Nielsen: 57-43 to Coalition
The latest monthly Nielsen result backs up Newspoll’s 57-43 result from last week, out from 53-47 when Nielsen last polled in the days preceding the leadership challenge. At 27% for Labor (down a dizzying seven points on the previous poll) and 47% for the Coalition (up three), the primary vote results are likewise all but identical to Newspoll’s (28% and 47%). Tony Abbott has widened his preferred prime minister lead from 47-46 to 48-44, while Joe Hockey is found to lead Wayne Swan 45-43 as preferred treasurer. The results of this poll support Newspoll and to a lesser extent Morgan in showing a further blowout in the Coalition lead in the wake of the leadership challenge: the only holdout so far as Essential Research, which shall as usual report tomorrow.
UPDATE: Full tables from GhostWhoVotes. Nielsen also shows Julia Gillard’s approval rating unchanged last time at 36 per cent approval (steady) and 59 per cent disapproval (down one) – a substantially higher approval rating than from Newspoll, though this is partly as a result of the unusual fact that Nielsen produces lower undecided ratings on these questions. Tony Abbott is respectively down two to a new low of 39 per cent and steady on 56 per cent. Also:
• State breakdowns suggest an upheaval of biblical dimensions has driven the northern and southern states apart: compared with last month’s two-party preferred figures, Labor is down ten points in Queensland and eight in New South Wales (and by five points in Western Australia besides), but is up by four in both Victoria (where Labor holds a 51-49 lead) and South Australia. This is a correction – probably an over-correction – from the previous result in which Labor occupied a narrow band from 44 per cent and 49 per cent across the five states, implausibly scoring weaker in Victoria than New South Wales and South Australia than Queensland. It should be remembered that all of these state sub-samples are modest, and that the margin of error approaches double figures in the smaller states.
• There are also some diverting results from the gender and city/rural breakdowns, which being binary offer bigger samples and margins of error of about 3.5 per cent. The gender gap, as measured by the differential in the two major parties’ net primary votes, has blown out from one point to 12. Labor is down nine points on the primary vote among men to 24 per cent, and the Coalition is up six to 50 per cent.
• Labor is also down nine points, and the Coalition up seven, among rural voters.
• The government’s policy (I’m not sure if it was identified to respondents as such) of using the mining tax to fund a 1% cut to company tax is supported by 53% and opposed by 33%.
• Only 5% per cent believe they will be better off with the carbon price and its attendant compensation, against 52% who believe they will be worse off.
• Support for the carbon tax is at 36% against 60% opposed, which is respectively down one and up one since Nielsen last posed the question in October.
• The Coalition is favoured to handle the economy by 57% against 36% for Labor.
UPDATE 2: Essential Research reports that after Labor’s recovery from 56-44 to 54-46 last week, the Coalition has gained a point to lead 55-45. On the primary vote, the Coalition is up a point to 48 per cent and Labor down one to 33 per cent. A semi-regular question on leaders’ attributes finds views of Julia Gillard have soured further since June last year, by double figures in the case of “intelligent” and “hard-working”, with Tony Abbott also going backwards by lesser degree (Gillard is rated slightly more intelligent and Abbott slightly more hard working, and Gillard is 11% higher on “out of touch with ordinary people”). There are also questions on the proposed increase in superannuation payments from 9% to 12% (69% supporting and 13% opposed, perfectly unchanged since May last year), size and role of government (44% believe it presently too large against 28% too small, but 67% maintain government has a role to “protect ordniary Australians from unfair policies and practices on the part of large financial and/or industrial groups” against 20% who sign on for a laissez-faire view of the role of the state) and the appopriate responses for police when faced with various situations. On the latter count, 10% of respondents believe persons under the influence of alcohol should be shot.
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
fess
The one where he admits he will tax business to pay for the nanny scheme.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:42 pm
GG
She’s raking it in but, and I quote ” .. can’t stand that woman when she comes on television”
by Mick77 on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:43 pm
fesss,
Abbott confessed that his ppl scheme was to be paid by a tax.
There’s a link earlier in the thread.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:43 pm
mick77
is your mum English?
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:43 pm
Am surprised that got into the msm.
The hacks must be slipping!
by confessions on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:44 pm
Mick77,
Imagine how much she’ll stand Tony Abbott who promises to take it all away again.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:45 pm
Puff @1353 – YES she’s a Pom and also gets a small widow’s benefit from Uk for my dad’s war service. Why do you ask (whingeing ……?)
by Mick77 on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:45 pm
Confessions
Its Laws. The MSM idolizes him and Jones.
by guytaur on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:46 pm
There is also a racist background, imo, to the ‘distrust’ and ‘lying’ tags being hung around Julia Gillard’s neck, from people of English descent. I am surprised no-one has examined it yet. It would almost certainly form part of Abbott’s views, being born in England and tertiary-educated there.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:48 pm
I avoid answering spam and I think I just saw some from a well know spambot in response to one of my posts. At work we are told to delete these along with emails purporting to be from Microsoft, the UK Lottery etc.
But for anyone out there genuinely seeking clarification on what is and isnt a tax, and doesn’t have time to take courses in constitutional law and /or public finance (a basic course in either by the way could be at least be well under way in the number of hours of Question Time thrown away by the LOTO’s vanity project of futile motions for suspension of standing orders so far this parliament, n = 27 hours) I will be happy to provide a short reading list in the next few days amongst work and family responsibilities.
Much of the required info has actually already been posted on this blog or other areas of Crikey, I quess they don’t make spambots like they used to.
We could do this by reference to the works of Clint Eastwood (“Me, I’ve got a light”) or even Paul Hogan (“That’s not a knife”) but lets keep it simple.
A very brief introductory point for those who arrived late at the first tutorial. If you have a tradeable asset (even if its one you were required to acquire in order to engage in the activity concerned) – the requirement to acquire the tradeable asset Is. Not. A . Tax. Because as explained in the course introduction you don’t get to trade tax liabilities while your business is a going concern. Whereas, whether at fixed or floating price, the whole point of both the currently proposed carbon price model and the previous model (poor idea in my view for the Greens to block it although i can see why too) is that viable ongoing businesses engage in trade in permits.
Now, if you incur a liability for selling x units of electricity, or x units of something requiring input of electricity, thats a tax.
If we had honesty in billing rather than what we probably can expect from a number of State governments, we would have a line at the bottom of the electricity bill for an actual carbon tax just like we have for GST.
And it would still be a tax even if you get credits or exemptions when you can show that you used electricity that was generated by means that involve no, or less than average, CO2 emissions.
Such a scheme could be kinda “like” a (Not A Tax) trading scheme if the government decides and manages to reward firms that reduce their own emissions or come up with means for others to reduce emissions – say by inventing and implementing new technologies or just using existing technologies better.
But it would Still Be A Tax – because it would rely on “Direct Action” by government to (1) decide to allocate proceeds of something that is Really A Tax (that would be Tony’s dip into the bottomless well of Consolidated Revenue) to such deserving cases
(2) accurately identify the selfsame deserving cases.
All the above show why Tony derides economists.
Because almost all of us, (yes I proudly identify as an economist for this purpose) think his policy, in this area for starters, is Absolute Crap.
And unless he was drunk or asleep or otherwise occupied for the lectures I attended at Sydney in the same period as he was there, he knows it too.
Just running through this I think I understand more than previously why the PM hasnt been able to “cut through” on the issue. Which shock jock would allow her the time to run through this? None. Which Press Gallery show pony ? None. Which Murdoch Sky TV presenter – oh spare me. Which ABC journalist? None.
by Marrickville Mauler on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:48 pm
GG
Again I just make the point that it’s a personality thing with Gillard, not hip pocket or logical.
by Mick77 on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:49 pm
Mick77
Then now I understand.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:49 pm
Newspoll South Australia – Jan-Mar 2012 (870 Voters)
Two Party Preferred: ALP 48 (0) LIB 52 (0)
Primary Votes: ALP 34 (0) LIB 40 (0) GRN 11 (+2) NAT <0.5 (was 2)
Weatherill: Approve 47 (-4) Disapprove 23 (+9)
Redmond: Approve 43 (-6) Disapprove 34 (+4)
Preferred Premier: Weatherill 46 (+1) Redmond 23 (-4)
by GhostWhoVotes on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:50 pm
No, nothing to do with ‘whinging poms’. Next time you speak to your mother, ask her if she would ever vote for someone who is Welsh.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:50 pm
Mick77,
Your mother is perfectly entitled to vote against her economic interests.
However, I always thought a good son would help her avoid such calamities.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:51 pm
Oh oh. Compulsry voting under court challenge. More otes disenfranchised the higher the right wing vote. See USA as exmple of this.
by guytaur on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:52 pm
Puff
Wow that’s an exciting new analysis from left field. Maybe you’re getting a bit tired. I though Gillard was born in UK and Abbott was born here but it seems I’m wrong although never gave it any thought like you have.
by Mick77 on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:53 pm
The new oil crisis in the USA
________________
James Kunstler is his splendid weekly blog on the US economy (or what’s left of it)accuses the oil companies of trying to deceive the stock market with tall tales of the new fields to be found and how wise it would be for people and govts to invest in US oil
He is a fierce critic of just about everyone in US business and banking seeing them as”a criminal elite milking the American people “(sounds like a description of capitalism)
Great stuff
http://kunstler.com/blog/2012/04/unthinkable.html
by deblonay on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:53 pm
SA going OK. Both leaders down, weatherall still way ahead of whatserame, and tpp fair enough. Greens picked up two.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:55 pm
Mick77,
Abbott’s a Pommy bastard. Didn’t you know.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:55 pm
You mean the whole ‘welshing’ thing which we see periodically in the msm?
by confessions on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:56 pm
Puff – give it a rest, as if voting for someone who was Welsh is an issue for anyone.
by Mick77 on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:56 pm
870. Now I know South Australia is small, but I am sure 2000 would be a reasonable figure to obtain. A figure you could achieve in Zhobart or ZNewcastle without too much other. Why such small samples?
by guytaur on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:58 pm
GG
No, naive me has always regarded both Gillard and Abbott as Aussies. And I’m obviously not a very good son … just ask my mum for her confirmation, and with that I’ll sign off before I get a late night call from her because her ears are burning!
by Mick77 on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:59 pm
guytaur,
The National sample is usually 1000 plus for Newspoll. SA would be a small component. So a cumulative sample is waht they do.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:02 am
GG
That just shows the National sample is way too small.
by guytaur on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:03 am
GG
Abbott a Pom? – bit of a stretch (not that it matters). from Wiki:
Abbott was born in London, England on 4 November 1957 to expatriate Australian parents.[5][6] On 7 September 1960, his family moved to Australia on the Assisted Passage Migration Scheme ship Oronsay.[7] His mother was an Australian citizen and his father had lived in Australia since 1940
by Mick77 on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:04 am
This is a new one: English born people are discriminating against Julia because she’s of Welsh extraction.
Any more excuses for her shit house poll ratings?
by Thornleigh Labor Man on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:05 am
guytaur,
You now enter the realms of sample theory. You’ll need a hat and sword.
My advice before you go down this path “grasshopper” is to read up about MOE. Otherwise, you will be flailed.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:06 am
Mick77
Abbott was born in England. Gillard is Welsh, a part of the UK as you know.
I dare you to ask your Mum the question. How did I guess correctly that your mother was English when you reported an inexplicable change in her voting habits with a distrust of Gillard?
I have thought this for a while, but left the idea on the backburner. But I know a lot about the English, and I have been around UK immigrants for many years. I even know the historical background for this attitude. I do know if there is an huge affect but it does add a particular nastiness to labelling Gillard as a liar and untrustworthy. Make no mistake, Abbott would understand it well, and is not be loathe to use it.
I am not tired, I am right.
Oh, btw, have you ever had someone welch/welsh on a bet?
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:08 am
The final collapse in Afghanistan(like Vietnam 1975)
__________
In The Age Prof Hugh White looks at the coming collapse
The Afghan Govt total budget is $1.6 billion p.a…and the army needs three times that to operate
Nobody will supply that money and when the final pull out takes place it’s all over red rover for Karzai(who will turn up next day at his Swiss Bank most likely))
So why does Gillard still mouth the “In for the long haul” bullshit…how silly does she think we are…and this is a matter where she could win a few needed votes….but she is so blinded by her infatuation with Obama she is incapable of making a decision.. a true puppet !
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/when-the-goings-good-20120402-1w8no.html?rand=1333
by deblonay on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:08 am
Ah, evan arrives, the biggest piece of shite that has ever professed loyalty to the ALP.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:09 am
fess
Yes. It may not be huge, but it will be there.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:10 am
TLM
You obviously no nothing about UK history or culture.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:11 am
@GG
When a method of polling is used that excludes others you have to increase sample sizes.
Otherwise the statistcl mean or average becomes an abnormality. However we o know for sure a larger sample size helps and oes not detract from results.
by guytaur on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:11 am
I wonder if the announcement of a sudden engagement to Tim would boost Julia’s ratings?
by Thornleigh Labor Man on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:15 am
guytaur,
And, your point is?
Polling Companies are constrained by cost v credibility issues all the time . This is why state polls are usually presented quarterly. MOE is rarely mentioned in Oz polls.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:15 am
Ugh, McClelland isn’t being very helpful…
by rishane on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:15 am
Mick, JG and TA were both born in the UK. TA in England, JG in Wales.
As a diversion from the economics tutotial, JG as a small child may well have seen the steam engine which hauls the “Hogwarts Express” in the Harry Potter films.
Because, JG spent her first years in Barry.
Hundreds of steam engines slated for scrapping were stored there , including Great Western Railway 5972 Olton Hall (later to appear as “Hogwarts Castle”).
Quite a decent history is available on Wikepedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodham_Brothers
Now, no opinion poll would have given any of the locos any chance of survival. But that’s not what happened. Possible parallels?
As well as the loco which has repainted redder than the PM’s hair (ironically the correct colour for either a Hall or a Castle would be green, make of that what you will!) a definite majority of engines at Barry apparently destined for scrapping have made it either into static preservation (Senate?) or active on the mainline (Reps?) More details at the wikipedia page.
by Marrickville Mauler on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:16 am
Puff – your theory of Gillard’s popularity being damaged by anti-Welsh Englishmen is absurd and I admit that I now am too tired to explain why, particularly in the case of my family. Anyway if you really believe that nonsense, then that’s another good reason to replace her isn’t it and win back all those racist Poms who’ll love Smith’s posher way of speaking. G’nite
by Mick77 on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:17 am
rishane,
Poor judgement. Under presure to retain his pre selection
Howes will probably take him out.
Sad for him.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:18 am
If I get a Nanny AND Abbotts Paid Paternity Leave, does that mean I can sit about the house getting full pay for 6 months while the Nanny looks after the baby?
by GeeWizz on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:20 am
GG:
McClelland has announced his retirement, hasn’t he?
by confessions on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:20 am
MM,
I always knew that Gillard would steam roll to success.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:21 am
fess,
It seems, by the current performance, he is waiting for other to do it for him.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:22 am
Liberal policies are unfunded and under-developed. Therefore the Abbott Nannyville announcement can be whatever you want it to be.
by confessions on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:22 am
@Mick
I agree with you. Makes me wonder if Puff having a bit of a practical joke.
by guytaur on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:23 am
Gee Whiz,
Depends on what type of womean you are.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:23 am
Goodnight.
by guytaur on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:24 am
At a point, an increase in sample size produces only a negligible increase of reliability in the result. That point is around 1000. Which is why most reputable polls use a sample size thereabouts.
by This little black duck on Apr 3, 2012 at 12:25 am