Morgan face-to-face: 55-45 to Coalition
Morgan has published its results from last weekend’s face-to-face polling, showing Labor and the Coalition both down half a point on the primary vote, to 36.5% and 45% respectively, with the Greens up two to 12.5%. The headline respondent-allocated preference figure is up from 54-46 to 55-45, but as always with Morgan this is heavily at odds with the 51.5-48.5 result using the industry standard measure of preferences as per the result of the last election. Also as always, it needs to be remembered that the primary vote figures in Morgan’s face-to-face polling are biased to Labor: at the four elections since 2001 Labor’s primary vote has been overstated by an average of 3.7% and Coalition’s understated by 3.6%, although it was less pronounced in 2010 (1.9% and 2.0%).
Morgan has also published phone poll results of state voting intention for New South Wales and Victoria from small samples (479 and 408 respectively), though not as small as some Morgan have passed off in the past. As with other polls, it shows the O’Farrell government holding its ground since the election on the primary vote, on which it leads 49% to 24.5% (51.2% to 25.6% at the election) with the Greens on 13% (10.3%). This time though, Morgan has produced a quirky respondent-allocated preference split which favours Labor: the LNP leads 58.5-41.5 on their published figure, but on 2011 election preferences it would be 64-46, just as it was at the election. Both New South Wales and Victorian results come with figures for leaders’ personal ratings, for what they are worth.
The Victorian figures have the Coalition at 45.5% against 44.8% at the election, Labor at 35.5% against 36.2% and the Greens at 12.5% against 11.2%. This pans out to 53-47 on Morgan’s published preferences figure, or 52-48 using the previous-election method. There was also the matter of Saturday’s Niddrie by-election, which was very easy to overlook because of events in Queensland and the no-show by the Liberals. Labor’s Ben Carroll polled 46.8% compared with Rob Hulls’ 45.7% at the election, with the remainder scattered very evenly among the other eight candidates. The VEC conducted a notional two-party count between Labor and the Greens which had the margin 20.7%, but the Greens actually finished third some distance behind independent Andrea Surace. Preferences were only distributed to the stage where Labor secured a majority, so no two-candidate preferred margin is available (UPDATE: Lenxyz in comments points out I wasn’t looking hard enough: a full preference count shows Carroll with 18371 to 8967 for Surace for a 2PP of 67-33).
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-, NSW Politics, Victorian Politics
One of the reasons for the Buswell effect is because Abbott doesn’t exert an authority over his partyroom in the same way Gillard does hers. Abbott is left sucking up to whatever populist cause he can get his hands on (like Buswell) in an attempt to maintain the polling, which is manifesting in a kind of forelock-tugging at the Nationals, and an abandonment of what the Liberal party actually stands for.
Labor went through this in the Rudd era: manipulation of the 24/7 news cycle in an attempt to maintain the stratospheric polling and an abandonment of substantive policy follow-through. Suffice to say, it didn’t end well.
by confessions on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:07 am
Not all polls show her that low.
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:07 am
No good telling me about the polls to show they aren’t soft. Labor had massive leads for two years and we know how that ended up don’t we.
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:09 am
Jonesy, Hadley and other Sydney Shock Jocks are heard all over NSW and QLD
by Muskiemp on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:11 am
No use speculating on the carbon tax either. It’s not in yet. Let’s see how people view it in 12 months time.
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:12 am
Just amazing.
There has been historic stability in the Opposition since Abbott took over, think back over the last quarter century of oppositions.
There has been quite a lot of Cabinet leaking since Gillard has been leader. Half the cabinet implied Rudd had mental health problems, yet a third of the caucus still preferred him over her just weeks ago.
Nevertheless, you believe whatever you wish, and presume NSW, and Qld is not about to happen again, I guess. Everyone has the right to choose their own poison.
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:12 am
Are you really saying those governments lost because of the federal government?
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:14 am
Someone on here the other day (I can’t recall who off th top of my head) was asking about local astroturfing operations.
I managed to find this, which may be of interest to them.
It’s an Exiled Online article on the Convoy of No Consequence last year and who, exactly, was behind it all. Some familiar names get a run and some, no so familair.
Joe6 pack will probably recognise Mr Mick Pattel.
Charming people, all.
http://exiledonline.com/teabagger-dundee-america-exports-libertarian-revolution-to-australia/
by smithe on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:14 am
Correct.
Some show her even lower than 26%!
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:14 am
The ALP is in such a mess because the don’t defend their territory(policy).
by Muskiemp on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:15 am
And Victoria, South Australia and the Northern Territory.
Anti-Labor/anti-Green/pro-Liebral propaganda across the country every day…
by Cuppa on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:15 am
Which one?
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:15 am
@mod lib,
I can’t wait till you actually critise the Liberal party for once.
Till that day – be quiet (Of course – I could say shut up too).
All you do is bloody whinge about the party you will never vote or never speak up or never support a policy from.
by zoidlord on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:16 am
No.
The ALP brand is on the nose.
The ALP are hopeful that a classic NSW Right powerbroker moving to Canberra is going to solve their problems. His initial judgements have shown that is unlikely to be the case.
The Qld example shows clearly that making a clear promise before an election and clearly breaking it immediately after an election makes you a lame duck government.
Sleepwalking to oblivion is what is going on here, that realisation will eventually dawn.
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:17 am
I dont’ have to go back a quarter of a century. I only have to go back to Beazley, who enjoyed a partyroom support far greater than Abbott’s leadership vote.
We already know there are Abbott’s own frontbenchers who are speaking out publicly against the leader/party policy on issues. The more the debate shifts to policy, the more the coalition fall apart simply because they aren’t up to the task of taking policy stuff head on.
All of it courtesy of Rudd and his backers who refused to accept the will of Caucus. Now that there’s been a vote which overwhelmingly favoured the PM, the media debate has shifted markedly from Labor’s internal woes, to policy. All of which is bad news for Tony Abbott and the opposition.
by confessions on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:18 am
Sep 2nd
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:18 am
ATM. That’s not to say it will be in 18 months time.
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:19 am
I meant different polling organisations when I said not all polls show her that low.
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:20 am
Even when the Liebrals (inevitably) move to wind back the wages and living standards of his neighbours and loved ones he won’t complain. Faschismus über alles
by Cuppa on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:21 am
Lol. Surely you jest.
Every second day it seems that one front bencher is saying something to contradict another on policy. Sometimes several times in the same day. Hell, they’re not even rstricting warfare to policy, if I read Sophie’s attitude to Heff aright.
And this is stability?
Just because the Federal leadership door appears to have been wedged-shut by Credlin with a piece of Turnbull’s shattered skull doesn’t mean that there are no leadership frictions or internal fractures splitting the Tories Hell West and Crooked.
Hell, they’re lucky to get them all into the same room together sometimes without blood flowing.
Then there’s the Nationals. Most Libs seem about ready to strangle their hayseed partners-in-crime, especially Barnaby the Blowhard and that epic retard Truzz.
by smithe on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:26 am
Baillieu has broken a few election promises so far. He seems to be still doing well in the polls.
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:27 am
On average, over the last 40 years of Australian governments, the Liberal party has overseen:
1. Higher real wage rises than the ALP
2. Lower inflation than the ALP
3. Lower home interest rates than the ALP
4. Lower Unemployment than the ALP
More likely to have a job, more likely to have a wage rise, more able to spend the money given lower inflation, and less on interest rates….it would appear that the facts suggest the little bloke does pretty well under Liberal rule.
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:27 am
smithe:
Have you seen what the Treasurer said about the former Foreign Minister?
Or what a Tasmanian ALP MP said about the PM (“credibility problem”)
Or….
oh why bother, we will be seeing all of these things again and again in Liberal party advertising at the next election so why steal the thunder now?
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:30 am
You have the figures to back this up?
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:32 am
@Mod Lib/220
Sounding like a true fan of the libs – do you keep a brochure ?
by zoidlord on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:32 am
By the time of the next election that will be stale news.
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:33 am
Btw @Mod Lib – you can’t say having lower broadband prices atm under the liberals – because back then it was skyrocketed under Telstra!
by zoidlord on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:34 am
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1011/11rp12
Feel free to analyse yourself
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:34 am
@Gary
That’s because Baillieu is a male and a Liberal. That makes breaking election promises perfectly fine.
If you’re not a male, well, break one promise and you’re a lying bitch and despised by the electorate forever. If you’re Labor, well, that makes it twice as bad. A Socialist Lying Bitch is of course the lowest tier of Australian Society.
by Von Kirsdarke on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:34 am
Your “party” holds as a core ideal SerfChoices, which has one aim: to cut the wages and living standards of your neighbours and loved ones. Taken to its “logical” extension it would see Australia as a sweatshop economy (think Bangladesh) Banana republic, where billionaires and a corrupt inner circle piss over everyone else. With all the media int he country onside, and a ruffian redneck who advocates “Guided Democracy”, you people plan a living hell for fellow Australians.
by Cuppa on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:34 am
Crashing.
Mod Lib just leave those figures here. I will catch up with them tomorrow. I suspect the 40 year span was picked for a reason. The list not that impressive taken over a shorter time maybe? Hmm?
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:35 am
Thunder?
Mate we know our lot, but more importantly we know your lot.
As PK would say, don’t waste your time on us, son: Look to yourselves. We know you. We know you.
You couldn’t put together a soccer wall without the those forming it trying to tear each others’ nuts off.
How’s Santo these days, Btw? Still trying to run QLD is he?
by smithe on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:37 am
Cuppa:
I think workchoices was Howard’s biggest mistakes. Having said that, the principle of Liberal party workplace relations reform is to increase flexibility and get the unions out of the way of increased productivity.
Its not about lower wages for workers, its about flexibility.
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:38 am
One final word. Cuppa, it could be that the electorate needs a good dose of Liberalism, ie Workchoices mark 11, to get their minds right again.
by Gary on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:38 am
The only thing these halfwits have ‘going’ for them are Spin and Lies, plus the most biased media on the planet outside of Malaysia and North Korea to do propaganda duties.
by Cuppa on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:40 am
You are blaming me for the Australian Parliamentary Library release now eh?
I have just looked at the data they have released. If you have a better dataset please let me know and I will look at it.
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:41 am
@Mod Lib – you’re numbers fail
- GDP Numbers are actually greater under ALP (especially Rudd/Gillard)
- Household Savings are greater under ALP
- Inflation under Rudd/Gillard is 2.8 vs 2.6 under LNP/Nats.
- Long Term Unemployment is lower under Rudd/Gillard.
- Mature Age Unemployment is also lower under Rudd/Gillard.
- Labour force participation rate higher with Rudd/Gillard
- Labour productivity is lower under Rudd/Gillard
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1011/11rp12#_Toc292724156
by zoidlord on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:42 am
Is seven MPs enough to put together a soccer wall?
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:44 am
For “flexibility” read: Third World pay and conditions, leading (as is the intent) to a Third World sweatshop economy.
For “getting unions out” read: One-party state, unions being the backbone of the Labor Party.
All the things I said in my previous comment.
Keep your spin and forked-tongue speak for your own kind.
by Cuppa on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:44 am
Unions are the backbone of the ALP, I grant you that.
They are not the backbone of Australia, certainly not 21st century Australia. That is where the ALP has lost the plot.
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:45 am
Which is code for lower wages.
Do you think we’re all fuacking daft?
If the punters could figure-out what this little gem meant last time, do you seriously think they’l have forgotten?
Jesus H. You tried that euphemism once before and came a gutser. Just going to keep plugging away with it are you?
Just because your lot have the memoriy span of a goldfish doesn’t mean the Australian people do.
by smithe on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:46 am
Is higher or lower better?
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:47 am
Gary,
There’s definitely no teacher like bitter experience. Pity about the most biased media in the free world though. 90 per cent of the Liebrals’ ‘influence’ over the electorate lies right there.
by Cuppa on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:47 am
@Mod Lib/240,
You calling a 0.2 difference bad?
by zoidlord on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:50 am
You’ll grant me nothing. I told it to you in the first place. I grant you the information.
That’s why you far-right totalitarians have always vilified unions. One: because they form the backbone of your main political rivals. If you destroy unions you destroy your political competition, making possible the realisation of the one-party fascist agenda. And Two: because they’re the only force standing between the Liebrals and their “vision” for coming generations of Third World working conditions and economy.
by Cuppa on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:52 am
Well, this place is certainly good for a laugh!
Afraid its time for bed. Back for Newshour probably for those who want to re-engage.
Au revoir…
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:52 am
@Mod Lib
You must lead a boring life – if you think talking about politics is a good laugh? Makes me wonder if you’re trolling.
by zoidlord on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:56 am
ModLib,
You guys have really got to invest in a Thesaurus or something.
Start using a few new words, other than “productivity” and “flexibility”. They’re a bit shop-soiled these days, having had the crap flogged out of them by Labor over the last two Federal Elections on the trot.
No, really mate, you need some new words to encode the fuacking you’re planning for wages and conditions here.
The punters have twigged to the ones you use now. They have broken your Enigma. They’ve woken-up to you.
Maybe if your lot start to use a few more words, you just might wake-up to a few new concepts too. Like equity, fairness and social justice. Maybe even to that old Australian classic: A fair Go.
Remember that one?
Labor has never forgotten it or what it means.
by smithe on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:57 am
I wouldn’t waste too much time worrying about my life.
I just find the suspension of common sense here amazing. Gillard has done nothing wrong, everything is going well, its just media bias, its just “the bogans”.
The inability to acknowledge the reality of the current situation is what I find amusing.
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 12:58 am
7 seats to 78 seats.
“They’ve woken up to you”…..your dreaming.
by Mod Lib on Mar 31, 2012 at 1:00 am