Facebook Google Menu Linkedin lock Pinterest Search Twitter

Advertisement

BludgerTrack: 52.2-47.8 to Labor

The latest poll aggregate puts Labor back in parliamentary majority territory, as a new result from ReachTEL makes the Coalition's strong result from Nielsen a fortnight ago look still more like an anomaly.

User login status :

Share

Following on from the thumping Labor lead in last week’s Newspoll, the addition of the latest ReachTEL to the BludgerTrack poll aggregate causes Labor to regain nearly all the ground it lost on the back of last fortnight’s Nielsen. However, with new contrary signals emerging through a shift back to the Coalition in Essential Research, it’s perhaps telling that the two-party trendline (displayed as always on the sidebar) looks as though it’s not sure which way to turn. Labor is now back into majority territory on the national seat projection, having picked up three seats each in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland and a further one in the territories (i.e. Solomon). It’s interesting to note that the state breakdowns show emphatic swings to Labor except where they govern at state level, at least until next Saturday’s elections. On the primary vote, Labor makes a gain this week directly at the expense of the Coalition, while the Palmer United Party is up slightly on a post-election low last week. There is no new data for leadership ratings this week.

William Bowe — Editor of The Poll Bludger

William Bowe

Editor of The Poll Bludger

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, is one of the most heavily trafficked forums for online discussion of Australian politics, and joined the Crikey stable in 2008.

Get a free trial to post comments
More from William Bowe

Advertisement

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola

3396 comments

3,396 thoughts on “BludgerTrack: 52.2-47.8 to Labor

  1. Everything

    [Rossmore
    Posted Monday, March 10, 2014 at 10:27 pm | PERMALINK
    And by my post at 3441 I don’t mean to indicate support for Mod Libs juvenile debating points.]

    Heaven forbid! 🙂

  2. Jimmyhaz

    I don’t think there’s any need for One Nation, they can just fold right into the LNP.

  3. confessions

    [She has NEVER won under these circumstances, even though she is a household name.

    Not once.

    That says it all for me. We don’t need a law, we just need to allow Australians to be Australians.]

    We need laws to prevent the powerful from abusing their power. If that’s what the Bolt Law does, then I’m so bloody good with that.

    How about Bolt run for office? Of course he never would as he knows that he would never be successful. Like a true coward, he prefers to preach from behind his Murdoch-protected newspaper instead of put his arse out there for true democratic judgement.

  4. bemused

    Everything@3349


    bemused
    ….William must be building up a good case to invoke the stupidity rule to ban you.


    William must be heartily sick of me, I know, but I am worth half a laugh half the time aren’t I?

    The laughs you draw are those of people mocking your stupidity.

  5. Everything

    No he is not entitled to make comments about a court case, whether he is PM or not!

  6. Steve777

    Our Attorney General supports Abbott’s interference in legal proceedings. Had Julia Gillard made those sorts of comments in defence of a Labor figure involved in legal proceedings, the pompous idiot who was Shadow Attorney General at the time would have been screaming for Julia to be held in contempt of court.

  7. bemused

    Billy Bragg on QANDA next week. Should be interesting.

  8. swamprat

    Everything

    I find pretend “liberals” like you far more contemptable than lumpen thugs like Erica, Abbott etc.

    I have yet to hear your outrage against Apples $0.07 in the dollar tax in Australia from billions of sales.

    I know you much prefer the poor uneducated powerless person who
    took $100 more than she should have in benefits be attacked and thrown the “full force of the (liberal) law”

  9. guytaur

    We saw some censorship tonight. No embarrassing AS questions allowed

  10. Everything

    I have posted here many times the Mod Lib Tax regulation that would have a floor tax rate under which nobody may go. In other words, you can claim as many deductions as you like, but whatever you claim, there is a minimum tax rate (15%, 25%….the exact figure can be worked out in Treasury).

    I absolutely want large companies to pay their fair share in tax. I also want fabulously wealthy Australians to pay their fair share in tax.

    The rest is projection of your bias against people who don’t agree with you. You project what you want, and then hate what you have projected. It is very well known in psychology.

  11. Geoff

    Swamprat 3358

    [I have yet to hear your outrage against Apples $0.07 in the dollar tax in Australia from billions of sales.]

    Under what government did they make these profits?
    So why did they not change the law?

  12. zoidlord

    @Geoff/3361

    They made the money here, then shipped it off to Ireland.

  13. Steve777

    re 3352 Jimmyhaz: I don’t think there’s any need for One Nation, they can just fold right into the LNP.

    I recall an editorial in the Australian many years ago praising John Howard for ‘addressing the concerns’ of those attracted to One Nation. Translation: John Howard adopted much of their rhetoric if not their policies. They have for the most part returned to the LNP fold. The Pacific Solution was a master stroke in ending Pauline Hanson’s and One Nation’s influence.

  14. guytaur

    E

    You left out a vital word in your post about tax. Fair.

    The rich need to pay more to help those who cannot on services every citizen needs. The rich still benefit from those services and are getting their money’s worth.

  15. Geoff

    Yes Zoidlord. It is a largely untaxed profit. However is illigal under current law and how long has these laws stood?

  16. swamprat

    Steve77

    [Our Attorney General supports Abbott’s interference in legal proceedings. Had Julia Gillard made those sorts of comments in defence of a Labor figure involved in legal proceedings, the pompous idiot who was Shadow Attorney General at the time would have been screaming for Julia to be held in contempt of court.]

    Maybe you are right but what is your point?

    1. the media is unfair? ……..dear dear, the ALP has had decades to improve the quality of our media and has done nothing (and i have read reports that ALP power-hungers have used the corrupt media for their own personal step to power);

    2. the ALP selects MPs who have little or no political ability and are defeated by ignorant right-wing LNP thugs?

    I wonder why this is?

  17. Everything

    [guytaur
    Posted Monday, March 10, 2014 at 10:42 pm | PERMALINK
    E

    You left out a vital word in your post about tax. Fair.]

    Uummmm, no I didn’t! I said “fair share in tax”…..have another look! 🙂

  18. zoidlord

    @Geoff/3365

    I’m not an expert on law on things like this, that is out of my league.

    But Labor did put in Transparency measures in (which Apparently Abbott was signalling to remove).

    http://www.afr.com/p/technology/backlash_over_apple_tax_strategy_ImIsOU4aOL9w5RYcsShBQM
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/news/stoush-erupts-over-apples-tax-affairs/story-e6frg906-1226846822133

  19. swamprat

    Geoff

    [Swamprat 3358

    I have yet to hear your outrage against Apples $0.07 in the dollar tax in Australia from billions of sales.

    Under what government did they make these profits?
    So why did they not change the law?]

    The news said the ALP Government changed the law but the NEW government has reversed that law.

    This was explained by SS Senator Corman, he did not want Australia taking action until the “rest of the world agreed”.

    It is a Liberal thing, I assume.

  20. zoidlord

    And Also:

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/tax-deal-how-apple-shifts-its-billions-out-of-australia-20140306-347×9.html

    “US tech giant Apple has shifted an estimated $8.9 billion in untaxed profits from its Australian operations to a tax haven structure in Ireland in the last decade, an investigation by The Australian Financial Review has found.”

    1 decade (~2004) means a loophole existed since liberal government.

  21. swamprat

    Geoff

    It is in the family of LNP laws like removing the requirement that “Financial advisors” have to act in the best interests of their clients.

    Labor introduced that law upon recommendation of the Storm Financial debacle but as it may require honesty from bankers the LNP Govt has removed that.

  22. guytaur

    E

    Sorry. Yes you did say fair share of tax. You say floor tax. Is that a progressive or regressive tax?

    A reminder GST is regressive and income tax as structured now is progressive.

  23. Bugler

    For Everything,

    [RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ACT 1975 – SECT 18C

    Offensive behaviour because of race, colour or national or ethnic origin
    (1) It is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, if:

    (a) the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people; and

    (b) the act is done because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the people in the group.

    (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), an act is taken not to be done in private if it:

    (a) causes words, sounds, images or writing to be communicated to the public; or

    (b) is done in a public place; or

    (c) is done in the sight or hearing of people who are in a public place.

    (3) In this section:

    “public place” includes any place to which the public have access as of right or by invitation, whether express or implied and whether or not a charge is made for admission to the place.]

    and

    [RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ACT 1975 – SECT 18D

    Exemptions
    Section 18C does not render unlawful anything said or done reasonably and in good faith:

    (a) in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work; or

    (b) in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public interest; or

    (c) in making or publishing:

    (i) a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest; or

    (ii) a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held by the person making the comment.]

    And who enforces it?

    [RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ACT 1975 – SECT 6B

    Application of the Criminal Code
    Chapter 2 of the Criminal Code applies to all offences against this Act.

    Note: Chapter 2 of the Criminal Code sets out the general principles of criminal responsibility.]

    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rda1975202/

  24. Geoff

    [The news said the ALP Government changed the law but the NEW government has reversed that law.]
    What news said that? and what laws were changed?

  25. guytaur

    “@GhostWhoVotes: #Newspoll 2 Party Preferred: L/NP 49 (+3) ALP 51 (-3) #auspol”

  26. guytaur

    “@GhostWhoVotes: #Newspoll Primary Votes: L/NP 41 (+2) ALP 35 (-4) GRN 11 (+1) #auspol”

  27. Steve777

    Re Swamprat @3367

    I just find it extraordinary that the PM and Attorney General can publicly interfere in legal proceedings and in the case of Abbott try to heavy one side into settling, with from what I have seen almost no comment from the media. I am suggesting that the media have one rule for Right Wing governments and another for Labor. So, to answer your points:

    1. Yes to the question and yes to the ALP’s trying to manipulate corrupted media for their own ends.
    2. Unfortunately, Yes in many instances. The ALP has been completely crap at getting its message across in recent years.

  28. zoidlord

    GhostWhoVotes ‏@GhostWhoVotes 2m

    #Newspoll 2 Party Preferred: L/NP 49 (+3) ALP 51 (-3) #auspol

    GhostWhoVotes ‏@GhostWhoVotes 1m

    #Newspoll Primary Votes: L/NP 41 (+2) ALP 35 (-4) GRN 11 (+1) #auspol

  29. Diogenes

    It’s the correction we had to have.

  30. confessions

    Yep, correction.

  31. swamprat

    Geoff

    [What news said that? and what laws were changed?]

    I saw it on ABC, i did not take much notice, normal LNP.

    It was Sidonas from the LNP Government. He said that private companies did not like “red tape” and that requirement was to be removed as it was unnecessary and costly.

  32. Everything

    [guytaur
    ….Sorry. Yes you did say fair share of tax. You say floor tax. Is that a progressive or regressive tax?

    A reminder GST is regressive and income tax as structured now is progressive.]

    Progressive. Poor tax payers wouldn’t be affected at all, as they are usually on PAYE and don’t have many deductions. Rich tax payers would be hammered as they have expensive (tax deductible) Barristers/Accountants practically eliminating their taxable income. I would let them do that to their heart’s content, UP UNTIL x% (might be 15% or 25% who knows) after which the expensive Barristers/Accountants become worthless as you have to pay that rate of tax no matter what.

    You would need certain exemptions for start up businesses etc, but it is definitely draftable.

  33. swamprat

    Diogenes

    [It’s the correction we had to have.]

    Could someone explain to me what is a “correction”, and why do we have to have it, or not have it?

    How can any poll be needing ‘correction?

    Does that mean some polls are correct and other are not?

    please explain?

  34. zoidlord

    @Confessions/3381

    Or the good old bash on Welfare worked.

  35. Everything

    The “truth” might be 52-48 and all the polls are basically noise around truth.

  36. guytaur

    E

    Sounds reasonable to me as a layperson on tax. I will leave it up to tax experts here to point out where that impression is wrong.

  37. Kevin Bonham

    We now have Labor being declared to have lost support although the 54 was never real in the first place (and nor was the 48 from Nielsen). 51 is simply a more accurate reading. If Nielsen gets 51 those covering Nielsen will talk about how much Labor has gained.

    My aggregate is 51.2 to Labor.

  38. Everything

    guytaur:

    It is very simple…..I am always wRONg!

    Any explanation which comes to that conclusion is therefore salient, and one can argue the opposite in a few days, or weeks, or months if needed, as long as one is arguing against me!

    Good night all :devil:

  39. swamprat

    [The “truth” might be 52-48 and all the polls are basically noise around truth.]

    The real truth is the ALP is a failed party.

    – It barely knows what it stands for, apart from being a soupy moderate right wing US bendover party

    – It cannot compete in working class seats against barely literate real right wing idiots

    – it does not know whether it represents Australia or the few unions that are attached to it; and

    – IT REFUSES TO CHANGE.

  40. Steve777

    I always thought the 54-46 to Labor was a rogue. That would be a mark of a very unpopular Government. Abbott has his problems and in my opinion deserves to be regarded with disdain and contempt but that feeling is not prevalent broader community. I think Labor is on 51 or 52 which would drop by a couple of points if an election were actually called in the near future.

  41. Geoff

    Geoff

    [What news said that? and what laws were changed?

    I saw it on ABC, i did not take much notice, normal LNP.

    It was Sidonas from the LNP Government. He said that private companies did not like “red tape” and that requirement was to be removed as it was unnecessary and costly.]

    No link? no youtube vid? of course you saw it on “ABC”
    and of course you are lying.

  42. Jimmyhaz

    Honestly, the tax rate above a certain income should rise drastically.

    At 100K 40% or whatever is fine, but people earning $20 mil a year barely feel it. Any income above a certain amount (perhaps divided into the percentiles, rather than a fixed amount, so the 1% pay 60%, 0.1% pay 90% etc) should be taxed away, as it serves no public good to allow its concentration.

  43. mexicanbeemer

    Loos like Lisa Wilkinson has had one of those long days she will be pleased is over starting off with a large spider and finishing up with Brandis

  44. Otiose

    → → 11/03/2014 05:09:18 —- Nett_NEWS++™ @ http://bit.ly/1aQcqOy #auspol http://bit.ly/1qpOJpX