Essential Research: 56-44 to Coalition
The latest Essential Research result has Labor gaining a point on two-party preferred for the second week in a row, with the Coalition now leading 56-44, and has Labor gaining three points on the primary vote – a very unusual occurrence in this series, which publishes weekly results derived from a two-week rolling average. Labor’s primary vote is at 33%, with the Coalition and the Greens each down a point to 49% and 10% respectively.
The first of the supplementary questions measures respondents’ knowledge rather than opinions: namely, the question of whether interest rates are higher or lower now than they were when Labor came to power, the purpose presumably being to determine whether misapprehensions are behind Labor’s diabolical polling. A majority (35% to 20%) were in fact aware that they were now lower, but only 10% thought they were a little lower against 25% for a lot, when the official interest rate has in fact gone from 6.75% to 3.75%. Respondents were then asked how much credit they gave Labor for the drop: 7% said a lot, 19% a fair amount, 27% a little and 35% none. Further questions cover the casualisation of the workforce, the mining boom, the value of various industries to average Australians, and the notion that the government is engaged in “class warfare” (28% agree, 46% disagree).
Further polling snippets:
• Yesterday’s Sunday Mail reported that the Galaxy poll of Queensland respondents covered in the previous post also found that Kevin Rudd’s lead over Julia Gillard in the state at 67-21, and at 62-37 among Labor voters.
• News Limited tabloids carried another Galaxy poll yesterday, this one conducted online from a national sample of 606, which showed support for gay marriage at 50% against 33% opposed. However, 26% of respondents said legislation to allow gay marriage would make them less likely to vote Labor, against only 22% who said more likely.
• Labor has gone public with polling conducted for it by UMR Research, which apparently found that 25% of respondents “would vote for” Julian Assange if he ran for a Senate seat. This tendency was fairly evenly spread among supporters of different parties: 39% for Greens, 26% for Labor and 23% for Coalition. The combined figure is similar to the 23% of respondents to a Galaxy poll in September last year who rated themselves “likely” to vote for Katter’s Australian Party at the Queensland state election: 11.5% would actually do so. It is not clear if the poll was entirely national, as the report from Phillip Coorey in the Sydney Morning Herald only spoke of results from New South Wales and Victoria, which perhaps surprisingly showed slightly stronger support for Assange in the former.
Preselection:
• Tasmanian Labor Senator Nick Sherry, who had already announced he would not contest the next election, has brought forward his retirement. David Killick of The Mercury reports the vacancy looks set to be filled by Lin Thorp, member for the state upper house seat of Rumney from 1999 until her defeat in 2011. Thorp has the backing of Sherry’s Left faction, including from Premier Lara Giddings. However, earlier reports suggested others in the Left wanted a younger candidate, and that a move was on to have the party’s administrative committee reserve the position for a candidate from northern Tasmanian – with Launceston commercial lawyer Ross Hart fitting the bill on both counts. Notably, Unions Tasmania secretary Kevin Harkins, who was said to have been locked out preselection in 2007 because Kevin Rudd had him confused with Kevin Reynolds, and again in 2010 because Rudd did not want to admit to his mistake, had ruled himself out because “we’re likely to have a very conservative government in just a tad over 12 months’ time, (and) the best place for me is with the union movement”.
Page 1 of 3 | Next page
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
Centre
Swan is a shocker of a speaker.
by MTBW on May 23, 2012 at 10:51 am
guytaur
You’ve only gone the ‘Rudd’s to blame’ route to take the heat of yourself and the fact that you can’t support your defence of the Greens.
Look, I don’t mind that you’re a partisan hack. A lot of us here are. But at least we try and back up our partisan claims with reference to stuff like evidence and argument.
Avoiding the question altogether by setting other hares running just further weakens your position.
by zoomster on May 23, 2012 at 10:52 am
SK
Busy. We run a small business, but we have had a lot of projects on. Everyone well so far. Touch wood
by victoria on May 23, 2012 at 10:53 am
And so say all of us !
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/may/22/news-international-executives-jail
by poroti on May 23, 2012 at 10:54 am
Maybe someone or some people are but not talking publically about it.
by Gary on May 23, 2012 at 10:55 am
zoomster/2901
You show you are totally partisan and ignore facts to boot. Your own post condemns you. You whinge about the Greens blocking something and refuse to consider the architect of what the Greens are blocking. That is Rudd.
by guytaur on May 23, 2012 at 10:56 am
Gary
I could name one or two who probably are.
by MTBW on May 23, 2012 at 10:57 am
Gary,
JG may be called many things, but she can’t be called out for not being caring and compassionate. I’m sure she has made a point of making sure he is ok.
by Space Kidette on May 23, 2012 at 10:57 am
It’s not a pack at all.
NormanK contributes to the debates over at the Political Sword. He writes lucidly, with intelligent valid argument that is well researched and he writes with a compassion that appears to be sorely missing in you.
You have your point of veiw and it is widely accepted here on PB , not agreed with, but accepted. I find it sad that you can, with a supposedly witty quip, denigrate the efforts of an honest, passionate writer who is imploring, yes, imploring, the people of this country to take a step back from an abyss. An abyss that none but the either the truly foolish or truly corrupt would want us to fall into.
Think man…for Gods sake…. think
by Ian on May 23, 2012 at 10:58 am
MTWB
Your judgement of people cutting through where it hurts when they speak is POOR.
Mick Collins, you are right, it could easily happen.
Enough, the media and Abbott better back off !!!
by Centre on May 23, 2012 at 10:58 am
Is anyone watching Abbott?
by guytaur on May 23, 2012 at 10:58 am
guytaur @ 2905
And you show that Showy was right when he dubbed you ‘guytard’.
by bemused on May 23, 2012 at 10:59 am
mtbw
Joel Fitzgibbon would be one of them, and Mike Kelly another
by victoria on May 23, 2012 at 10:59 am
bemused
Losing an argument so now going the personal abuse route hey.
Very unbecoming of you.
by guytaur on May 23, 2012 at 11:00 am
If Swan had backed Rudd there would be some here thinking he was the greatest bloke on the planet rather than they are thinking he’s the devil himself. The bloke isn’t the best performer in parliament but he is far from the worst. He has also presided over the well performing Australian economy in these tough times in the Rudd/Gillard governments. For heaven sake give him a break.
by Gary on May 23, 2012 at 11:00 am
Ian @ 2908
I did not criticise his writing or the content.
I was making the point that open letters are normally by well known individuals who are lending their credibility to a cause. So who is NormanK?
by bemused on May 23, 2012 at 11:01 am
Gary/2914
+1
by guytaur on May 23, 2012 at 11:02 am
victoria @ 2912
I think you would certainly be right about Fitzgibbon – he was a mate of Greg Wilton.
by bemused on May 23, 2012 at 11:03 am
If Swan would be able to talk beyond clunky soundbites millions more Australians would understand the economy and not swallow urban myths like small business is being crippled because of political uncertainty from a minority governmen
by bluegreen on May 23, 2012 at 11:03 am
You are just being picky and elitist, bemused. It was directed at people of goodwill. No need for you to bother with it.
by joe2 on May 23, 2012 at 11:03 am
Wayne Swan is one of Labor’s greatest assets. He delivered a great budget. He steered this country through the GFC (along with others). He espouses Labor values as well as anyone. Taking on Palmer et al was a masterstroke.
by Lynchpin on May 23, 2012 at 11:04 am
JonD
Yeah. It IS indeed rubbish.
Imprint was transferred from the front copy to the back by good old-fashioned carbon paper (touched ONLY by – and soon discarded by – the seller/ seller’s agent). So the person who came up with this crap has never actually signed a copy of a card bill where the info was imprinted by a manual-slider – or is making the whole thing up/ regurgitating someone else’s lies
As one who used cards long before EFPOS-style receipts, I know that some of my fingerprints would be on the top copy – which goes to the bank & is destroyed relatively soon after the information is transferred to computer & the account holder has had adequate time to query the statement; and that they wouldn’t be on the bottom copy. My fingers would never have touched the carbon paper!
In fact, the only place fingerprints might be is on the yellow client’s slip. Yet the most likely prints on that slip would be the merchant/ agent’s who separated the white & yellow slips, put the white in the till, and handed the card-holder the yellow. It usually goes into the wallet – or is handed in if on an expenses account – and discarded after bank statements have been checked/ books reconciled. I wasn’t in any organisation which held onto yellow slips after audit time.
I agree with grandfathers’ half-brother’s copper son! It’s pure Bul*shite!
This sort of rubbish from Smith should have the same effect as Hadley’s re Slipper’s Cabcharge rantings did on cabbies & Limo drivers – a combo of rolling-in-the-aisle derisive laughter, and utter fury that anyone would make such manifestly stupid claims!
by OzPol Tragic on May 23, 2012 at 11:04 am
guytaur @ 2913
As numerous others have repeatedly shown, you don’t have an argument. You are just spewing green nonsense.
by bemused on May 23, 2012 at 11:04 am
If you had heard the Washer interview in full you would know Washer spoke to someone within Labor who confirmed they are watching Thomson. I found Washer to be very genuine and concerned for a fellow human under great stress. Personally I think all sides of politics should grant Thomson extended leave away from the spotlight of politics to deal with the issues he confronts and stuff the numbers in the house.
by davidwh on May 23, 2012 at 11:04 am
Bushfire Bill@2787
That was provided by him during the case (hence why it is his current license, not from the time of the alleged purchases).
by ShiftyPhil on May 23, 2012 at 11:05 am
Swan isn’t the only person in the government and wasn’t back in 2008 when the GFC hit. To say it’s because of him the message hasn’t resonated is just too simplistic.
by Gary on May 23, 2012 at 11:06 am
JohD,
Thank you for your answers.
Still can’t see why Mike Smith took receipts at face value before putting them out there for the world to see. Oh wait, yes I can…;)
by C@tmomma on May 23, 2012 at 11:07 am
SK
Can I incorporate your @2875 into a post at The Derp.
Full credit will of course be given.
by Dan Gulberry on May 23, 2012 at 11:07 am
davidwh @ 2923
All of which raises the question: “What on earth is anyone of such quality as Washer doing lending support to Abbotts gang?”
by bemused on May 23, 2012 at 11:08 am
Maybe what really should occur is that the opposition needs to back off and let justice take its course.
by Gary on May 23, 2012 at 11:08 am
Re the 211 on the credit slip: This link helps:
http://www.anz.com/australia/business/merchant/pdf/Manual-Processing-Guide.pdf
As you can see, the Authorisation was approved, and the 211 is the Authorisation Number. As far as I can tell, it’s not a code, just a reference number so you can say the transaction was approved.
by Aguirre on May 23, 2012 at 11:08 am
davidwh, you are such an obvious concern troll, it is almost vomit bucketworthy.
by joe2 on May 23, 2012 at 11:09 am
Dan,
Knock yourself out. I am enjoying the Daily Derp!
by Space Kidette on May 23, 2012 at 11:09 am
Government should announce they’re closing down the courts because they’re now redundant and a waste of money.
“But what about the constitution?”
“They just are.”
//Walks off.
by ShiftyPhil on May 23, 2012 at 11:10 am
joe2
shove off.
by bluegreen on May 23, 2012 at 11:10 am
victoria,
I’m a small biz consultant. Had heaps of enquiries of late from small businesses who are planning for growth as they become busier. Lot wanting to shift to ecommerce because they feel that is where the future is.
Are you noticing a pick up in your industry too?
by Space Kidette on May 23, 2012 at 11:11 am
Thank you to the PBs who set out the potential scope of the Privilege Committee’s investigations.
If Thomson’s claims about the shortcomings of the FWA report are found to be true by the committee and evidence is produced to that effect the case against Thomson will suffer a massive body blow. Almost all of Thomson’s detractors are still referring to the report as “findings of fact” against him, as if it is written in stone. The rug will well and truly be pulled out from under them.
As Oakshotte said several times on Lateline this week, Thomson’s accusations against the report need to be properly tested, because either way it has huge ramifications. Either Thomson has misled parliament or there are huge problems with the report. The PC now becomes the parliamentary body which, with proper investigation can decide that issue.
Fingers crossed, this could be the beginning of the long awaited blow back against the scumbag opposition.
by Darn on May 23, 2012 at 11:12 am
Aguirre @ 2930
That is correct.
Establishments will have a ‘floor limit’ above which they MUST phone for authorisation of a transaction. Floor limits vary according to the type of business and it’s history but that was quite a large transaction and probably well above any ‘floor limit’.
BTW, the authorisation actually means next to nothing if it is subsequently found there is any fraud involved. The merchant will wear the cost.
by bemused on May 23, 2012 at 11:12 am
davidwh
I agree with you. bemused referred to Greg Wilton and politics took it’s toll on Nick Sherry as well. Whatever the merits of his case I saw someone very much on the edge on Monday. He is in need of some time out.
by MTBW on May 23, 2012 at 11:13 am
Sure it’s been discussed, but Redmond’s comments in relation to sexual harassment certainly are interesting when viewed in the prism of certain Opposition members’ statements relating to the Slipper affair.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-23/libs-leader-tells-women-to-ignore-discrimination/4027684
Would Redmond have advised Ashby to just ‘get on with his job’?
by ltep on May 23, 2012 at 11:13 am
SK
We have a couple of aspects to our business. Repair and recondition bumpers. Smash repairs, Restoration etc. we are also involved in a Polymer product which is sprayed on ute trays, floors, and many other applications. We currently are replacing walk over bridges in our municipality, and applying this product on the treads. Very busy.
by victoria on May 23, 2012 at 11:15 am
davidwh, doubt the Coalition is going to grant Thomson a pair given he’s not technically a member of the ALP, so he can’t really take leave of any sort or miss any divisions if he wants to support the Government.
by ltep on May 23, 2012 at 11:15 am
The Greens are political lunatics.
1. They could have supported the CPRS that was agreed to by Rudd and Turnbull (a combined 92% representation of the electorate).
Labor + 50% of the Coalition who supported the CPRS and with the support of the Greens would have enabled – and only then enabled – Rudd to call a DD and end the political career of Abbott.
But NO, the Greens insisted that their targets were NON negotiable.
2. Now, not only has Labor lost the political advantage of going to an election on a policy that was supported by half the Coalition, they had to adopt a scheme the PM said she would never introduce because of the Greens.
There are no excuses. Face it!
Labor’s polling problems today are all the fault of the Greens. The smear of Julya today are all the fault of the Greens.
Keep away from the Greens, they’re bad news.
On the flip side, they may just get the bestest friend the environment ever had
Tony Abbott!
by Centre on May 23, 2012 at 11:16 am
Tony Abbott is a nasty piece of work, not fit to polish Julia Gillard’s boots. It is obvious he has decided to go in for the kill on Craig Thomson and has totally ignored Dr Mal Washer’s mental health medical advice wrt Craig from the 7.30 Report last night.
by C@tmomma on May 23, 2012 at 11:16 am
SK
There is an authorisation code on the credit card-slip – 211. Schnappie found a list of bank authorisation codes (admittedly on a USA site) which says that 211 = Security code not valid.
The security code is the three digit code on the back of the card. If it is not valid, then the card is either one that has been replaced, or is not kosher.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on May 23, 2012 at 11:16 am
bemused
No actually Andrew Leigh does not have an argument. He used a hypothetical.
You can just as easily say that if Rudd had come to an agreement with the Greens then all the benefits we are seeing now from the Carbon Price would have been achieved two years ago. Thus putting Australia in a better position on the fight against Climate Change.
by guytaur on May 23, 2012 at 11:16 am
guytaur,
This is the biggest cop-out I have seen for a long time.
The fact it gets continually repeated as a justification for the Greens taking one of the biggest risks in Australia’s political history is insulting to the average person’s intelligence.
No matter how many times you lot repeat it, it is “never” going to substitute for reality and the truth!
Give us a break, eh?
by scorpio on May 23, 2012 at 11:17 am
Joe you are wrong and it’s because of attitudes like that just expressed by you that I’m posting less at present while all this sillyness here plays out.
Bemused you get good and bad in all organisations. Currently the Libs are being driven by more uncooth elements. Perhaps less ethical elements is a better way to express it.
by davidwh on May 23, 2012 at 11:17 am
William needs to set new rules: posts are only allowed if:
1. you are a true labor supporter (as defined by the majority at any point in time)
2. you do not express complexity and nuance in you views
3. you agree that Gillard is the best performer in the history of politics
4. you agree that Rudd is the true enemy
5. you agree that Tony Abbott is bad, but Rudd is worse
6. That polls are important, but only when they support your view (otherwise people are stupid and deserve what they get)
7. That there are no Lizard people, and Craig Thomson is the subject of the largest conspiracy since Harold Holt.
8. Anyone who diverges from these views is a Fiberal, a concern troll or not a true Labor supporter.
by bluegreen on May 23, 2012 at 11:17 am
victoria,
Excellent. I’ hoping this uptick persists as the gold coast relies heavily (though not soley) on the tourist trade. Just wanted to test to see if it is a bit wider than the GC.
by Space Kidette on May 23, 2012 at 11:17 am