tip off

Essential Research: 51-49 to Coalition

The ever-reliable Essential Research still has the Coalition with its nose in front on two-party preferred, but down two points on the primary vote. However, expectations for the future of the economy and various other indicators paint a very worrying picture for the government.

Crikey reports that Essential Research, which looks like the only poll we’re getting this week, is once again unchanged on two-party preferred, with the Coalition leading 51-49. However, both parties are down on the primary vote, the Coalition by two points to 43% and Labor by one point to 37%, while the Greens are up one to 9% and the Palmer United Party is steady on 4%. It should be noted that this result compares a two-week average with last week’s debut figures derived from one week of polling only, so a two-point primary vote change from this notoriously stable series is less striking than it would be normally. Also featured are results on asylum seeker policy (broadly favourable to the government) and climate change (51% caused by human activity, 39% part of a normal fluctuation), on which more shortly.

UPDATE: Full Essential report here. Another figure to emerge is a deterioration in perceptions of the state of the economy, with the total good rating down six points since immediately after the election to 34% and poor up one to 26%. Thirty-eight per cent now believe it heading in the right direction, down six, against 33% for the wrong direction, up seven. Respondents were asked whether things would get better or worse under the Coalition government across a range of measures, with remarkable results – large majorities of respondents expecting pretty much everything to get worse, with the singular exception of company profits. The figures are worse across the board for the government than immediately after the election, most remarkably so in relation to unemployment (from a net rating of minus 10% to minus 23%) and cost of living (minus 13% to minus 35%).

On asylum seekers, only 30% believe most are genuine refugees against 47% who believe most are not, and 22% believe the government too tough versus 25% for too soft and 35% for taking the right approach. Fifty-two per cent think recent extreme temperatures likely to be related to climate change, versus 34% who think otherwise.

1416
  • 51
    Rex Douglas
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

    bemused

    The ALP/Greens should be doing everything in their power to create a DD scenario.

  • 52
    rossmcg
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

    Ctar1

    I was going to mention Richardson too. With all the dodgy stuff around him since he left politics you would think people might be embarrassed to be seen with him.

  • 53
    spur212
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

    Steve777 @44

    Those are net ratings.

    It’s 51/49 because it hasn’t translated into “voting behaviour” yet, but you can presume it will sooner or later

  • 54
    MTBW
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    rossmcg

    I absolutely agree with you regarding Reith.

    Why he still gets to be able to write articles in the newspaper is beyond me.

  • 55
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    The ALP/Greens should be doing everything in their power to create a DD scenario.

    Which isn’t much because, ultimately, it’s the PM’s decision alone. And PM’s do not call DDs because they were pressured to.

  • 56
    psyclaw
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    Fran Barlow

    Of course the Responsible Service of Alcohol laws can be easily enforced. It’s all a matter of sufficient, appropriate staffing at the venue’s expense, and “motivation” (self generated or otherwise) to follow the law.

    In busy times they need more staff. Don’t forget what contributes to the busy-ness ….. serving more up to those already inebriated.

    Venues squealed when they had to provide their own security, and when the security had to extend to the precincts.

    Sufficient bar staff including mature workers, a commitment to refuse service to drunks, authoritative back up by security staff, and old habits can be changed.

    But most important would be the publicity……that the venue owners are contributing to this severe social problem.

    And after all, it’s not too difficult to identify that a drinker is already totally wasted when he/she fronts the bar, is it.

  • 57
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

    Those saying relax the ALP has years have missed something.

    Mr Shorten is currently on the campaign trail. Finally the MSM has noticed.

    The WA Senate election looking likely at this stage is a lot closer in time than three years away. If Greens or Labor get an extra seat at the expense of the LNP the carbon price may just stay.

    That is worth campaigning for.

  • 58
    Patrick Bateman
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

    What I find amazing about those “better/worse” responses is that they are that negative despite the concerted efforts of the commercial media to suppress all negative news for the govt.

    Imagine if the media was being as relentlessly critical as it was of Gillard.

  • 59
    MTBW
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

    Did any of you see the comments by Thomas Kelly’s family?

    They were straight forward and happy to see some changes.

  • 60
    frednk
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

    last essential I can find was on DEC 3 at 52% to Coalition so they are getting with the trand slowly.

  • 61
    Rex Douglas
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

    Carey Moore #40

    I’m in no doubt as to Kevin Rudds primary motivation for introducing the new rules re leadership election.

  • 62
    Patrick Bateman
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    Bleedingly obvious that Australia voted Labor out because of their inability to portray a united front, not because of their policies or values.

    Sadly true.

    I have maintained for a long time that Labor’s mistake was picking Rudd in the first place. He was never a principled choice.

  • 63
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    Rex Douglas. Sneer at Rudd all you like. The results were undoubtedly good for Labor.

  • 64
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    I’m in no doubt as to Kevin Rudds primary motivation for introducing the new rules re leadership election.

    Zzzzzzzz

  • 65
    Rex Douglas
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

    Carey Moore #64

    Time to wake up ;)

  • 66
    spur212
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

    Patrick Bateman

    The government has more influence over public opinion than the media does. Doesn’t matter if it’s Labor or Coalition in government, it’s the same deal. Abbott’s ratings will fall for the exact same reasons Gillard’s and Rudd Mark II’s did: a failure to take responsibility, inspire or relate to people.

    In many instances, the media’s attempt to spin a story in a politician’s favour says exactly the wrong thing to the exact wrong voter the politician is trying to influence. The Courier Mail on the weekend with the headline for Campbell Newman reading “I’m no dictator” is a classic example.

  • 67
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

    Nice to hear SKY News start with “The Opposition says…” and ABC radio with “The Opposition Leader…” all the same!

  • 68
    Bushfire Bill
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

    “The Abbott Liberals – what a disaster”

    It’s what happens when you put an habitual thug in office as Prime Minister; a thug surrounded by other thugs.

    They get what they want by threats and intimidation.

    Abbott’s “statesman” act is pure farce. He put out the meme that he would “grow into the job”. The “Job maketh the man” and so on.

    Murdoch rags (and, initially at least, Mark Kenny and Hartcher at Fairfax) dutifully picked this up and set about making it come true, or appear to be true.

    But no amount of lipstick could sanitize the Abbott pig.

    No matter what they wrote about him he kept on f**king it up: Indonesia, Education, national confidence, social services, the NBN.

    So many punters thought they’d “worked Tony Abbott out”. They knew he was a scammer, he’d already admitted that (not much point denying it), but they convinced themselves he was only working the scam on others, not on them.

    It’s a classic con trick: let the victims win some small victories – a “unity ticket” here, a “blood oath” there – and they’ll give you a go. They’re looking for excuses. The skilful con man let’s his victims think he’s dumber than they are, allows them a few small wins and then takes them to the cleaners.

    Look at the Essential findings on the economy and jobs, among the other topics: nearly all are negative, big time, since the election. It’s what happens when you put the Mob in as your partner.

    They trash the joint. Then they torch it to collect the insurance.

  • 69
    sprocket_
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

    Anthony B ‏@swearyanthony 6 mins amazing coincidence the new CBD lockout area stops a block before News Ltd’s local pub, too.

    pic.twitter.com/EjeUVfsKnj

  • 70
    sprocket_
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

    and the link

    https://twitter.com/swearyanthony/status/425471880967884800/photo/1/large

    No we can’t have the Holt St Bowling Club members going dry, can we Barry?

  • 71
    Asha Leu
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

    @Rex Douglas 51

    The ALP/Greens should be doing everything in their power to create a DD scenario.

    It doesn’t matter how much legislation the ALP and the Greens block, there’s not a chance that Abbott will call a Double Dissolution while the polls have Labor in the lead.

    The only way a DD can be forced is through blocking supply, which is an inefficient, destructive and extraordinarily risky way of doing so. Sure, it worked a charm for Fraser, but he had the advantages of a government plagued by ministerial scandals, an economy spiraling out of control and very one-sided media coverage courtesy of Rupert Murdoch. Were Shorten to try the same tactic, it would most likely backfire spectacularly for him.

    As I’ve said before, I’d much rather Labor win in a landslide in 2016 then scrape through to victory in six months. It takes time for the electorate to fully turn against the government and PM of the day. Right now many voters would still be trying to convince themselves they made the right decision on September 7. Have some patience.

    @Rex Douglas 61

    I’m in no doubt as to Kevin Rudds primary motivation for introducing the new rules re leadership election.

    Oh, I agree.

    But with Rudd now out of parliament, who really gives a shit what his motivations were?

  • 72
    Bule
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

    Bushfire Bill,

    If it’s a confidence trick, what does it say that confidence (as demonstrated by the better/worse) figures show that confidence in the future is slipping across the board?

    What does it say that despite this plummeting confidence those polled would still prefer that the Mob preside over the decline in our fortunes?

  • 73
    mexicanbeemer
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

    So a four month old government with positive global economic news and apparently delivering its headline policy only achieves a 51-49 lead.

    A swing against it of 2%.

    It looks like the voters are saying okay you have made a few stumbles and some successes but what about the big elephant in the room.

    The budget!!

  • 74
    mexicanbeemer
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

    Have to laugh at the Australian Newspaper’s claim that Tone is top billing when various business and economic publications have listed the who’s who and not one mention of Tone.

  • 75
    feeney
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    Report in SMH alludes to Labor and Liberal “internal polling” showing a further drop in Labor’s PV in Griffith.

    I doubt the veracity of any party’s internal polling.

    But, this country and its people are so f—ed, nothing would surprise me.

  • 76
    Bushfire Bill
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

    The Rudd who was elected Prime Minister was a different “Rudd” to the one who was sacked by his own party.

    This wasn’t just some petty ambition on Gillard’s behalf, or Senator Feeny’s hurt feelings, or some kind of “Kirribilli Agreement” mix-up. Things must have been pretty dire to even contemplate getting rid of Rudd not long before an election.

    Labor people who’d known him for a long time knew he had a certain personality type that was ultimately destructive and divisive, no matter how popular he was with the voters.

    If the PM can’t function, then the government can’t function. It’s logical to think that very serious matters were at hand before the decision was made to axe Rudd. That he got not one vote in favour of holding a formal spill means, to me, that the party knew the end had come.

    He subsequently proved that his rat-f**king abilities were second to none. Gillard, a popular Prime Minister at first, and a competent office-holder, was white-anted mercilessly from the front and, unforgivably, from the rear.

    To say that “Labor” couldn’t show it could stay united is too kind to Rudd and too cruel to Gillard. She tried to run a reforming government that achieved serious things, rather than took selfies of itself.

    You just cannot look at Gillard in isolation as causing the loss in September. She was the focus of hatred, (in the end, blind hatred) from within a minority of the party who wouldn’t give up even after Rudd himself publicly gave up (after the no-show in February). You just can’t swim through a tsunami generated by Rudd and Abbott, and a hostile, sniggering media pushing negative themes. It’s amazing she lasted as long as she did with the tidal wave of hatred that swept over her, carefully manufactured and nurtured to make her look incompetent.

    It didn’t matter what she did. Even taking to wearing glasses was mocked, as were her bum, breasts, thighs, ankles, ear-lobes. The ABC made an entire comedy series about her (I bet they wouldn’t dare do the same about Abbott).

    The slightest sign of emotion from her condemned her as a weak woman. The slightest sign of strength, or even professional detatchment was put up as her having no soul. She was in the equivalent of public stocks in the village square, where everything trotten was thrown at her, or blamed on her, and nothing that was good or encouraging (and there was a lot of it) went to her credit.

    Mark Kenny once wrote an article on her final China trip. He said she had been a brilliant success… it was just a pity, a damn shame, that Rudd had popped up onto Q&A (or something similar) right at the end of it. Kenny, a supposedly professional journalist, wrote off the entire journey on this basis. Instead of pointing out the triviality of the hecklers, he sided with them. He was not alone by any means.

    And look what we got in her place. Rudd as an empty shell, wowing the crowds and losing the election. And then Abbott and his bunch of thugs and whingers, trying their best to make themselves look good by making others look bad… the meanest way to national esteem possible.

    Now all the whingers are back out bemoaning the new government and their own prospects after they voted it in.

    It really does make you want to spew at the stupidity of the Australian electorate.

  • 77
    CTar1
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

    Report in SMH alludes to ...

    They like to do that on no solid basis whatsoever.

  • 78
    Yesiree Bob
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

    I’d much prefer the ALP to get on with informing the public of the level of destructiveness from this Govt than watching it publicly navel-gazing.

    And how, exactly are the ALP “naval gazing” ?

  • 79
    mexicanbeemer
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:05 pm | Permalink

    Bill Glesson does have the advantage of being high profile and may benefit from that but at this stage i don’t think he will get over the line.

  • 80
    spur212
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:08 pm | Permalink

    Here’ the thing in regards or the better or worse expectation ratings from Essential: the Coalition were elected with low expectations but since becoming the government, they have fallen further and more importantly on areas that were/often perceived as Coalition strengths such as political leadership, the economy, trust in government and interest rates.

    I would put most of this collapse down to Abbott personally as a leader. Leadership really is everything in this day and age. I suspect their response to these sort of numbers will be “optimism” but that will look “out of touch”

    It’s important that Shorten doesn’t copy what Abbott did or he’ll fall into the same chasm. He needs to be critical but also constructive

  • 81
    Bushfire Bill
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

    If it’s a confidence trick, what does it say that confidence (as demonstrated by the better/worse) figures show that confidence in the future is slipping across the board?

    The nation has that feeling you get when you go around to the scammer’s office to pick up your cheque or your winnings and you find nothing but an empty room… the chicken has flown the coop.

    It takes a while, usually, for the feeling to sink in… you’ve done your dough. You’ll rationalize that you did everything right. You asked the appropriate questions and got the appropriate answers – support for Gonski, the NDIS, a fair hearing for the Labor’s optical NBN model – only to then have it dawn on you that it was all – ALL of it – utter bullshit, designed solely to get you to sign on the dotted line.

    There was never any intention to keep those promises they made. It was literally all lies. Punters have a lot of trouble admitting they were duped. But when they finally do, watch out.

    I give it another few months and we’ll know for sure. The Coalition has promised gloom and doom and they’re doing their best to deliver it. That’s hardly something which inspires confidence.

  • 82
    Centre
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

    Interesting that Sportsbet have a price for the PUP to win Ruddy’s old seat.

    The odds are:

    ALP $1.20

    LNP $3.50

    PUP $34.00

    Greens $67.00

    Are the PUP contesting or are Sportsbet being very cheeky, which bookies certainly can be?

    If the PUP are contesting, as I said, they’d have a better chance than the Full Mooners.

  • 83
    bemused
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

    Rex Douglas@61

    Carey Moore #40

    I’m in no doubt as to Kevin Rudds primary motivation for introducing the new rules re leadership election.

    Oh? And what was that Rex? I didn’t know you were his confidant.

  • 84
    victoria
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

    Hngh Court decision on new WA senate could be known as early as next week

    http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/high-court-decision-on-new-wa-senate-poll-could-be-known-as-early-as-next-week-20140121-31685.html

  • 85
    rossmcg
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

    Centre

    There is a price on PUP in Griffith because the bookies know there is a sucker born every minute

  • 86
    Centre
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

    Other markets that I found quite interesting are; betting on the Greens leader at the next election:

    Milne $1.50

    Bandt $3.25

    Sarah H-Y $8.00

    What may save Milne is that polling for the Loons is always overstated. I really think they would do much better under Bandt. Still, they could go full moon the whole hog and install Sarah H-Y.

    And betting to lead the Coalition at the next election:

    Turnbull $7.00

    Hockey $13.00

    Morrison $15.00

    Mesma $17.00

    and

    Mirrabella $101.00 (Sportsbet being very cheeky here)?

    So where’s betting for the ALP leader at the next election?

    There isn’t any!

    Well done Ruddy, thanks to his reforms, leadershit seems to be dead, buried and cremated at long last.

  • 87
    bemused
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    Patrick Bateman@62


    Bleedingly obvious that Australia voted Labor out because of their inability to portray a united front, not because of their policies or values.


    Sadly true.

    I have maintained for a long time that Labor’s mistake was picking Rudd in the first place. He was never a principled choice.

    Then who was Patrick?

  • 88
    Centre
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    rossmcg

    Correct!

  • 89
    Mortlock
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    The most interesting is the state of the economy – people voting for all the major parties – including the LNP – are net positive in terms of stating the economy is in a good shape. However, those voting ‘other’ or non-aligned it is a net negative. So I guess we now know who the ‘budget emergency’ discourse was aimed at – potential swinging coters

  • 90
    Centre
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

    That fact that there is now unity under the new reforms where MPs and Members select the ALP leader is certainly a HUGE slap in the face to all those fools who said the process would be a disaster.

    I’m really referring to Graham Richardson.

    Richo go and give yourself a slap in the face, on the positive, it could only improve your appearance :P

  • 91
    ruawake
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:36 pm | Permalink

    I’m in no doubt as to Kevin Rudds primary motivation for introducing the new rules re leadership election.

    Nice try but the “new” rules were passed by Federal Conference a few years ago. Seems Kevin was implementing the will of the Party.

    But don’t let facts stand in the way of a good rant. :P

  • 92
    ruawake
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

    I am waiting for my phone call from Bill Shorten at 6.30 tonight, will let bludgers know what he says, (if you’se are nice and play well together).

  • 93
    mari
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:39 pm | Permalink

    http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/murdoch-puts-mockers-on-melbourne-club-moves-against-abbott,6080 Think any truth in this?

  • 94
    ruawake
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:42 pm | Permalink

    On internal ALP polling in Griffith. Dick Williams informed us that none would be occurring and that relying on media polling would have to suffice.

  • 95
    Jackol
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:42 pm | Permalink

    Re: Griffith polling

    It’s an age-old political thing to attempt to be the underdog, while still looking competitive.

    If it looks like you’re going to lose big time, the bandwagon effect kicks in.

    If it looks like you’re going to romp it in, people think their vote doesn’t count and don’t turn up to support your candidate or think about ‘sending a message’ of some sort.

    So the fact both the ALP and the LNP make comments about how tight their internal polling is is no surprise at all, and tells us nothing about what the actual sentiment in the seat is. As I’ve said before any media report that talks about ‘internal polling’ is only of interest in what it might tell you about the dynamic of the party doing the leaking – as an insight into seat polling any such leak is absolutely meaningless.

    Going off the shift in the national polling and the historical precedents for by-elections I’d say Glasson has a snowball’s chance in hell at the moment.

    But it is a by-election – pretty much anything can happen. The bookies apparently think PUP is in with a chance even though they’re not running a candidate…

  • 96
    shellbell
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

    Statement of NSW Bar Association on NSW drinking laws

    http://www.nswbar.asn.au/circulars/2014/jan/MR_1punch.pdf

  • 97
    mexicanbeemer
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

    Thinking about the need to tighten the budget as given me an idea, lets limit the time a polly can receive the pension too the first term after they leave parliament which gives them enough time to network their way into a new job.

  • 98
    CTar1
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:50 pm | Permalink

    mari

    Think any truth in this?

    I take all things on IA with a grain of salt. The have a bulshit way of making arguments.

    I.e. The members of the Melbourne Club they name just happen to be Victorians. Abbott is, of course, from Sydney.

  • 99
    mari
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

    CTAR1 98

    And you think the old interstate rivalry is alive and kicking?

  • 100
    Jackol
    Posted Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

    And on disgruntled Albanese supporters:

    I’m not sure if it’s people agitating for Albanese as leader or people who hold a grudge against Shorten for his past number crunching/shifting support.

    If it’s people holding a torch for Albo I think they’re barking up the wrong tree. My impression was always that Albo was putting his hand up to do the right thing by the party – at first to be the night watchman as the no-hope LOTO after losing government when all the candidates who think they’re in with a real chance of being PM sit on their hands, and then when the membership vote was confirmed and Shorten had put his hand up Albo threw his efforts into making the leadership vote a vibrant contest to validate the new system.

    I honestly don’t think Albo had any particular ambition to be leader and was just doing what his party needed him to do, and anyone who thinks he is sitting in the background just waiting to jump out and be a knight in shining armour as leader to take the ALP to the promised land is deluding themselves.

    As far as those who hold a grudge against Shorten – I can understand the perspective given the history, but it’s just not a useful perspective to hold on to.

    Judge Shorten on what he does as leader and how he does it. If he doesn’t work out then he doesn’t work out, and fair comment on how he is performing is always worthwhile – and being fair he’s only a couple of months into the job as no-hope LOTO after losing government so it’s really too early to be passing judgment on Shorten. Trying to tear Shorten down for past wrongs … not so helpful for the ALP.

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...