This week’s Essential Report comes in unchanged from last week in all respects, with the primaries running 41/39 to Labor, washing out into a two party preferred of 55/45 the same way. The Greens are on 13 and the broad “Others” are on 7. This comes from a rolling two week sample of 1747, giving us an MoE that maxes out around the 2.3% mark.
Additional questions this week looked at approval ratings, better PM, when people have or are likely to make up their mind on which party they are voting for, the interest in the election compared to previous campaigns and a cheeky little one on Costello as leader of the Coalition. These additional qurestions came from a sample of 1028, giving us an MoE that maxes out around the 3.1% mark.
.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Julia Gillard/Tony Abbott is doing as Prime Minister/Opposition Leader?
First the approval levels and approval strengths of Julia:
On the cross-tabs, Essential tells us:
Among Liberal/National voters, 18% approve and 70% disapprove.
By gender ‐ men 51% approve/36% disapprove and women 49% approve/30% disapprove.
Now for Tony:
On the cross-tabs, we get:
78% of Liberal/National voters approve and 11% disapprove. Among Labor voters, 15% approve and 74% disapprove.
There were no substantial differences by gender ‐ men 37% approve/48% disapprove and women 33% approve/44% disapprove.
Meanwhile, the net approval ratings come in like this:
.
Who do you think would make the better Prime Minister out of Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott?
On the cross-tabs, men prefer Julia Gillard 50/29 and women 51/23.
.
How interested are you in this federal election?
Gender cross-tabs say that “women (19% more/9% less) were somewhat more interested than men (16% more/13% less).”
.
When do you think you will make your decision about which party to vote for?
.
Do you think that if Peter Costello had stayed in Parliament, he would make a better leader of the Liberal Party than Tony Abbott?
As Essential notes – the highest level of support for Abbott here came among Labor voters 
47 Comments
When things are going south …… dontcha just lurv face-saving 2 week rolling averages?
The last Q tells much anyone independent of mind needs to know about Essential.
If things were “going south” – or going anywhere for that matter, it would still be picked up with a two week average considering that the headline results haven’t really moved with Essential for weeks.
James K I will back Possum everytime in a 2 way with you. You are out of your depth.
I think the story is that there has been little movement at the station, and a win by Tony would be so extraordinary – a lot of pollsters and pundits will be scratching their heads and frantically trying to explain how they got it so wrong.
Do these polls attempt to maintain a 50/50 male-female sample set? It seems to me that the gender preference could throw off the MoE.
Is there any historical statistical information on whether the male-female ratio is skewed in phone polls?
In the absence of any factor to influence poll results, the rolling average makes sense, if there is a decline, then it will be fully visible next week.
Re. phone polls – there are probably M-F skews in any particular poll, but it it might average itself out. The problem with phone polls is that they only include landlines and not mobiles, so they would regularly skew older.
Do the latest phone polls include mobiles?
I think the Coalition could win this election. Apart from News Limited on their side, I looks like they’ve learnt to reach the mass in similar way the the Democrats did in the last US election through electronic media.
The internet blogs are flooded with Libs rants on Yahoo and 9MSN for example; some of them pretend to be Labor voters who vow never to vote Labor again and endorsing with very obvious fake comments (I am not saying that thare is no Labor voters switching to the Coalition). Like the phone results for who won the debate, lots of Libs rang in mulktiple times to give it to Abbott; some 51 times from 1 mobile number.
I think Labor supporters will need to counter this occurence by voicing their opinions more on the net, newspaper and radio etc to balance things out. Since people keep hearing on thing all the times they will start to believe so they need the alternative for check and balance.
If someone start a progressive centrist party I wil condsider voting for them instead of the craps we are being offered.
JamesK you.. take off your blue coloured glasses.. clear your perception
Yes cant wait till this weekends polls.. cant help but feel that if it doesnt change this week, its not going to change much.
Does anyone know what polling is occuring this weekend? all phone or some face?
The data would be weighted to match the demographic of the public you are trying to survey.
So if you made 1000 (answered) calls and 600 of the answers were from males and 400 from females you would have to weigh the data to match the demographics.
Ie if the 600 Men responded 60/40 to a question and the women responded 40/60 to the same question, the end result for the poll would be 50/50 if you are ensuring a equal weighting between males and females (without weighting the result would be 52/48).
I imagine weighting would more often happen due to a lack of younger responses, though a combination of disinterest and simply not being home as much as a retiree.
Hopefully what I just said was correct..
Scott im thinking not too many people bother reading blogs on the bottom of news.. on ABC it’s always cranky retirees having a rant
All the polls we cover on Pollytics are properly weighted, including weighting by age and gender -so there is no skew there at all.
@ RichMondo
I understand where you are coming from. But on Yahoo and 9MSN there are many younger people commenting on news and finance articles.
@Scott
but how much effect do they have? how many people read them?
(I know hypocritical posting here and all)
I do agree that it is a powerful tool, A certain Country in middle-east has a ‘blog squad’ of thousands.
@ Richmodo
They are posts in the mainstream domains which reach a wider section of readers (as opposed to Crikey which is more to the left side audience). It could create what you call a ripple affect as 1 will spread and multiply; and in particular on marginal seat where people are not properly informed and educated it could be a big factor, it is amazing how people just believe in lies and roumors instead of going out to find the facts.
I love all the focus on the male/female split and People Skills attempts to defuse it as an issue by rolling out his lovely wife. You do not have to roll out your understandably reluctant non-pollie wife you just have to roll out a policy affecting women that does not focus on them as “breeders or feeders”. Stay out of the child care centres or maternity wards and tout a policy that:
A) assists young women into hard to access male dominated careers/apprenticeships or training or
B) on providing women with the skills to sit on boards or
C) on assisting women manage the gaps that appear in their superannuation savings in later life or
D) on helping singles into homes (which is becoming increasingly only available to two income families).
Stopping talking about women only in terms of marriage/parenthood related issues and your problems with women would drop substantially.
Scott73 – “If someone start a progressive centrist party I wil condsider voting for them instead of the craps we are being offered.”
I second thaty motion.
Just think.. if the Democrats had not been killed off by the Kernot/Reith IR deal and Meg Lees’ GST deal – they would be ideally placed to scoop up disaffected ALP and Lib voters who just can’t bring themselves to vote for those commie hippie druggie Greens.
@ David Richard
Yes, and it would be wonderful if we have more alternatives rather this two party system dominating the political domain.
Tsk tsk, just like the fashion industry.
Down with your anti-weight policy! We want skew!!
scott 73 – I’m pretty sure there’d be 25% vote share in it for a third party somewhat closer to the point of origin on the political compass graph if one were around. There’s 10% each from both the majors, plus 5% from the Greens (roughly) that could be up for grabs. then all they’d have to do is come second and pick up preferences from one or both of the old parties.
It’s doable – and it would be a better , more robust democracy than the faux democracy we have at the moment.
Democracy was bound to fail in Australia. I mean, what a nerve to imagine that other blokes could possibly be as good as a Bludstone booted worker, like me.
As for women, there’s only two places for a woman. Cooking the food and ironing the clothes.
Ask that Tony Abbott fella, he’ll tell ya.
@Venise
Wat? you don’t think chastity belts for school girls are good education revolution from the monk?
I think it is possible for the government to have effective green policy without driving up the cost of living. I have family in Canada and the electricity is so cheap because it is hydro. So investment in renewable energy will actually drive cost down.
Giving now that there are even technology to capture carbon emission to feed to algae to generate electricity I think a green future is very doable; it’s just that short sighted scaremongering are in our way.
A carbon tax could be easily inroduced if government allow for rebate of up to half of the amount payable if companies invest such amount into green industry. It will be a win/win situation and government won’t have to spend a lot to subsidise green industry.
I love reading the blogs, it’s easy to pick a young Liberal from a mile away, they just don’t seem to have the capacity to say anything without some stupid demeaning comment. Most of their arguments are based on repeating the same lies over and over (such as the BER is a waste or somehow a 20 billion dollar budget surplus somehow rescued the country from the biggest crash since 1929).
It’s easy to discern the difference between a welded on supporter of either party but the greens supporters are the easiest as they always seem to need to shout at the end of a blog post.
I also love the “I was going to vote for the greens but now I’m not going to because they’ve done a preference deal with Labor!!!” … What, now you’ll sacrifice everything you believe in from an environmental perspective and vote for Abbott.
Thanks for the updates Possum, it’s very comforting to see a scientific interpretation of the polls rather than the bizarre headlines in the Australian.
I know that there SHOULD be no way that Tony Abbott will be PM. However, I fear that the revived mining ads and the concerted effort on behalf of the ABC, 7, 9, 10, and the print media and radio are biting and the ALP may after all lose.
I hope I am wrong – because Tony Abbott PM is not something I want to see.
“The internet blogs are flooded with Libs rants on Yahoo and 9MSN for example …”
ROFL. Yesterday’s party ranting on yesteryear’s Interwebs.
On the other hand I hope that you’re right about our next PM, David Richards and I think you might be but certainly not about our MSM.
They criticise Labor (if at all) mainly from the left and certainly not from a conservative or libertarian perspective.
Labor has done the unthinkable for big government lefty types and that was to so overtly mismanage the various big ticket programs.
What a sin. Quel horreur!….. visibility.
Not the waste and abuse per-se because that always happens… but the PR disaster.
That’s all lefties ever care about….. the image…. the seemliness of their saintliness.
Never the actual result.
Because it always… but always and inevitably…. fails the people.
Judge us on our intentions rather than the results of our actions?
I don’t think so.
What universe do you come from JamesK? You don’t think News Media has waged an unprincipled and unmitigated assault on Rudd and Labor in general – and in doing so has made its flagship, the Australian little better than a propaganda rag? All you can see is where the media attacks Labor from the left. One way mirror indeed!
And what universe do you inhabit where you seriously believe Labor has mismanaged its big ticket programs? You might not get the term “big lie” but do yourself a favour and google for it.
JamesK – do you do anything other than channel Tony Abbott?
The anger the leeft has towards the ALP is the way they have lurched so far to the right – considerably to the right of Malcolm Fraser and even Robert Menzies. We atre now oversupplied with two extremist right wing parties, and no real leftist challenger. This does not make for a real democracy.
JamesK – are you comfortable in supporting a party that is so mendacious and so dishonest, not to mention incompetent?
If you call the Rudd/Gillard government incompetent, just wait to see how incompetent a Libe4ral government can be.. or just recall 12 years of Howard incompetence.
Does anyone know how the timing of the survey works. I have read their web site and it suggests to me that it works by emailing a large group of people and then leaving responses open until the weekend. (I have been surveyed by other companies that work in this way)
The reason I raise this is that, if true, the survey probably had most of its responses on Tuesday, trailing off over the week.
This would place the survey prior to Labor’s 150 community council announcement. A 55/45 result would then be in line with other surveys taken just prior.
In effect 55/45 from 3 surveys in the week ended Tuesday suggests they were not rogue and 52/48 from the following Fri-Sun are just a reflection of changing mood.
It’s not just JamesK who is channelling Tonmy Abbott, the ABC seems to be doing it’s level best to spin everything to the advantage of the Oppostion.
If I had more time I would already have put in about ten complaints about headlines and stories.
@David Richards
Are you seriously proposing that mendaciousness is more a Liberal Party trait than Labor??????
Are you seriously suggesting that the Howard government was incompetent?????
The Hawke/Keating ALP government was competent but this Rudd/Gillard government is not.
What is additionally surprising is that the Lib heavyweights have been criticised for not having removed Howard but the ALP men of ability (and there are many) said nothing to restrain Rudd. Indeed his demise came from outside cabinet.
This woeful incompetence of Rudd came in the face of a supposed great depth of talent in Labor. What a joke.
I think that suggesting Labor is a right wing party says more about you than the ALP.
The Force is strong in you Dave but wake up!…… This is a centre-left country
Give yourself to the Dark Side Dave…….
LOL – it’s not just me that places the ALP firmly on the right/authoritarian side – check Political compass site
On the evidence so far available – this is an extremely conservative, militarist, paranoid, xenophobic, anti-intellectual country obsessed with sport. It is far from centre left.
If you can’t see why the Howard government was incompetent – perhaps this will refresh your memory -
AWB bribe to Saddam
Sea Sprite helicopters
F18 Super Hornet & JSF
Air Warfare Destroyer programme
The Asylum Seeker Issue (and Cornelia Rau et al) that FAILED to stop the boats
Various government decisions that made housing the most unaffordable it’s ever been
Dr Haneef case
I’m sure others can add a lot more during the 12 years of the putrid Howard era.
Poss, have you or anyone ever bothered to analyse past opinion poll results in previous elections at say 2, 3 or 4 weeks (or any other appropriate time) out from the election against the ‘final’ result to ascertain whether there is a point, no matter how close the result, that it’s glasses down? I suppose this may also be a question as to when people lock in their vote or what is the average/greatest turnaround/change from polls before the election vs the actual result.
Hope this makes sense (sorry if it doesn’t).
Look Dave, I can see you’re really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over……….
There is no recognisable pundit alleging the Howard government was incompetent only the loon fringe.
Competence is neither policy nor political philosophy.
And why do you hate your fellow citizens so much David? Is that a healthy way to lead your life?
Come to the dark side, Dave, we have cookies……..
@JamesK
If you read the next article by possum and down where comments are posted, possum provided a link to the audit into the real rorts under the Howard government.
With what’s left of my senile mind I will try to go through the history of Australian politics:
In the early 1900s the Australian Workers Union wanted the White Australia policy to kind of monopolise (I don’t want to use the work protect) for themselves against foreign workers.
In Menzies first term in office he was knifed and had to stood down after his trip to Britain to discuss war with Churhchill. Later on after he assumed office again Menzies signed the UN convention on refugees; nevertheless he still has the fear of the yellow peril and immigrants still need to be Europeans only.
The Whitlam government abolished the White Australia policy. But in 1977 Hawke ran his campaign with the phrase ‘we will determine who come into this country’ against the refugees.
The Liberals government in the early 80′s ran the country into big debt and high unemployment so Hawke won government. It was under the Keating/Hawke reform of the Australian economy that makes it cope with the modern world.
Howard came into power when the economy was returning to better shape already under Keating. Howard made further reforms; sure he did inherit $96 billions of debt from Labor but he also sold $61billions of public assets. Howard would have lost the election in early 2000s but thanks to the boat loads of people he copied Hawke’s phrase and got elected again.
The current government debt level per GDP is about 6% and unemployment rate is about 5%, it is much better than when Fraser lost office so do not say that Liberals are exclusively better economic managers. And both side of politics had nasty history on racial issues too so neither will deserve my allegiance.
Howard lost his own seat so it would tell you someting about confidence in competency or not.
@scott73.
I’ve never encountered you before but you have failed to prosecute what you I suppose was meant to be your central argument.
Please hoover the foam and spittle from your indignant mouth and provide evidence that there are any recognised and reasonable pundits who critique the Howard government on its competency.
Your post is a rather poor joke, scott73.
Do try again…….. but pleeeeease……. no more righteous indignation.
That would just go to reaffirm the impression that you are an preposterous mouth foaming lefty not at all interested in a reasoned debate.
Your last post in particular provides only an obvious logical fallacy to support your silly thesis.
Fail. Need to work harder. And do try honesty as it’s still the best policy.
My arguement was not about whether Howard government was very incompetent. I was pointing out both parties had issue with race as well as economic management and neither side can claim superiority over the other; like the attack on the rortings but you would not bother to look at the audit into the rorts under the Howard government provided by pPossum in the latest post.
The reasonable pundits by your standard must be columnists in The Australian or whosoever I do not care. You should look at how you attacked me with the way you speak when I have not been rude to you; that really shows who are reasonable people. I will not waste my time with people who are so blinded by ideology and cannot be objective.
Have a good life.
@ scott73
So if you are not arguing that the Howard government was not in fact competent why address me at all?
What made you think I might be interested in your version of the history of Australian politics since the “early 1900s” or that I might be interested in your assertion (unfounded) that “both parties had issue with race as well as economic management”?
Why would you write an addendum post to make a facile incoherent argument that attempts however ineptly to further denigrate John Howard?
Does that help further the image that you are in any way shape or form reasoned and reasonable?
The correct response is in the negative.
JamesK – your idolatry and blinkered view of John Howard is far from reasoned and reasonable. The many failings of the Howard government have been documented time and time again.
Neither the ALP nor the Liberals are competent, and neither deserve to be the government. That Australia is doomed to be run by one or the other puts the lie to the lucky country myth. Both parties are decayed and dysfunctional – and the Action Man Who Would Be King is only there by the grace of one vote due to a very convenient (for him) hospital stay by one of his colleagues.
Both parties are infected and infested with self serving apparatchiks devoid of integrity, honour, vision, compassion, and any relevant competencies in their portfolios either as ministers or shadow ministers. Instead of a meritocracy, we have the inverse.
@David Richards
Dave…..what idolatry?
Show me a single instance of my supposed hero worship.
This all started because of my comment about our MSM.
Laurie Oakes was in the tank for Rudd but Oakes has now done the dirty on Julia at least twice in the last 2 weeks. Both undoubtedly from Rudd leaks.
Oakes had been derided because of his pro-Rudd/ pro-Labor partisanship up until quite recently.
He’s very defensive on accusations of journalistic integrity.
He’s certainly not pro Liberal Party. He’s a lefty in the tank for Rudd but certainly newly of the view that Labor are just a little to overtly mendacious and plainly just too incompetent.
He’s near retirement and I suspect he’s decided to attack Labor in a pathetic attempt to shore up his self-respect.
The Liberals can hardly believe their luck.
I’ve merely pointed out that the Howard gov was competent as was Hawke-Keating.
Nothing more.
@JamesK
This will be the last time I respond to you:
I addressed to you because you seem to think Abbott to be prime minister will be a better choice and will provide competent government like Howard and the Rudd or Gillard government is a bad choice and has been incompetent.
I tried to point out to you that there were rorts under the Howard government as well (in the ANAO audit of Howard regional partnership which Possum provided the link to), so why is the attack of the rortings under Rudd’s government as incompetent ok, but the rortings under Howard does not diminish the level of competency and can be ignored?
The addendum points out to the fact that not only Howard lost government but also his seat which about 52% voters did not have confidence in his economic management anymore as there was high interest rate, rapid inflation and Work Choices so one would say a reasonable number of reasonable pundits in the population had lost confidence in the competency of the Howard government to run the economy or country.
Obviously you do not want the facts and say that it is my version of history and ‘unfounded’ assertion that both parties had issue with race as well as economic management; like when Fraser lost office unemployment was high as well as public debt for example and Hawke and Keating managed to turn it back for a while but this somehow does not prove to you that the Liberals had problem managing the economy as well.
They are all documented which I learnt back in my days at University many years ago but you can deny it all if you want to. I tried to give chronology so you can see that the Howard government pick up the economic reform from the Hawke/Keating government. And the race issues which relates to boat people issue at the moment both sides have been on the good as well as the bad so no one is the pure angel; but one would think a Liberal purist would want to abide the UN convention like Fraser and does not approach it the way Howard and Abbott does.
You said I denigrated Howard then called me names with a whole lot of tirade. I cannot see where I denigrated him but just listed the facts of what happened, and I never called you names wherever your politic lies or demeaned you in any ways.
Good luck.
“I addressed to you because you seem to think Abbott to be prime minister will be a better choice and will provide competent government” says scott73.
Interestingly I haven’t said what you seem to think I seem to think.
What I’ve said is that this Rudd/Gillard government is incompetent.
I’ve also said the Howard and Hawke/Keating governments were competent.
You have slimed Howard unilaterally and without a valid argument and for some strange reason off your own back directed such nonsense at me.
Now for some reason you say its because you seemed to think that I “seemed to think” what I didn’t say.
Stop sporting the false cloak of reasonableness belatedly after your unfair smear.
Be honest.