Newspoll: 57-43 to Coalition
A bad result for the government in the latest fortnightly Newspoll, with the Coalition’s two-party lead out from 54-46 to 57-43. The primary votes are 28 per cent for Labor (down three) and 47 per cent for the Coalition (up four). Julia Gillard at least has the consolation that her personal ratings have improved from the previous fortnight’s dismal result, with her approval up three to 31 per cent and disapproval down four to 58 per cent. Tony Abbott’s ratings are unchanged at 32 per cent approval and 58 per cent disapproval, and there is likewise essentially no change on preferred prime minister (Gillard leads 40-37, up from 39-37).
Another consolation for Labor is the possibility that a bit of static might be expected from a poll conducted over the same weekend as a state election such as the one in Queensland. They can be fortified in this view by the fact that their standing improved in this week’s Essential Research poll, the most recent weekly component of which was conducted over a longer period than Newspoll (Wednesday to Sunday rather than Friday to Sunday). Very unusually, given that Essential is a two-week rolling average, this showed a two-point shift on two-party preferred, with the Coalition lead shrinking from 56-44 to 54-46. Given that Essential spiked to 57-43 a fortnight ago, and the sample which sent it there has now washed out of the rolling average, this is not entirely surprising. Labor’s primary vote is up two to 34 per cent, and the Coalition’s is down one to 47 per cent. Further questions featured in the poll cover the economy, its prospects, best party to handle it and personal financial situation (slightly more optimism than six months ago, and Labor up in line with its overall improvement since then), job security, Kony 2012, taking sickies and the impact of the high dollar.
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
Finns
That would be an extreme case, then.
by Boerwar on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:33 pm
[ Thornleigh Labor Man
Posted Tuesday, March 27, 2012 at 3:36 pm | Permalink
Latest from David Pembarthy:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/election-rout-could-signal-kevin-rudds-return/story-e6frfhqf-1226310671214
Good old Pembo.
As Keating would say: Like dogs returning to their own vomit.
by smithe on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:33 pm
I see Annastacia Palaszczuk has put her hand up for QLD ALP leader, while I know nothing about her and thus couldn’t comment on her quality for the role, I will make my comment on the inevitable “gender tokenism” debate that will inevitably occur and say it’s a good thing that women are frequently seeing themselves as viable candidates for their party’s leadership. I hope to see more of it. On both sides.
As for the argument that voters don’t like women, more female leaders in the future would decrease such a prejudice.
Next stop: maybe some leaders who aren’t white?
by Carey Moore on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:33 pm
Dennis came cheap.
http://www.theage.com.au/business/media-and-marketing/failed-radio-station-in-debt-to-celebrities-20120327-1vvtp.html#ixzz1qIQqWww4
by Bushfire Bill on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:34 pm
See, if you wait long enough in politics things do turn your way.
Interestingly, some tory political pundits have made a shift – not widely touted – to the effect that they do recognise their boy Abbott is despised and rejected by most of the Oz electorate.
Their tune is now, “Look we know he doesn’t appeal to everyone, but if it means getting rid of Gillard then I think you, the Oz electorate, could stomach him.”
Once they would never had admitted their pin up boy had any issues, but even they have to concede the electorate might need to look beyond Abbott to the “goodies” a conservative government might bring.
This is a telling shift, as they are starting to get anxious, that despite Abbott’s unrelenting negativity, it is not really getting him closer to the lodge than 18 months ago.
And make no mistake the Dr No thing is biting.
In a letter to the editor of the West, today, by one of in-house, tame cat conservative writers the editor often gives a forum to (she seems to have a letter published every second day!), a one Viv Murray says the following:
“Calling him (Abbott) Dr No, Mr Negative and Mad Monk gets very boring (to her one assumes)……..If Mr Abbott has be negative (the fact she thinks there is some doubt about it speaks volumes) it is because we have had so much bad policy from Labor.
(And the clincher) Why should the Liberal-National coalition be telling Labor what its future policies will be so far ahead of the next election?”
The fact of course, that perhaps the Oz electorate might like to see Abbott’s policies seems to have escaped her notice.
She then finishes with:
“Until the next election is called it is up to the Opposition to hold the Government to account by criticising poor decisions. If there are lots of poor decisions, there will be lost of negativity towards them, not just from Mr Abbott, but from voters as well.”
So there you have it from the conservatives play book of policy making.
For mine, for a one-eyed conservative which this woman is week in and week out, to have to defend Abbott’s negativity in this way shows Labor has at least one winner on him.
The better policy of course, is to ignore him.
by Tricot on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:35 pm
BB
Funniest thing I have read in a long time. Thanks for the laugh!!!
by victoria on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:35 pm
Well aint that spiteful!
by billie on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:35 pm
Which is what I stated earlier, the legislation is in effect and Newman will blame Labor.
by ruawake on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:36 pm
Is this in Australia’s best interests?
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/us-and-australia-discuss-drone-flights-over-indian-ocean-20120327-1vw10.html
by Pegasus on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:38 pm
I did? If I thought you were I liar I would not imply it.
by ruawake on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:38 pm
DavidWH, even you would surely admit that 50% is a big jump. Little wonder he did not talk about this before the election. What an extraordinary betrayal of trust. And so soon.
by joe2 on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:38 pm
BB
Did Mr Bolt feature in the debtors list? Or was he prudent in terms of demanding his payments upfront?
by Boerwar on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:39 pm
Now that does require a “PLEASE EXPLAIN”
by The Finnigans on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:40 pm
Alliances and coalitions. And gerrymanders.
People should look up the australian electoral commision 2010 federal election results. Primary votes: ALP 37.99%, Liberal 30.46% Greens 11.76% LNP Qld 9.12% Nationals 3.73% Informal 5.55% All others 1.39%
Progressives: 49.75 Conservatives: 43.31 Informal 5.55% All others 1.39%
Those “others” include Cruikshank, Wilkie and Windsor.
2pp ALP 50.12 LNP 49.88
Total seats won: ALP 72, Liberal 44, LNP Qld 21, Nats 7, Greens 1, Country Liberals 1, Independents 4
Progressives: 76 seats Conservatives 74 seats
Nats polled one third the votes of the Greens, and won 7 times the seats.
Now, to the charge that ALP needs minor preferences to form Govt. This is true. The truth is also that the LNP need minor preferences to form Govt.
Get this: from 2010 federal election.
64 seats were won by first preference vote. Alp 24, LNP 39, Independent 1
The ALP won 48 seats after going to preferences.
The LNP won 32 seats after going to preferences.
Facts dispel fiction, but unfortunetaly they do not dispel myths.
by dedalus on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:40 pm
SHY obvious non sequitur:
What does the 2nd paragraph have to do with the first? SHY has quoted the UNHCR as talking about improving conditions in transit countries.
I’m assuming there’s an implied “if we take more refugees from transit countries that will ‘improve’ the transit countries”, which doesn’t – to my mind – make any sense whatsoever.
And it’s also my biggest gripe with the Greens’ position on the Malaysia arrangement – it represented the single biggest opportunity for improving the lot of asylum seekers in Malaysia that Australia could facilitate.
I don’t particularly want to enter another round of ALP bashing over the “evils” of the Malaysia deal, but Pegasus does quote SHY at us and I’m not going to let that go unchallenged.
by Jackol on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:41 pm
Pegasus:
And yet you preference the Liberal Party above the Labor Party and would again? What?
Too many cognitive disconnects going on there.
by Fiz on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:41 pm
Horsey, NO
by The Finnigans on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:41 pm
Funny thing is when Abbott is PM, the attitude of the Coalition and its hacks will go from “it’s the opposition’s job to oppose.” to “the government was elected to govern. Stop opposing us and being negative!”
by Carey Moore on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:42 pm
Tricot @ 294
Thank you for that.
Unfortunately, this is the conclusion i have also reached.
by Pegasus on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:42 pm
there are some posters here who resort to juvenille behaviour
wtf does a persons financial matters matter
a continuing decline into dross and drivel by a once eadable poster
more like a farting spark than a wildfire
by gusface on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:42 pm
by victoria on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:42 pm
50% increase in power prices is because of:
1. Anna Bligh’s incompetence
2. Julia Gillards carbon tax
by GeeWizz on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:43 pm
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/russian-pm-vladimir-putin-to-visit-israel-in-june-1.420873
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/03/inside-rick-santorums-alternate-reality/255057/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/mar/26/news-corp-ondigital-paytv-panorama
by Leroy on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:43 pm
Fiz
I have never preferenced Liberals above Labor in a Federal election and would never do so.
by Pegasus on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:44 pm
Truthie, in the immortal words of Tony Abbott: The power price is now Newman’s problem
by The Finnigans on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:44 pm
eadable being of course shorthand for readable among us 6.5 star bisons
by gusface on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:44 pm
Newliar, GeeWizz, ‘new-man-liar’ and you know it.
by joe2 on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:46 pm
I’m with Finns on the policy of opposing increased peace time* interlocking of US/Australian militaries. Quite simply, it reduces our sovereignity.
Come to think of it, where is the public discussion on the policy aspects of the status of forces agreement?
*’Peace’ time if you count our Afghanistan adventurism as being more like a squabble over the opium trade.
by Boerwar on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:47 pm
wizzer
You can’t blame the carbon tax, Campbell needs the $365 million it pays him.
by ruawake on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:48 pm
Miracle Man had better start fixing that economy with plans other than cranking the energy COL by 50%.
What a whacker.
by Boerwar on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:48 pm
In my quest to make sure the oration is authentic, and not just satire, I went to:
http://greensmps.org.au/
…which is the truly ruly website for Green MPs.
And yes, there’s a link on the front page to the oration (it comes up in the feature box, which scrolls through a number of different topics, so you may have to wait for a few minutes for it to flash up) to:
http://greensmps.org.au/content/news-stories/bob-brown-delivers-3rd-annual-green-oration
So it’s real, all right.
Some snippets:
It’s all very florid and over blown rhetoric.
by zoomster on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:49 pm
Regardless of what the recommendation on power prices is, it’s Campbell Newman’s call as to what the actual increase will be.
If he campaigned so strongly on “cost of living” then he deserves to lose some paint over any significant increase in charges that he has control over. Live by the sword etc.
I note that there is probably a fair amount of expectation management (ie spin) occurring here – a leak about the largest possible increase “50%!”, which Campbell Newman can then undercut in terms of actual increase so people think “Oh that’s not so bad”. It’s still spin and still worthy of criticism if he has just been hammering CoL in the election campaign and follows through with a significant increase.
But still, he hasn’t done anything yet, so it’s a bit silly to be going on about hypothetical price rises at this point.
by Jackol on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:50 pm
Fear not dave. She’ll no doubt have them extended-out to the stilt-size by the time she fronts the High Court on Special Leave to Appeal day. Doubtless it will be a short hearing.
Still, it would be worth paying good money to view the spectacle of something resembling an an 8 foot-tall brolga stepping up to the Bar Table.
by smithe on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:50 pm
The way to make a 30% price increase “palatable” is to threaten a 50% increase.
by This little black duck on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Of course, Newman’s government will continue with the tradition honoured by both side of politics, of opening the books and “discovering” the state of things are far worse than expected. This “tradition” as well as the accompanying honeymoon period will shield them from any criticism of anything bad happening under them as just a hangover from the previous government, as well as give them elbow room to revise their pre-election promises.
by Carey Moore on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:52 pm
The more the Queensland electricity prices rise now the less will be the proportionate impact of the carbon price.
by BK on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:52 pm
Some unhappy campers:
by B.C. on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:52 pm
P and T
One of the preconditions for centre-left organisational sanity is the Labor continues to enjoy the fruits of opposition. I am guessing, but my view is that that will take 10-20 years to sink in.
Of course another precondition for centre-left organisationals sanity is for the Greens party to notice that the planet will continue to go to hell in a handbasket while they compete with their centre-left party partners rather than co-operate structurally to destroy the conservative rightists who are busy cooking the planet as we write. I imagine that will also take 10-20 years to sink in.
The only real problem with the 10-20 year scenario is that we will have passed through 400ppm during that time span. We don’t actually have the time that the centre-left protagonists appear to believe that we have.
by Boerwar on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:52 pm
QLD Labor = The shadow kitchen cabinet with a few guests over for dinner.
by rummel on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:53 pm
Yes. This stinks of both hubris and spite.
I hope Hubby has the financial security and style to tell him where to shove it and perhaps recommend ex-Senator Flow or one the Bjelke Petersen clan, or maybe a real LNP stalwart like Bill O’Chee, for the chainsaw job.
by smithe on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:54 pm
Bob Brown wants an Earth Govt. Maybe the tin foilers were correct.
I guess earthers is better than friends.
by ruawake on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:54 pm
GeeWizz
Orrrrrrrr. From November 2009. Their Nov 2011 estimate is 42%, close to ruas 50%.
http://www.aemc.gov.au/Media/docs/Information%20sheet-9110c5bf-385f-4ed4-8642-f9569133e97e-0.pdf
by poroti on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:55 pm
Kerry Packer said there was nothing there after being “death” for 10mins. James Cameron said there’s nothing there at the deepest ocean
by The Finnigans on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:55 pm
r
You talkin’ Clive?
by Boerwar on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:55 pm
And just to follow up on 712. Would the coalition ever win an election without the outrageous rural electorate gerrymander? And what does it say about country people that they will vote for a flake like katter, who wins them so little, and disparage canny politicians like Windsor, who win them so much?
And why have country towns been dying, and the bush going bust? Why do these good honest trusting folk vote in 7 national MP’s who end up doing so very little for their interests? Why do they vote for those who are opposing the NBN rollout, one of the few bright rays of hope for regional Australia?
Questions to be answered, my bushie friends.
by dedalus on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:56 pm
d
One reason is that lots of your bushie friends would have cherish values over their hip pockets. In other words, they would rather be a bit poorer as long as it means that gays can’t marry one another.
by Boerwar on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:58 pm
Doesn’t it stand to reason that public servants are at the bidding of the government of the day? If they can’t act in the service of the government they have every right to resign. I don’t see any ‘spite’ in requiring public servants to do their job.
by ltep on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:58 pm
Itep
Yep.
by Boerwar on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:59 pm
QCA will report electricity pricing with and without the CPS element so it should be easy to determine the CPS impact.
by DavidWH on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:59 pm
And for something a bit more dispassionate from the current Economist:
In a generally up-beat article about JG under the heading: “Your Tax or Mine?” – “Lucky Julia chalks up another political victory”, the writer concludes as follows:
“While they argue, (here referring to Forrest, Barnett and the Big Miners)……..Ms Gillard seems to be the biggest political winner.
“Five months ago she won parliamentary approval for a plan to price carbon, another idea Mr Rudd proposed and then mismanaged………….”
“These victories have strengthened her authority and, for the moment, defied critics’ predictions of her imminent demise.”
We would never see this kind of analysis in the Oz media, and, of course, not many read the Economist either I would have thought.
Looking at the current Newspoll would not give this flavour either, but then, I see nearly all reference to it has all be disappeared from on-line news.
However, from the hurly-burly of day to day politics from outside, the above seems a fair and balanced view of events I would have thought.
by Tricot on Mar 27, 2012 at 5:59 pm