Newspoll and Essential Research: 56-44 to Coalition
GhostWhoVotes reports Newspoll has come in at 56-44 to the Coalition, down from 57-43 last time, which exactly matches Essential Research’s progress over the last week. In Newspoll’s case, the picture on the primary vote is very much the same as a fortnight ago, with Labor, the Coalition and the Greens all up a point at the expense of “others”, to 29%, 48% and 12%. Personal ratings offer multiple stings in the tail for Julia Gillard. Where last time she was up three points on approval and down four on disapproval, those results have exactly reversed, putting her back at 28% approval and 62% disapproval. Tony Abbott has seized the lead as preferred prime minister, gaining four to 41% with Gillard down one to 39%, and his approval rating is up three to 35% with disapproval down four to 54%. GhostWhoVotes also relates that Gillard’s “trustworthiness” rating is down from 61% to 44% since the 2010 election, with Abbott’s down from 58% to 54%. Presumably this portends a battery of attitudinal results concerning the two leaders.
Essential Research had the primary votes at 48% for the Coalition (down two), 31% for Labor (steady) and 11% for the Greens (steady). Also featured were its monthly personal ratings, which had Julia Gillard’s approval steady at 32% and her disapproval down three to 58%, Tony Abbott’s respectively up two to 38% and down two to 50%, and Gillard’s lead as preferred prime minister shifting from 40-37 to 38-36. Support for the National Broadband Network was up a point since February to a new high of 57% with opposition down three to 22%, and 46% saying they will either definitely or probably sign up for it. There was also a question on appropriate areas for federal and state responsibility, with the states only coming out heavily on top for public transport and “investing in regional areas”.
I now offer a Senate-tacular review of recent happenings relating to the upper chamber, where it’s all happening at the moment:
• There has been talk lately about the potential make-up of the Senate if the Coalition wins next year’s election in a landslide, which might upset long-held assumptions about the political calculus under an Abbott government. Half-Senate elections usually result in each state’s six seats splitting three left and three right, and the territories’ two seats invariably go one Labor and one Coalition. However, four and two results have not been unknown, usually involving Labor winning three and the Coalition two with the last seat going to the Greens or the Democrats. The only four-right, two-left results were when John Howard gained control of the Senate at the 2004 election, in Queensland (four Coalition and two Labor) and Victoria (three Coalition, two Labor, one Family First). There is also the occasional unclassifiable like Nick Xenophon, who is up for re-election in South Australia next year and presumably likely to win, and perhaps even Julian Assange, of whose aspirations we have heard nothing further.
The difficulty for the Coalition is that a four-left, two-right result in Tasmania at the 2010 election (three Labor, two Liberal and one Greens) will carry over to the next parliament. However, on the basis of Newspoll’s recent state breakdowns it is easy to envision this being counterbalanced by a four-right, two-left result in Queensland, either through a repeat of 2004 or, perhaps, a Katter’s Australian Party Senator joining three from the LNP. This would leave the left with 38 and the right with 37 (including the thus-far low-profile Victorian Senator John Madigan of the DLP, a carryover from 2010), plus Xenophon – still leaving the left with a blocking majority, even when Xenophon voted with the right. However, the Queensland election wipeout and a further dive in Labor’s federal poll ratings encourages contemplation of further four-right, two-left results in New South Wales and Western Australia. Assuming no cross-ideological preference deals such as that which produced Family First’s win in Victoria in 2004, a rough benchmark here is that the combined Labor and Greens vote would need to fall to about 40%. This compares with Labor-plus-Greens results in 2010 of 42.2% in Queensland, 43.7% in Western Australia and 47.2% in New South Wales. Any two such results would be enough to get the carbon tax repealed, given the likely support of Xenophon, and all three would leave a Coalition government similarly placed to its state counterpart in New South Wales, where Labor and the Greens can be overruled with the support of the Shooters Party and the Christian Democratic Party.
Page 1 of 2 | Next page
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
Peter Reith just said on #Slynews, wtte, “Hockey said what he said overseas, wasnt expecting to be reported here”, Yes Pete, Truth Overboard
by The Finnigans on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:46 am
OPT
Sadly this is true.
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:46 am
Finningans/3350
Reith may wish Lateline to be off shored like a lot of Australian business has been. That does not change facts. It sounds to me like Reith may be in need of medication with “facts” like that.
by guytaur on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:48 am
Greg Sheriden’s fantasy night out with Tony Abbott.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/purepoison/2012/04/19/greg-sheridans-fantasy-night-out-with-tony-abbott/
by confessions on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:50 am
From ms grattons
Piece below
Announcing the reforms, Prime Minister Julia Gillard will say: ”If you want a nursing home place, we will make it easier to get one. If you want
care in the home, we will make it easier to get that care. More people will get to keep their home – and more people will get to stay in their home.”
She will say that aged care, like Medicare, is one of the most fundamental parts of Australia’s social compact.
”It’s one of those pillars that bring security and decency to every Australian, no matter what their circumstances or background. For older Australians, who have worked so hard, that is something they have earned many times over.” She will also reject the notion that ageing is simply a challenge to be managed, saying instead that our longer lives should be welcomed, and our ageing population seen in many ways as a gift. ”Ageing should never be seen as a burden.”
Read later
Michelle Grattan April 20, 2012 Join the conversation 12 people are reading this now.
Tweet Tweet
Issues (10769)
Urban Affairs (10355)
Legal Affairs (9368)
Education (7719)
Arts (7673)
Story Tools
Share on Facebook
Email this story
Print this story
Reprints & permissions
The Age Jobs
A strange sense of entitlement Joe Hockey’s politically dangerous contribution to the welfare debate is a g
by my say on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:50 am
This was a surprise, Ms A. Crabb writing something not vacuous but accurate observations re Hockey’s speech
“…The first is to burst into hysterical laughter, or begin thumping one’s head rhythmically against the nearest vertical flat surface, seeing as Mr Hockey’s side of politics not only has done much to establish the very sense of entitlement of which he complains, but has moreover appealed to it remorselessly in opposing various measures introduced by the Government in recent years…”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-19/crabb-eye-popping-politics/3960830
(The comments section – and what gets me it’s moderated with each post vetted by staff – yet many would make the mongel Breivik proud)
by David McRae on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:51 am
The Australian Christian Lobby has said a decision to uphold complaints over an article written by tennis legend Margaret Court in which she said homosexuality was a choice as a victory for ‘aggressively intolerant’ gay activists.
In January, Margaret Court wrote an opinion piece in Australia’s Herald Sun which said she believed people could determine their sexual orientation.
She wrote: “Let me be clear. I believe that a person’s sexuality is a choice. In the Bible it said that homosexuality is among sins that are works of the flesh,.
“It is not something you are born with. My concern is that we are advocating to young people that it is OK to have these feelings.”
The Australian Press Council (APC) said complaints had been received saying “this passage was inaccurate because modern scientific knowledge indicated that sexuality was not a matter of choice”, and further that it was “offensive, incited homophobia and would aggravate problems of bullying and suicidal feelings amongst young gay people”.
It upheld the complaints this week, calling the article “potentially dangerous”.
The Herald Sun had said it was “clearly an opinion piece” and that the paper was “was entitled to publish a variety of opinions”.
But the APC ruled: “As the factual assertion about choice of sexuality was very probably inaccurate and potentially dangerous, the newspaper should either have edited it or published accompanying rebuttal (preferably from an authoritative source).”
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/04/19/complaints-over-margaret-courts-gay-choice-article-trash-free-speech-group-says/
by guytaur on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:51 am
guytaur
Precisely. Reith is the biggest spinner of crap
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:51 am
Re-read your conversation last evening on the other WA monitored site.
You might have an idea then. And the scratching should tell you.
by Dr John on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:53 am
Dr John
How about you tell me what inflammatory comments I have made.
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:55 am
But the APC ruled: “As the factual assertion about choice of sexuality was very probably inaccurate and potentially dangerous, the newspaper should either have edited it or published accompanying rebuttal (preferably from an authoritative source).”
Does that need to apply to Climate Change and science as well?
by guytaur on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:58 am
SK –
We should organise a SEQ Chapter of Bludgers meet-up. Why should all the South Australian Bludgers have all the fun. I notice the MNC of NSW Bludgers are also arranging something.
by MsAdventure on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:00 am
Deleted at commenter’s request
by my say on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:01 am
OPT
The AWM is factually incorrect in this matter. It is compounding the factual incorrectness by engaging in a bit of jingoism. As noted previously, the AWM is a political institution and its presentation of Australian War history cannot be trusted.
The first permanent defeat of Japanese land forces was the successful landing by US forces at Guadacanal*. That is factual. It is a matter of personal indifference who was first. But facts are facts. The more interesting question is why it is so important for Australians that they were the ‘first’. It was not an Olympic gold medal competition, after all.
The significance of the Milne Bay Battle can only be satisfactorily discussed in the context of a strategic overview. If the AWM does not place Milne Bay in the context of the shift in air-sea power and the implications for logistics, it tails.
Thinking some more about the Milne Bay battle:
(1) When does a battle become a ‘battle’ and not skirmish? I raise this because it is an academic question in military history. In Europe, for example, a fight that involved less than two battalions on at least one of the two sides would not have been called a battle at all. It was just too small. In the American Civil War one threshold is that battles had to have at least 1000 infantry on each side.
(2) From a purist military point of view, the Australians had, at the end of the battle an advantage in numbers of 8.5 to 1.2. They controlled the air. They had all the heavy weapons. The appropriate last phase in a theoretical battle is the exploitation phase. It is worth considering the question whether the Australians failed to exploit their victory effectively.
If we look at the Battle for Milne Bay from the Japanese side:
(1) The reconnaissance was faulty. The Japanese did not expect to be fighting 9000 Australians. Had their intelligence been better, they would not have tried a landing with only 1800 troops. (Although, you never know. Around 30,000 Japanese inflicted the worst defeat in British military history on 100,000 British troops in the Malay campaign.)
(2) Despite faulty intelligence, and despite a determined enemy fighting from prepared positions, and despite the overhwelming enemy preponderance in all forms of heavy weapons, the Japanese succeed in doing the most difficult thing in war – they achieve a disputed sea landing.
(3) Despite being surprised by the size of the enemy force, and despite being outnumbered 9:1.8 at the beginning of the battle, and despite being subject to constant air attack, the Japanese still manage to inflict 400 casualties while taking 600 casualties.
(4) A completely inferior Japanese force survives and maintains a battle for around a fortnight.
(5) Despite being faced with overwhelming force, despite having suffered 30% casualties, and despite facing air superiority by the enemy, the Japanese succeed in an exceedingly difficult military task – the Japanese withdraw in good order.
*I suspect, but do not know, that the very heavy attrition of Japanese air- and sea- power by the Americans** in the Guadacanal campaign actually made air superiority for the Australians in Milne Bay possible.
** Australia lost HMAS Canberra during this campaign scuttled on the orders of a (British?) Rear Admiral near Savo Island, to the anger of the Australians, after taking severe battle damage. The Shropshire was subsequently offered as a balm to the wounded sensitivities of the colonials.
by Boerwar on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:02 am
Michael Pascoe reeckons Hockey’s comments were aimed at Abbott and not ALP. That is what I thought yesterday too.
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:06 am
I said ‘encouraged’ inflammatory comments. Da! How would you be up against a leading silk?
by Dr John on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:06 am
Dr John
Seriously tell me how I encouraged inflammatory comments. i am all ears. Actually look forward to you explaining it all to me, because I am clueless.
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:07 am
Well, you know, Abbott’s always liked to tailor his statements to suit the audience he’s speaking to. Less charitable people might call that hypocrisy, even lying. But that’s just Tony.
Anyway, sounds like Tony’s cutting out the middle man nowadays, and just saying everything to everybody.
by Aguirre on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:07 am
That ruling by the Australian Press Council if upheld could have interesting implications for the Murdoch empire. They would have to change the whole way of reporting. The whole opinion excuse no longer a way to get around reporting accurately. Shanahan and his spin on polls could very well be the first victim.
by guytaur on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:10 am
I wonder how many excuses they’ll rack up before the story goes away. So far we’ve got:
1. He was speaking broadly
2. You weren’t supposed to hear that
3. And of course ModLib’s: He’s talking about middle class welfare
by Aguirre on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:11 am
News ltd tabloids will likely take the angle that this is a politically motivated move by the govt to attract the seniors vote!
by confessions on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:11 am
guytaur
All newspapers have to do is label an article “an opinion piece” to get around it
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:11 am
victoria
Read the ruling as I posted it above. It makes it clear that is not the case.
by guytaur on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:13 am
confessions
Not having to sell one’s home is a vote winner imo
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:14 am
Aguirre
And in complete confidence that no-one in the MSM will call him out on any inconsistency, lie or complete rubbish.
Must admit, however, to being pleasantly surprised by this previously posted Mark Kenny article.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/coalitions-talk-doesnt-add-up/story-e6frea6u-1226333698602
by CO on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:14 am
He’s always told his audiences what he thinks they want to hear. Sometimes he goes too far, as I suspect he has on local govt.
by confessions on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:14 am
I wonder what they were there to actually discuss and what article Sheridan would have written had that interruption not occurred?
Something anti-Gillard, probably, and it further calls into question the impartiality of Sheridan (as if there was really any doubt) when you learn that he has very selectively reported what happened that evening, ensuring it was spun in Abbott’s favour.
Whatever the true intent of the meeting, I have enjoyed speculating on the idea of Greg and Tony just being on a date. You know they say that most gay bashers are acting out against their latent homosexual feelings
by Danny Lewis on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:16 am
Morning all -
Guytaur – I was wondering that, too. It should and the ABC should heed it.
I like the decision made and particularly that part of it.
by BH on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:19 am
Ms Adventure,
Sounds like a good idea!
by Space Kidette on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:22 am
victoria @ 3364
Perhaps this from Turnbull is a pincer movement on Abbott and his rose-coloured glasses view of the Howard Government.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/turnbull-we-made-economic-mistakes-20120419-1xa2d.html
by CO on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:23 am
BH
Maybe even apply to what is a tax. Media being forced to not call the carbon price a tax unless they can prove it is a tax would be great. The undoing of another fear campaign.
by guytaur on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:23 am
CO
Hmmm… Seems Turnbull and Hockey have had a gutful of Abbott and the Nats running the show!!
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:25 am
by Space Kidette on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:28 am
Don
You get a free original WW2 bayonet
by Leroy on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:29 am
Danny Lewis/3376
Your post put me off eating my breakfast. Just that feel of ick you get seeing them solo, goes up X2 imagining them together.
by guytaur on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:29 am
Note that this piece is written by Jessica Wright, esteemed lesser half of the Wright Family Father-Daughter Journalism act, “Tony & Jess”.
It contains no smarmy asides, no references to polls, no convoluted metaphors about the inevitability of Labor defeat, no clever word plays about Gillard and a “Rudderless” Labor party (ha, ha), in fact nothing of anything that could be described as the trademark Brilliant Wright Wit.
Straight reporting, all the way. Just like Grattan the other day on Kentucky Joe’s vision for the future: Australia as a nirvana of battery pensioners and benevolent billionaires.
How long since we’ve seen such a piece of unbiased reportage from either Wright?
Oh, about the last time the Libs came out with something that was so embarrassing the only thing their shills in the media could write about it was that it had been said, but was better forgotten.
by Bushfire Bill on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:30 am
CO @ 3333
I heard Conroy @ 8:36. He said that when Telstra was a monopoly they hamstrung Australia with lower line speeds and the copper wire is deteriorating in situ. A private company working to maximise its profit would only cover 60% of the population ie the capital cities plus Newcastle and Wollongong. Only the NBN will provide universal coverage, the New Zealand model that the Coalition pinned its hopes on was abandoned by the conservative government 12 months ago as being inadequate for a population of 4.5 million
by billie on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:31 am
BB
The only conclusion I can come to is that the journos must know that the leqdership is now up for grabs
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:32 am
Danny:
Sheriden was probably imploring Abbott to dump JBishop from shadow FM role!
by confessions on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:32 am
I’m waiting for the Libs to claim this is aged care initiative actually Liberal policy and Labor is copying them.
Either that or a repeat of the NDIS: Labor will stuff it up somehow, so we need to do it in a bipartisan way so we can make sure it gets done right.
The only ideas the Libs seem to have these days revolve around creatively dissing other people’s ideas.
by Danny Lewis on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:32 am
For those who claim that the claims of bias from the press are unfounded here is the proof. If these things were happening in the Labor Party there would be above the fold bold headlines screaming “Leadership War!”
by guytaur on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:35 am
Oops. Cut and paste FAIL! I hope you understood what word was supposed to go where
by Danny Lewis on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:35 am
http://www.vexnews.com/2012/04/placid-shrek-turns-feral-hockey-takes-stick-to-entitlements-without-blessing-of-leader-or-colleagues/
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/conservative-australia-is-suddenly-in-bed-with-reds/story-e6frezz0-1226333634436
by Leroy on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:36 am
Michael Danby in the DT today
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/conservative-australia-is-suddenly-in-bed-with-reds/story-e6frezz0-1226333634436
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:36 am
Leroy
You beat me to it!!!
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:36 am
billie,
Gotta love our media. Political reporters with jack-sh*t knowledge of economics pass economic opinion as gospel; political reporters with jack-sh*t knowledge of IT & T matters pass IT&T opinion as gospel.
Aren’t they the same people who, with no scientific training, pass off climate change as bull?
Gee, I wonder why no-one believes what they read in the papers anymore.
by Space Kidette on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:37 am
guytaur
I am in no doubt that The likes of Hockey and Turnbull are sending a clear message to their dear Leader and his National friends
by victoria on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:38 am
SK
There is hope. See 3356.
by guytaur on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:39 am
victoria
Yes. So where are the leadership challenge headlines?
by guytaur on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:40 am
Deadwood OO has an encouraging article in it today. Nearly a whole page including a 35cm x 19 cm colour cartoon of Hockey and Robb sitting on the back of Tones bike flattening the tyre and causing a wheel stand.
by poroti on Apr 20, 2012 at 9:41 am