Newspoll: 53-47 to Labor in Queensland

A very well timed Newspoll survey of 752 respondents shows Anna Bligh’s Labor government looking well placed with a 53-47 lead on two-party preferred – although this may be based on an unduly generous preference estimate. On the primary vote, Labor holds a narrow lead of 43 per cent to 42 per cent. This marks a correction from an aberrant looking result in the last quarter of 2008, when Labor led 45 per cent to 37 per cent (57-43 on two-party preferred). Normally Newspoll’s Queensland surveys are quarterly, with samples of over 1000 – obviously this one been cut short and rushed into service.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

212 comments on “Newspoll: 53-47 to Labor in Queensland”

Comments Page 5 of 5
1 4 5
  1. [It’s a better recipe than a Liberal government which would just cut spending everywhere. Look what happened when they did that in the Great Depression.]

    Bob, labor was in power federally from 1929 to 1932.

  2. dyno, bob is correct. Albeit pedantically so.

    A federal parliamentary term expires not three years after the last election, but three years after the term’s first sitting of parliament.

    Recall that Howard had parliament prorogued when he called the 2007 election.

  3. Dovif 190

    The coalition was happy enough to promise $20 billion in LONG TERM tax cuts prior to the previous election without linking it to any job creation or long term financial outcomes. Were they not in control of the economy?

  4. [Bob, unless you are playing some obscure word game, that statement is clearly wrong. The 2007 federal election was more than three years after the 2004 one.]

    Dyno, a 3 year term commences from the first day of sitting of the new parliament. Not the election. The last term to go the full three years was prior to the 1910 election.

  5. [Bob, labor was in power federally from 1929 to 1932.]

    Both Labor and the conservatives lowered spending, 1929-1932, and after 1932. The depression lasted for most of the 1930s.

  6. ruawake
    Posted Wednesday, February 25, 2009 at 5:36 pm | Permalink
    No not similar to the Obama package at all, the obama package offer tax cut to all people who lodge tax…



    it would be helpful, if you are reporting facts before saying someone is wrong, instead of uttering rubbish

    Sometimes reading helps, here are some links
    Note Tax cut for all, handout for pensioners and low income (ie non lodgers)
    Note Tax cut for all, handout for pensioners and low income (ie non lodgers)

  7. That is why I said American’s plan is for tax cut, which is different than Australia’s. People who do not get tax cuts, get cash handout, which is the american plan. Ruawake throught I was wrong, not sure which stimulus plan he was looking at.

    Tax cut has some effect on the economy, howard’s 20billion tax cut can stimulate the economy, but the stupid reserve bank was raising interest rate by 3% in late 07 and early 08 which stopped the economy, that had a much bigger effect on the economy. I cannot believe any of those clowns still has a job.

    I think jobs are the key at the moment, if people are going to lose their job they are not going to spend …. which increase the chance of them losing their job!!!

    Obama’s speach was brilliant, he gave hope to the American people (who are in a economy 10 time worse than ours) He told them that recession will only last 2 year which was great, it might not be the true, but optimism will help the world get out much quicker. I think Rudd and Gillard are making a big mistake, they are saying it will be bad, but it is not their fault. This might absolve them of blame, but a positive message like Obama’s, could mean it does not get “bad” in the first place.

    I would be happy to forgo my $900, if the Government use the money to build rail lines for example, the rail line will employ people in the construction phase, and then once completed, will led to employment of train builder, drivers, cleaners. This would create jobs, while cash handout has almost no effect, as it is not permanent and school halls will have little effect too.

  8. dovif

    95% of people in the US will recieve a tax cut, 5% will not, so your comment is wrong.

    Thanks for providing the links to disprove your case. 😛

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 5 of 5
1 4 5