tip off

Essential Research: 56-44 to Coalition

The latest weekly Essential Research survey shows no change on last week, bar a one point drop in the Greens vote to 10 per cent: the Coalition is on 49 per cent of the primary vote and Labor on 32 per cent, with the Coalition’s two-party lead at 56-44. Essential also found plenty of interesting questions to ask about the Labor leadership. Respondents were asked to evaluate the performance of various actors during the challenge, with Kevin Rudd coming out least badly (33 per cent good, 35 per cent poor), “Labor Party ministers” the worst (10 per cent and 52 per cent), the media also very poorly (14 per cent and 43 per cent), Julia Gillard not well at all (23 per cent and 49 per cent) and Tony Abbott hardly better even if it might be hard to recall what he did exactly (25 per cent and 40 per cent).

Sixty-two per cent of respondents said the leadership challenge was bad for the government and 47 per cent that it has made them less likely to vote Labor (64 per cent among Coalition supporters, obviously including many who wouldn’t vote Labor in a pink fit), against 13 per cent who said it was a good thing and another 13 per cent (or perhaps the same 13 per cent) who they were more likely to vote Labor. A question on Kevin Rudd’s future produces a miraculously even three-way split with 29 per cent saying he should stay in parliament and again challenge for the leadership, 28 per cent saying he should stay in parliament and not challenge for the leadership and 30 per cent saying he should resign from parliament.

Respondents were asked to indicate whether they supported the Australian system of leaders being elected by MPs (36 per cent), American-style presidential primaries (31 per cent) and British-style election by both MPs and party members (11 per cent). Fifty-six per cent believed MPs should be guided by public opinion in leadership contests against 30 per cent by who they believed was the best person. The poll also points to a slight increase in support for an early election since the end of January, up three to 44 per cent with support for a completed term down two to 46 per cent.

We have also had Newspoll publish results from last week’s polling on the most important political issues and the best party to handle them. Such figures are invariably very closely associated with voting intention, and since this was a 53-47 poll result, it finds Labor improving considerably since the question was last asked as part of the poll of October 7-9, which was a 57-43 result. Labor has recovered big leads on its traditional strong suits of health, education, industrial relations and climate change, and closed the gap on the economy, interest rates and national security. Full tables from GhostWhoVotes.

2780
  • 1
    Pegasus
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    1934pc

    But not too much of a fair go, otherwise they lose the drive to find a job!.

    Is this tongue in cheek, or ru being serious?

  • 2
    The Finnigans
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    Tough Guy Putin cried? Must be the onions

  • 3
    This little black duck
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    David Crowe

    David Uren.

  • 4
    Bushfire Bill
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

    The real problem with the billionaires is their readiness to set up astroturfing operations, claiming they are groundswells of people power, when in fact they are finely targeted, undemocratic, front organizations designed to appear as if they spontaneously just arose from nowhere.

    Clive Palmer’s new Soccer outfit would be a case in point. It was ready to go, with its own logo and two of Palmer’s nephews as as executive directors.

    The Consumers & Taxpayers’ Association is another example: three people run it as a private organization, yet it is depicted as a major public institution. We don’t know who funds that one, but John Singleton (another Swan target and mate of Gina’s) sure gives them a lot of free air time under the guise of talkback radio “listener feedback” calls from its directors that usually go on for 5-10 minutes at a time. Poor Candeloris, for all Generic’s shilling for the Libs, have to pay for a lot less.

    The elephant in the room was Rupert Murdoch. His flagship newspaper runs at a loss and has for years, yet it keeps on churning out anti-Labor, anti-NBN, anti-Carbon Tax, anti-MRRT bilge, day after day. It’s a sheltered workshop that only survives as a newspaper at the political pleasure of its malignant owner and backer. None of the jobs there are real jobs. They are subsidized bully pulpits.

  • 5
    lizzie
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

    tlbd
    No David Uren was another older one. Long speech.

    dave
    The journo’s Q was such a cliche. No imagination.

  • 6
    lizzie
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    Robert Oakeshott MP ‏ @OakeyMP
    guest speaker at independent schools gathering today.Gonski wanted now and in full.Pyne and Coalition position causing surprise/concern.

    Independent schools. That’s interesting.

  • 7
    This little black duck
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:31 pm | Permalink

    Too many Davids …

  • 8
    BK
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

    Independent schools. That’s interesting.

    lizzie
    There’s independent schools and there’s Independent schools

  • 9
    ajm
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

    DWH (from previous thread)

    The problem with the entire mining tax evolution is that it has been poorly managed and communicated and the end result we end up with a flawed policy.

    I agree with you that it was poorly handled. We have learned recently that this was probably caused by Rudd’s fear of doing anything which would hurt his popularity, so the Henry review was kept under wraps for too long and then some bits of it picked out fro implementation.
    However, I doubt whether all the consultation in the world would have prevented the toxic campaign against it.
    I always wondered why they didn’t always call it a resource rent tax – sounds so innocuous. “Super profits tax” seems to be a real in-your-face name. The irony is the “super profits” is really just a technical economists’ term for profits derived as a result of some favourable externality, but that isn’t what the name communicated to the public.

  • 10
    stanny
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

    The narrowing!

  • 11
    confessions
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

    the media also very poorly (14 per cent and 43 per cent)

    This is a pleasant surprise!

  • 12
    my say
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/history-offers-pm-some-hope-20120303-1u9r3.html?skin=text-only

    this is a good read that was about during the time of crickey being down.

  • 13
    Tricot
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

    Not much of a WS fan, but today, at the PC I thought he did very well.

    He appeared confident, did not stumble over his words, kept on message, shelled it out to the journos who asked stupid questions and, most importantly, seemed on the front foot with a message to tell.

    I think the government might just be on a bit of a winner on the “politics of fairness” v the “politics of envy”

    The knee-jerk reaction from the vested interests in the press was thrown back in their faces by S.

    Interestingly I don’t recall one question about “leadership/Rudd/Carr” and all the baggage of just a week ago.

    Oh how quickly the caravan moves on.

  • 14
    DavidWH
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    Ajm I just think we should allow miners make a reasonable return, call it a normal return if you like, but then tax them at a high rate for profits in excess of that normal return, 40 or even 50 percent would be reasonable. However to do that in an effective way you have to properly deal with state royalties. We have just ended up with a poor outcome in my opinion.

  • 15
    ajm
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

    Interesting figures in the Essential poll. The thing that strikes me is that voting intention in recent polls seems to be almost completely decoupled from measure of approval/disapproval.
    I’ve always been very suspicious of approval scores and preferred prime minister scores and this has only confirmed that suspicion.
    The government needs to hammer away at what people risk losing if they vote coalition – that seems to me to be the best way of influencing voters. The government really needs to accept that the public may not approve of them or like them. What needs to happen is for the public to believe that Labor will deliver the NBN, tax cuts for the lower end of the income scale, the MRRT etc and also believe that the coalition will not deliver those things.
    My observation is that this is exactly what the government is doing, so I think the voting intentions will steadily improve from here.

  • 16
    Aguirre
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:49 pm | Permalink

    Interesting breakdowns in the Essential. It’s clearest indication of Ruddstoration! fallout I’ve seen so far.

    The one that most indicates the electorate are out of step with what’s actually happening is that 62% of them thought the challenge was bad for the government. Events since Monday suggest the government are looking more confident and positive. Those same events are likely to make any question about what Rudd should do meaningless. There won’t be any chatter about imminent Rudd challenges, so people will stop thinking about it. They’re divided on the question now, but they’re also of the opinion that it matters, and that won’t last.

    Most alarming is those 31% who want US-style primaries as the method for choosing leaders of parties. What are they thinking? That’ll lead directly to money displacing ability as the major factor in becoming a party leader. I understand they’re piqued at Rudd not being ALP leader, but I really can’t see how having a bunch of people backed by big money falling over themselves to out-bland each other is a step forward.

    Definite signs of Rudd fallout in those breakdowns.

  • 17
    my say
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

    i thought the hand held devices where a futuristic tool. Why is that crickey has now made it so that one has to have as magnifying glass to now read from our tablets Can it be explained to the viewing public why this is so, have tried to push the screen like one can do else where but the lettering remains the same, have clicked on to ‘ switch to standard site,’ ok for crickey news but doesnt not work here.

    so this limits us to computer users it would seem

  • 18
    Pegasus
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:51 pm | Permalink

    Findings from this Essential that Team Labor need to be concerned about:

    30 per cent of Labor voters think that Rudd should stay in Parliament and challenge again.

    The ratings by Labor voters of Gillard’s and Rudd’s performances during the leadership challenge: 50 per cent – good for G vs 49 per cent for R.

    52 per cent of Labor voters think that the party leader should be elected by the person the voters favour.

    Perceptions of ALP supporters out in voterland (i.e. the real world) to the recent leadership fracas, as hinted at by this survey, will need to be countered by vigorous grassroots activity.

  • 19
    ajm
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

    DWH

    Ajm I just think we should allow miners make a reasonable return, call it a normal return if you like, but then tax them at a high rate for profits in excess of that normal return, 40 or even 50 percent would be reasonable. However to do that in an effective way you have to properly deal with state royalties. We have just ended up with a poor outcome in my opinion.

    Couldn’t agree more. From what I read at the time, the proposed super profits tax was actually quite beneficial to mines in their startup stage and really soaked the big established miners (BHP, Rio, Xstrata). The big miners got a much better deal in the end, at the expense of the government (to some extent) but also of startup mines. Ironically the vehement opposition from a lot of the smaller miners ended up rebounding on them and (relatively) benefiting their bigger more established opposition. Their tactics were only going to be a winner if they stopped the tax entirely.

  • 20
    my say
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

    [ the link above gives a few examples of what people think about the poll
    [
    Mr Catsaras, who has aggregated polling data from September 2010, said Labor's support plummeted after announcing the carbon tax in February last year. However, support for the government has gradually improved since July, as the heat has come out of the carbon debate}
    POST 12 WORTH THE READ ABOVE.
    also see what others think.

  • 21
    my say
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

    {Mr Catsaras, who has aggregated polling data from September 2010, said Labor’s support plummeted after announcing the carbon tax in February last year. However, support for the government has gradually improved since July, as the heat has come out of the carbon debate}

    sorry forgot the links.

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/history-offers-pm-some-hope-20120303-1u9r3.html?skin=text-only

  • 22
    Gary
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

    Findings from this Essential that Team Labor need to be concerned about:

    30 per cent of Labor voters think that Rudd should stay in Parliament and challenge again.

    Does that mean 70% don’t?

  • 23
    ruawake
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

    Seems the press missed Swannie’s little joke about Gina’s damage to poetry. :lol:

  • 24
    Gary
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    ATM I don’t think Labor should be concentrating on any poll. Just get the job done and sell the bloody thing.

  • 25
    Pegasus
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    “Super profits tax” seems to be a real in-your-face name.

    Yeah, incredibly stupid. If u r going to try and implement a change that will put powerful vested interests offside, at least call such a measure by a euphemism palatable to the public at large.

    Politics 101 in selling a message.

  • 26
    zoomster
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    peg

    except, if these views are held by people who say they’re voting Labor, they’re not a concern.

    If, taking all those things into consideration, they still say they’ve voting Labor, that makes them pretty solid.

    I’m more interested in how we can get people who identify themselves as undecided or Liberal voting to switch to Labor, not the private angsts of those who have already decided to stick with the government.

  • 27
    CTar1
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

    49% of Greens think the leader should be elected by the parliamentary party members.

  • 28
    ajm
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

    Pegasus

    Perceptions of ALP supporters out in voterland (i.e. the real world) to the recent leadership fracas, as hinted at by this survey, will need to be countered by vigorous grassroots activity.

    I think all of this is pretty ephemeral. As long as Rudd fades from view and the government keeps on delivering these views will quickly dissipate. The attention span of the public to political drama would make a gnat look like a historian.

  • 29
    Pegasus
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    Gary

    Does that mean 70% don’t?

    10 out of 10 for your arithmetic skills.

    Good to c that u understand what really matters and what needs to be pointed out ;-)

  • 30
    The Finnigans
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    Findings from this Essential that Team Labor need to be concerned about:

    30 per cent of Labor voters think that Rudd should stay in Parliament and challenge again.

    Horsey, your hoof is showing

  • 31
    Burgey
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    Aguirre,

    I don’t think it’s ever about the electorate being out of step with a Party. It’s whether the Party is in step with the electorate.

  • 32
    DavidWH
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    Or if you are going to call something super profits then ensure what you are proposing remotely looks like super profits. Swan seemed to confuse returns above the risk less rate as super profits which made him look foolish from day 1.

  • 33
    Tom Hawkins
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:05 pm | Permalink

    49% of Greens think the leader should be elected by the parliamentary party members.

    100% of billionaires think that Lib leaders should be elected by billionaires.

  • 34
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:05 pm | Permalink

    I posted this on the previous thread before realising this new thread was open. So here it is again:

    New post at The Daily Derp:

    Voters Don’t Like LNP On Any Of The Issues

    It’d be nice if this one went viral, so Tweeters, Facebookers, all users of social media, do your thang :grin:

    Send it to members of the Government, media and everyone else you can think of.

    The link for the article is http://bit.ly/w1Uk2e

  • 35
    ajm
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

    DWH

    Swan seemed to confuse returns above the risk less rate as super profits which made him look foolish from day 1.

    That’s the problem of using technical economic terms. especially if they sound scary! “Resource rent” is technical as well but it just sounds boring so it goes through unnoticed.

  • 36
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

    My Say

    The new post was inspired by your comments at The Derp :wink:

  • 37
    DavidWH
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    Very true ajm and the initial policy was over complex. But yes the terminology created a rod for their own back.

  • 38
    dave
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

    DavidWH
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    Or if you are going to call something super profits then ensure what you are proposing remotely looks like super profits. Swan seemed to confuse returns above the risk less rate as super profits which made him look foolish from day 1.

    A very silly comment.

    The Iron Ore miners were doing very well with prices at about $30 on tonne. Its now still around $140 on tonne and the tonnages shipped have increased enormously and will increase even further in coming years.

    They are clearly making super profits from our national non renewable resources.

    Look at the chart -

    http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=iron-ore&months=120

  • 39
    CTar1
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

    Swann should keep on with the equality thing – it will bear fruit.

    Others should leave him to it and keep on with other messages.

    Swan’s targets will think twice if they think he’ll pop up and brand them as greedy if they make a silly statement.

    (on Forrests ad in the papers – I cut mine out, wrote ‘returning unused butt wipe to poor Andrew’ and posted it to Fortescue this morning)

  • 40
    my say
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

    thanks dan.

    I was rather surprised in my link to see what Mr Bowe think of mid term polls and other thoughts.

  • 41
    Pegasus
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:16 pm | Permalink

    zoomster

    except, if these views are held by people who say they’re voting Labor, they’re not a concern.

    Of course. Depends how confident ur that this is the case.

    IMO it is better to proceed on the basis that these statistics might reflect that there r enough Labor voters who will switch to Liberals at the next election to usher in an Abbott government.

    Team Labor must be proactive and take up the fight. It must take nothing for granted, including that there will not be an early election.

    I’m more interested in how we can get people who identify themselves as undecided or Liberal voting to switch to Labor, not the private angsts of those who have already decided to stick with the government.

    As am I but I do not make the assumptions being made by some PBers.

    Assume nothing. If your assumptions r correct then nothing is lost.

    However, if u take certain things for granted, eg that entrenched attitudes which impact on voting behaviour will change between now and the next election, then u have everything to lose.

  • 42
    BK
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:16 pm | Permalink

    If the Federal Government splashed two page ads in the papers there would be hell to pay.
    Given Twiggy’s record on payment of taxes we could safely say that in both cases the ads would be at taxpayers’ expense.

  • 43
    Gary
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

    10 out of 10 for your arithmetic skills.

    Good to c that u understand what really matters and what needs to be pointed out

    Just pointing out the very positive rather than the negative as some want to do.

  • 44
    DavidWH
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

    Dave I am in no doubt many miners are earning above normal returns at present but that has little to do with my comment you referred to.

  • 45
    dave
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

    Nonsense – they are making super profits and you know it.

  • 46
    my say
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    posting here is very difficult with a hand held device almost impossible, as one cannot read what one is typing,

    but i consider the hand held device more conduceive to being social, as in sitting in the same room as my beloved, its seems little thought was made for us who dont want to be cloistered away in the study.. Hope franks view keeps there print large or is this now the trend is this the latest in technology just wondering.

  • 47
    Pegasus
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    CTar1,

    If u think i am the enemy then u r making an assumption.

    Focus on the real enemy.

    Build alliances.

  • 48
    victoria
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

    my say

    You can increase the font size by stretching out the screen with your fingers

  • 49
    Pegasus
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    Gary,

    Just pointing out the very positive rather than the negative as some want to do.

    No, ur burying your head in the sand.

    Unpalatable ‘truths’ (it’s all relative) must be faced and countered.

  • 50
    lizzie
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    my say
    Surely there is a size control on your page?

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...