Morgan phone poll: 57-43 to Coalition
Roy Morgan has simultaneously published phone and face-to-face poll results. The phone poll was conducted from Tuesday to Thursday from a modest sample of 697, with a margin of error a bit below 4%. This tells very much the same story as other recent phone polling: Labor on 30%, the Coalition on 47.5% and the Greens on 11.5%. As is generally the case with phone polling, the two-party result is much the same whether determined by respondent allocation (57-43 to the Coalition) or applying the preference distribution from the last election (56-44).
The phone poll also gauged opinion on global warming and the carbon tax. On global warming, 35% believe concerns exaggerated, up three on October last year; 50% opted for “if we don’t act now it will be too late”, up six points; and 12% chose “it is already too late”, down eight points. Support for the carbon tax was at 34.5%, down 2.5%, with opposition up two to 59%. Support for the Coalition’s promise to repeal the tax if elected was up four points to 49% with opposition down five to 43%.
The face-to-face poll combines results from the last two weekends of Morgan’s regular surveying, with a sample of 1770. On the primary vote, this has Labor down a point on the previous survey to 31%, the Coalition up two to 46.5% and the Greens down half a point to 12.5%. As usual with these polls, and in contrast to the phone poll result, the difference between the two measures of the two-party result is cavernous (though terrible for Labor either way): 55-45 using the previous election method, but 59.5-40.5 using respondent allocation.
UPDATE: Spur212 in comments points out the following fascinating finding on the question of “who do you think will win”, which I normally don’t even bother to look at. Since the last Morgan phone poll in early February – before the Kevin Rudd leadership challenge – expectations of a Labor win have plummeted from 31% to 14%, while the Coalition has soared from 57% to 76.5%.
Also:
• The ABC reports that Dean Smith, a lobbyist and former adviser to former WA Premier Richard Court and federal MP Bronwyn Bishop, has been preselected for the third position on the WA Liberals’ Senate ticket at the election, behind incumbents David Johnston and Michaelia Cash. This makes it likely, though apparently not quite certain, that he will fill the casual vacancy created by the death on March 31 of Judith Adams.
• The Liberal member for Hume, Alby Schultz, has made long-anticipated announcement that he will retire at the next election. This sets the scene for what promising to be a bruising contest for the seat between the Liberals and Schultz’s bitter enemy, the Nationals. Imre Salusinszky of The Australian reports relations between the two have fractured over the Liberals’ moves to preselect candidates ahead of time in anticipation of a potential early election. The Nationals say this dishonours an agreement that preselections would wait until the two parties had reached their agreement determining which seats would be contested by which parties and the order of the Coalition Senate ticket, which has not left them of a mind to leave Hume to the Liberals. The most widely mooted potential Liberal candidate has been Angus Taylor, a 45-year-old Sydney lawyer, Rhodes Scholar and triathlete. Taylor is said to be close to Malcolm Turnbull, and to have the backing of Schultz. For the Nationals’ part, it has long been suggested that Senator Fiona Nash might try her hand at the seat, and The Australian now reports that Katrina Hodgkinson, state Primary Industry Minister and member for Burrinjuck, might also be interested.
• Imre Salusinszky and James Massola of The Australian further report that friction between the Liberals and Nationals in NSW might further see the Nationals field a candidate in Gilmore, where Liberal member Joanna Gash is retiring (and where one of the Liberal preselection candidates is Alby Schultz’s son Grant), and Farrer, which Sussan Ley gained for the Liberals when Tim Fischer retired in 2001.
Page 1 of 2 | Next page
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
Fair enough, here it is again:
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:23 am
We could have made a fortune from it, Victoria! As one of the Glass Ceiling breakers (& very proudly so) harrassment with sexual references, insults and outright propositioning was a daily par for the course until the 80s; especially at conferences where women were outnumbered usually by about 40:1 (Ed); overwhelmingly so (Admin & Management), & in postgrad courses – the BizBlokes were far more civilised (or “far less threatened by career women”) than the Ed blokes! I was the only woman among men during my first postgrad (OzHistory; but they were amazing nondiscriminatory blokes). As late as 1991, I was the only woman in a (compulsory) QUT class of (business)men.
by OzPol Tragic on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:25 am
We could have made a fortune from it, Victoria! As one of the Glass Ceiling breakers (& very proudly so) harrassment with sexual references, insults and outright propositioning was a daily par for the course until the 80s; especially at conferences where women were outnumbered usually by about 40:1 (Ed); overwhelmingly so (Admin & Management), & in postgrad courses – the BizBlokes were far more civilised (or “far less threatened by career women”) than the Ed blokes! I was the only woman among men during my first postgrad (OzHistory; but they were amazing nondiscriminatory blokes). As late as 1991, I was the only woman in a (compulsory) QUT class of (business)men.
by OzPol Tragic on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:25 am
Yes, sorry, this was a type: Rudd or Turnbull
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:26 am
Sorry for the re-post #2052; but it did save you from the italic prob – I hope!
by OzPol Tragic on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:26 am
{scroll}
by Cuppa on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:27 am
ML
Given that the 50/50 result demonstrated a considerable decline in the Labor vote, the contention is that the msm assault began well before August 2010.
by zoomster on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:27 am
OPT
Yes I could be sitting in the lap of luxury right about now!!!!
by victoria on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:27 am
Cuppa, +1
by The Finnigans on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:27 am
ML
You say that Gillard did not understand the sleaze associated with Slipper. Do you seriously believe that?
by victoria on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:28 am
Btw is it just me, or has Closseau brandis been awfully quiet on this one?
by victoria on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:29 am
Tricot,
It’s a well known fact that “still having a mathematical chance of…….” actually means you’re screwed.
by Greensborough Growler on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:29 am
ML
And I do like the reference to a prediction you made when you weren’t here.
Definitely gives you bragging rights.
Btw, still not voting for Abbott next election?
by zoomster on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:29 am
Vic ML has always been a hack but letting him play here keeps him off the streets.
Gary 2036 is on the money.
I posted earlier that the hip pocket will drive this. And it will. That is politics 101. I usually am out and about as part of my work and a lot of opinion on the CT is soft as people don’t feel they have enough information and they are definitely interested to hear about compensation.
This Slipper diversion shows the level of desperation of the Libs -using one of their own is very risky. This smells like do or die stuff. I have reserved judgement on the veracity of the claims and all sexual harassment claims need to be taken seriously but the timing of the release of this is entirely a different matter.
by Gweneth on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:30 am
OK zoomster, so it begain in 2009 and ramped up since then.
The point is, there has been a massive shift in voter sentiment over the Gillard Prime Ministership. Either it is due to the media (and NOTHING ELSE) as has been contended by Cuppa, or other factors are involved (e.g., Gillard being hopeless for one). If due to the media, then you must contend that the media bias has only been around for a few years, because the ALP was enjoying stratospheric polling in the early stages of the Rudd government.
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:30 am
Media reset happens Monday Night.
Q and A resets agenda. This time that is going to be set by Bob Brown.
Oops bad timing Murdoch Empire.
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:30 am
As things stand today, yep.
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:30 am
Cuppa scroll trolling,
Well its better to go and do something nice for yourself NOW come back later i a coupleof hours and see whats new,
Let mod lib have a chat to her self
by my say on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:31 am
For Slipper to survive that long in LNP with stuffs they “know” about him. He must have similar on them LNP. He aint that stupid
by The Finnigans on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:31 am
Mod Lib’s response:
I often come to PB to see what the reactions are to Insiders, Lateline, etc.
BB’s take here is emotively laden and biased. In contrast Mod Lib’s is not and states accurately what Atkins actually said.
by Pegasus on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:31 am
Huh?
I notice that those criticising seem afraid to include my offending post!
Funny that, aint it?
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:32 am
Vic, been wondering that myself about Closseau, kinda miss him
by The Finnigans on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:32 am
Oh dear Horsey, so your posts here are not “emotively laden and biased”
by The Finnigans on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:34 am
ML
No, it’s perfectly reasonable to contend that the media became biased.
It’s also perfectly reasonable to suggest that this coincided with Gillard’s assumption of the PMship.
by zoomster on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:34 am
Mod Lib
Media Reporting does influence opinion polls.
So does media reporting about opinion polls.
Just do a compare and contrast of polls for John Howard 18 Months into his term with that of Gillard’s.
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:34 am
Mod Lib a couple of pages back, responding to me:
I presume you mean “incredible”, but… oh… never mind…
Please show me, Mod Lib, any member of the public that has been asked about this story.
So far it has been nothing but journalists telling other journalists what other, different journalists have said or written without proof except one-sided documents, literally by definition, that are completely untested, and which came into the hands of the story’s originators in utterly suspect circumstances that are yet to be investigated.
The original story itself claimed, at the precise time of printing, that the government was “in crisis”. How could that be, when two seconds before the story did not even exist as a story?
It seems to be a paradox that without any activity at all, except the printing of a story, that a “crisis” can instantly (I don’t mean hours or days later, but instantly) appear, and be depicted as already ongoing.
The paradox is explained by the certain knowledge withing the Murdoch organization that the Murdoch media was about to run a bootstrap claiming that the very action of publication itself would, without further comment, testing, response from the parties involved or anyone else even remotely connected, however obliquely having anything to say, constitute a “crisis”. Every Murdoch tabloid – even the NT Times, which usually runs a “crocodile” story on Saturday – splurged this story all over their front pages in a clearly co-ordinated attempt to set up this instant “crisis”.
Other news papers picked it up. Also the ABC. But they were only recycling, indeed laundering the story. No new facts – not a single one – have been introduced, only new commentaries, made by journalists, talking to each other. This does, however, allow the original tabloids to cite “newspaper reports”.
This is a beat up, built upon a bootstrap, reinforced by opinionation, founded on a few alleged text messages and some untested court documents, spread initially by a known liar, purveyor and forger of faked documents, amplified by the nihilistic belief that a good sex scandal trumps everything: serious, epoch making government policy (leaving Afghanistan, rebuilding Aged Care, the Budget itself), monumental gaffes by the Opposition (Hockeynomics citing ending entitlement yet unable to cite one case where this was carried out, Robb going into bat for the ANZ bank raising interest rates) and the presumption of innocence, natural justice and due process…
Your reaction – that Slipper must go – if genuine shows that you have fallen for the easiest of standard Murdoch media tricks – “The Co-ordinated Tabloid Splash” – tricks for which News Ltd is now being systematically torn apart in the UK for corruption, intimidation, lying under oath, criminal conspiracy and destruction – worse… manufacturing – of evidence.
That’s if your disgust is genuine… but I don’t think it is.
What flows from the second possibility – that you’re a trolling hack regurgitating Opposition talking points – is uglier, far uglier than your being merely stupid and naive.
by Bushfire Bill on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:35 am
Fear not my say and Cuppa. Your Mod Lib free PB approaches, as I am off to enjoy the day.
Au revoir, until we meet again for Essential!
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:35 am
So was Abbott in his student days (though the action was initiated by women), a very expensive process for which his parents were prepared to pay for the best to the limits of the law – processes his complainants could not afford.
I notice no journo has yet cited that incident and asked him whether he ought to extend to Slipper the same extenuating circumstances.
Abbott is such a multi-faced hypocrite!
by OzPol Tragic on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:39 am
Ah, so that’s the way to get rid of ML – remind him he’s not voting for the Libs if Abbott”s still there.
by zoomster on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:39 am
Oh, and someone mentioned there had been no poll on the issue.
Au contraire – the Sunday Times has done one in Perth and with 1389 votes counted the scores are – to the question “Should Peter Slipper resign as Speaker of the House following allegations he sexually harassed a male adviser?
Yes: 76.62%
No: 15.05%
Unsure: 6.33%
Well, there you have it, game, set and match.
The people have spoken. The media have decided in the Court of Public Opinion. Never wrong of course, and guilt or innocence does not come into it
My previous comment was to the effect I am amazed that there are actually 1389 people in Perth who know who PS is and what he does. I suspect these were mainly NewsLtd employees and their friends.
I would lay odds that if I went out onto the street and asked 100 people at random, if this were possible, that 60% would not know who PS is. I would also make the bet that even if they had some idea of who he was, they would not know what his role was.
I would further suggest, if you dug a little deeper, most would not care as it does not have anything to do with self-interest.
by Tricot on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:39 am
Haha!
Who was it that said my use of the word “panic” to describe the ALP side was unfair?
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:40 am
Note the non answer from the commenter called Mod Lib:
That could be interpreted in one of two ways:
1) Yep, I’m still not voting for Abbott.
2) Yep, I’m voting for Abbott.
Shifty = Liberal
by Cuppa on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:40 am
Absolutely reaonable.
The media can influence opinion polls.
So is that the contention then? That the media bias started around 2009/2010?
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:41 am
Mod Lib/2080
I see no signs of panic in that post by BB.
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:42 am
I’m wondering who is bankrolling Ashby’s case? Or is it pro bono by a Lib?
That would answer a couple of our questions.
by lizzie on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:42 am
Actually that is WRONG! Income tax is a PROGRESSIVE tax as it consists of different levels of rate. After the introduction of the carbon tax, the tax free threshold increases to 18% I believe. For income tax to be regressive, one flat rate would need to apply to all income earners.
NO! The GST is a REGRESSIVE tax as the tax is charged to all consumers regardless of income.
The carbon tax is effectively a scheme, why? Because the funds that it raises is fully returned to consumers, trade exposed industries and investment in renewable energy.
To be complete, company tax is a PROGRESSIVE tax as a flat rate is charged to all companies large or small.
Oh and the mining tax is actually a resources rent tax (royalties) based on gross revenue in excess of a certain amount (superprofit). By far the main contributers to this tax will be BHP, Rio Tinto and Xstrata.
by Centre on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:43 am
Haha!
You guys are just a cack! (yes another poor word choice Cuppa, go hellferlether buddy)
If an election were held today I would preference the ALP ahead of the Liberal/National party.
Clear enough Cuppa? For someone who first declared they didn’t see my question, and then posted “scroll” it is a bit rich saying my post was shifty when it was perfectly clear!
You keep hiding though. Its hard when unfounded contentions get challenged- you wouldn’t expect that on PB from the usual crowd I know!
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:43 am
I reackon two weeks, and this will be another getch affair. Hope it brings down Abbott as the former brought down Turnbull.
Same problem, two oppositions leaders who were it tro much hurry to wait for an election.
by fredn on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:45 am
I wouldn’t expect many here to see it. If you look closely there is a little hint of potential victim bashing there, but it is subtle so those wedded blindly to the ALP won’t see it…
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:45 am
When does “I’m going” mean “I’m not going”?
When a Liberal says it.
Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, April 22, 2012 at 11:35 am – I am off
Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, April 22, 2012 at 11:40 am – Haha!
Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, April 22, 2012 at 11:41 am – Absolutely reaonable.
Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, April 22, 2012 at 11:43 am – Haha!
Shifty = Liberal
by Cuppa on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:46 am
Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, April 22, 2012 at 11:45 am – I wouldn’t expect many here to see it
by Cuppa on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:47 am
Mod Lib/2088
You are wrong. For starters. I do not vote Labor.
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:47 am
TLM
AFTER she has done ALL the hard work, thou doth jest!.
by 1934pc on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:48 am
My apologies.
Out of interest- who do you preference ahead usually- ALP or Coalition?
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:49 am
Cuppa, as i said before, Mod is getting more & more like Truthie everyday. just go on and on and on …………….
by The Finnigans on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:49 am
MTBW @ 2037
confessions is a master of such slurs and I too have been on the receiving end.
There is quite an element of bullying on this site aimed at inducing total conformity among ALP supporters. If you are not part of the “Cult of Julia” then look out.
by bemused on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:49 am
Another aspect that should be noted is that the claim by the staffer and the media publication occurred whilst Slipper was half way round the world. Hmmm……
by victoria on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:50 am
And even if they want the Malaysian solution, which you find abhorrent. You can’t stand Gillard as well. Gee Abbott must be really bad. If you see it why won’t more Libs see it down the track? Those polls really could be soft.
by Gary on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:51 am
You got me Cuppa! I always give a little notice of my leaving, as there is a history of a flurry of posts soon after that, with the ubiquitous (like that word?) post from someone saying they have frightened me off! Take a bow Zoomster!
I even remember one, a long time ago, when a poster came out and said (wtte) “Now that Modlib is gone I can say that what Modlib said was actually correct …….”!!!!
I hung around to read that one too, it sends me off into the day with a smile on my face.
by Mod Lib on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:51 am
Finnigans,
About as truthful too.
Goes with the territory I guess.
by Cuppa on Apr 22, 2012 at 11:51 am