handle reality.
Boerwar,
I get the impression, from the odd comment over the last two weeks, that Hawker Britton has effectively been sidelined. I haven’t got any hard evidence though.
tip. for sunday.
let bemused, chat to himself.
Mick Collins @ 2394
I suggest both should re-read the agreement they signed.
@ 2400
I did not raise the issue of Ruddstoration and have confined my remarks to the indies and their agreement.
tom
imo hell will boil over before oakeshott would support abbott
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/voters-will-see-benefits-flowing-from-labor-ahead-of-next-election-says-arbib/story-fn59niix-1226268826394
Boerwar
Good to hear from you.
Typical that Mark Arbib is defending Julia Gillard this morning – what is it again that Arbib has achieved in politics, other than being a professional head kicker?
BEMUSEed
there is more to this world than your black and and white world ,
its called, u derstanding spirit.
till u find it i cannot help u.
try some meditation, ‘yoga ty chi
it helps one,s innerself’
do some regression. work with a good teacher.
meditate awhile. its very good for ones health and we’ll being,
Interesting to read here that Arbib performed well on an interview this morning. I recall the first time I saw him interviewed on TV and wondered “who is this dill”?
May he and all other Ministers keep performing well.
my say @ 2409
Don’t be so condescending.
I cannot think of any way in which you could help me or anyone else.
bemsed
I found it even more interesting for the panel on Insiders to say this morning that Rudd is continuing his destabilisation of the govt. They do not know what the govt can do with a problem called Rudd
Suddenly? No. To Abbott? No. W doesn’t have to support Abbott to bring the house down. He simply has to say that there is no longer an agreement and the media will tear the house down in the worst possible light for Labor’s fortunes. The PM would have to visit the GG.
Correct. Mick Collins asks a very good question at 2400.
my say @ 2409
That has got to be a joke, right?
I am one of those on PB who does not see the world in black and white unlike the 2 competing cults here.
Victoria: INSIDERS, and in particular Barry Cassidy, is always biased against Rudd – what’s new?
Bushfire
Please could you keep records of this Channel-bill behaviour (with dates). Sounds as if you’ll be relieved of the problem soon.
Puff
These are “native” birds. Destroying eggs baaaad.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/12878852/kids-the-losers-in-optus-tv-case-minister/
Abbott is apparently on Meet the Press. This would be the first serious media interview he’s done in ages.
victoria @ 2412
Yes, I watched it too.
But what specifically is Rudd doing other than getting on with his job and being in the public eye?
Given his position as a former PM who obviously would like the job back as some stage, all he has to do is exist for the media to do all the rest.
It was interesting to hear the options the panel canvassed and dismissed.
Sounds pretty predictable to me. The ABC even interrupts news services to promo that stuff as they have programming to sell. It is just boring to me.
I enjoyed Insiders today.
No head-bashing Libs in sight, and homour displayed towards the three stooges.
Also, the discussion on the Rudd challenge was informative.
I’ll say no more
Tom Hawkins @ 2413
Which I answered @ 2404
Windsor now on Meet the Press, making a lot of sense as usual
confessions
The reason JM has given to why he didn’t read down but simply read the request for a meeting and said yes is feasible – ie out of the office and reading on a handheld thingee. Doesn’t say much however for his preparation for the actual meeting …
confessions @ 2419
And the whole panel, including Steve Price was not treating him gently.
His performance was evasive and unconvincing.
bemused
Cassidy did say that Rudd had spoken to four journos during the week and implied that he would “make his move” as soon as the PM made a mistake, but didn’t expect to win – yet. Destablisation effective.
LL
Refer my comment @ 2413 – it applies to O as well as W
Incidentally, Jon Faine even interrupted an interview with Swann to ask him what he thought about the pending 4 Cnrs program. Such rubbish when the poor bloke hasn’t even seen it. The ABC has become an embarrassing joke.
Did Cassidy mention his obvious, personal, continuing war Rudd that might limit his own objectivity on the subject?
lizzie
The panel today were fair. I dont think they are making it up. It is what it is, and they do not know what the solution is either. I loved David Marr’s comment about the PM. Wtte that she has had everything thrown at her, and her resilience has been amazing. I agree.
Hi bemused
Could you tell us what Abbott stumbled on?
Thanks.
lizzie @ 2427
Yes, I heard that too.
I think any such move would be unfortunate. I agree with ShowsOn that if Rudd seeks the leadership he won’t get it. His only prospect is to get on with his job and if things go bad, have his colleagues turn to him.
Rudd no doubt is still ambitious, but where’s the evidence that he, or his supporters, are actively destabilising this Gillard Government?
Do we blame Rudd for the Australia Day Debacle, or the tearing up of Wilkie’s agreement with Julia?
Perhaps Tony Hodges was a Rudd plant in Julia’s office?
lizzie
Oh
I see.
i thought they might be an introduced species of birds.
Oh well, nature takes its course then.
So the word “implied” from Cassidy, who is talking about something second hand, about someone he cannot stand, makes no one here at least suspicious?
Will the next Newspoll change the narrative again?
Oh, Julia is it now? Not the red-headed bitch you mentioned on FB?
Hypocrite.
BK @ 2432
Not so much stumbled as just wouldn’t answer questions such as would an Abbott Govt repeal the legislation means testing the health insurance rebate.
And of course he got into a rant about “stop the boats”.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/go-on-ditch-your-bank-says-pm-20120211-1sydk.html
Article & a video
Anyone who wants some Currawongs can have my share of them.
I for one am highly suspicious of anything Cassidy would say. I doubt very much he’d follow up to verify on anything he’s told, that would be too much like hard work – he’d simply write it down and work out how he could use it on Sunday. He’s not seeking truth. He seeks controversy and if it’s directed at people he dislikes even better.
This is all bluff on the part of the indies. Do you think that they would run to an election which would certainly see all that they have built with the Labor government utterly destroyed? At the end of the day, they would convince themselves that their ongoing opportunity to have significant influence on government and provide stability of government will get the better of any rhetoric on tearing up agreements.
Glad I am not the only one, Tom. It all sounds like an inter house promo for 4cnrs to me.
Amongst the rest of it around, desperately, keeping the fans burning.
Yes thats right a member of the Government was defending his Leader.
F^&k me, best we call in the conspiracy police, Eh Evan2GB ?
Many have had that sole role on both sides of politics. It seems to be a necessary political function.
More important than speculation over the Rudd Gillard war is this report.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/the-afghanistan-report-the-pentagon-doesnt-want-you-to-read-20120210#ixzz1m7dC7sAN
http://www1.rollingstone.com/extras/RS_REPORT.pdf
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2012/02/8904030
I’d like to think so. Would you be prepared to call his bluff? I’d stick with the certainty I have today than to find that he had only fired 5 shots not 6.
Thanks bemused. One day the journos will have had enough of his evasiveness.
Pages: « 1 … 47 48 [49] 50 51 … 94 » Show All