Big shock from Newspoll: Labor’s two-party lead has slumped from 59-41 to 52-48, their smallest lead since the last poll prior to the 2007 election. The shift on preferred prime minister is much more modest, Kevin Rudd’s lead slipping from 65-19 to 63-19. It’s apparently also been reported both sides have shifted seven points on the primary vote, which would mean they are level on 41 per cent. More to follow. UPDATE: Graphic here. Rudd has had four points transfer from approve (59 per cent) to disapprove (32 per cent); Turnbull’s approval is steady on 32 per cent and his disapproval is down three to 51 percent.
It’s a very different story from Essential Research, which has Labor’s lead steady at 59-41. Supplementary questions show mixed messages on asylum seekers: one shows support for a tough line and an apparent belief that the Rudd government is delivering, but 55 per cent rate its handling of the issue “not so good/poor” against 36 per cent “excellent/good”. Significantly, a further question shows people do not think the Liberals would do any better.
UPDATE: Newspoll history records six reversals of comparable size. The poll of 6-8 November 1992 saw a 46-54 Labor deficit turn into a 54-46 lead, for what looked to be no readily obvious reason at the time. On 20-22 August 1993, immediately after John Dawkins’ horror post-election budget, the Coalition’s lead went from 51-49 to 60-40. On 23-25 September 1994, Labor went from 57-43 ahead to 51-49 behind in what looked like a correction following two consecutive horror surveys for Alexander Downer. When John Howard took over from him at the end of January 1995, the next survey of 10-12 February saw Labor’s 54-46 lead turn into a 53-47 deficit. The poll immediately after the 1998 election saw the Coalition turn a 53-47 deficit at the last (evidently inaccurate) pre-election poll into a 54-46 lead. Finally, on 28-30 May 2004, Labor under Mark Latham suffered a short-lived slump from 53-47 ahead to 54-46 behind.
Sloppy manages to contradict himself within 30 seconds…
Sloppy does John Howard on AS. “That is our policy.” Mark that in red.
Dario,
You’re too quick for me.
[Sloppy does John Howard on AS. “That is our policy.” Mark that in red.]
And then says that it isn’t
Diog, perhaps I expressed myself poorly. The humanitarian refugees arriving in Australia, particularly in areas of first settlement, such as north and west Melbourne, are variously traumatised and have more than usual difficulty in coping with adaptation to what for them is an alien environment. Sometimes the severity of their trauma results in their being precipitated into even more alien environments such as psychiatric inpatient units. I am simply wanting those who argue here about the Australian response to refugees should research and understand how complex this issue is, and cannot be boiled down to simple black and white solutions. And it makes me so cranky to see it reduced to point scoring.
Shut up Sloppy for goodness sake
[So do you see aid and assistance as vital here? My thoughts were that helping them get their home countries fixed would be the best thing.]
In theory yes, but as I say, it’s quite likely that much of the tropical world is going to suffer such huge ecological catastrophes that no amount of aid will help.
[How do you pull up a drawbridge around Australia?]
With a large navy, which as you may have noticed the Rudd government is planning for. Most commentators saw this as a response to China’s rise, but it could equally be seen as preparation for fending off millions of desperate people trying to get to Australia.
Max goes Joe. This could be GOOD.
vp
is our B team beating their A team?
Can’t get my son off the TV, curse him!!
But what does the navy do when it finds a boat?
zoomster,
[Have to say it’s interesting how many people I know from the environment movement who started off as observers of the political process – journalists, academics – joined Labor when they decided that they wanted to become politically active.
I haven’t talked through the process with them, but assume that they made much the same decision I did, that it was worth putting up with the frustrations, compromises and sillinesses inherent the ALP to achieve action on the issues they cared about.]
Classic example here. An environment friendly decision made by one of those you outlined and certainly not driven by Greens activism. More like rank and file :Labor supporters, a few concerned Coalition supporters and a handful of Green activists.
[IT seems Peter Garrett has never been so popular in Rockhampton and Yeppoon.
The majority of readers on http://www.themorningbulletin.com.au have thrown their support behind the Federal Environment Minister in his decision to shoot down Tower Holdings’ Great Keppel Island resort plan.
At 5pm yesterday, more than 560 people had voted.
Only 36% said Garrett had done the wrong thing by shutting down Tower’s $1.14 billion development plans.]
http://www.themorningbulletin.com.au/story/2009/11/05/online-voters-back-garrett/
And in case anyone disputes this poll, they are usually hijacked by Coalition supporters which have produced Liberal PPM figures in excess of 80% in an electorate where the sitting Labor Member doesn’t even need to go to preferences!
Maxine is channeling Poss. About time he got a mention.
zoomster,
In spades – and she doesn’t have a shovel!
My god, someone please slap Shocker. She’s praising Barnett…
Why is Cherry Kickarovsky doing zombie impressions?
I told you the Libs would be celebrating the poll
[But what does the navy do when it finds a boat?]
Orders it to go away, and if it doesn’t, fires on it.
[With a large navy, which as you may have noticed the Rudd government is planning for. Most commentators saw this as a response to China’s rise, but it could equally be seen as preparation for fending off millions of desperate people trying to get to Australia.]
Good on yer Herr doktor, i suggest a large submarine fleet. just torpedoe them and then deny them straight face.
Sloppy making an absolute tit of himself
David is doing curling lip at Joe.
Why do they let Hockey get away with the pathetic argument that they aren’t in government so they don’t need a policy? They have a policy on other things. They had a policy on stimulus. They even gave numbers. But they have no policy on asylum seekers. Why the inconsistency? It’s simple: They have no answers.
Mr. Squiggle back at 1746, I think we do need some elasticity about humanitarian re-settlement. If the sort of structure you were proposing were to work, you’d need agreement at the UNHCR level and agreement from countries accepting refugees to balance things up between them. Now, knowing how hard it is to get other area mental health services to accept their share of the work in a shared network, well, it wouldn’t be easy.
Now Sloppy invokes the “I’m a migrant son” defence
Joe: “I’m the son of a migrant” And I don’t want to answer the Q.
[Good on yer Herr doktor, i suggest a large submarine fleet. just torpedoe them and then deny them straight face.]
I’m trying to make a serious point here.
Dario,
You’re doing it again.
[ But what does the navy do when it finds a boat?
Orders it to go away, and if it doesn’t, fires on it.]
That might sit uncomfortably with our international obligations. 😐
so am i
[You’re doing it again]
😉
David Marr just buried Joe – at sea.
Richo nails the poll by slapping Turnbull 🙂
Is Cherry Lindsay Lohan?
VP,
[However, as the person most at odds with the ABC’s management judgement of seat allocations, scorpio gets to be the Poll Pludger nominee for moderator at next year’s Q&A.]
It’s not on here yet, no daylight saving here, but I will probably watch it as it is the final for the year.
I doubt very much if I will bother next year though. I can’t stand the way that they stack the audiences to suit the favoured line of questioning and the way that Tony Jones cuts off any responses by Labor panellists or passes over questions from the floor until he gets one that can put Labor in a spot. Often by a young Lib supporter.
As far as I am concerned, it is just a vehicle to give the Libs a leg-up and to reduce Labor support by framing it in such a way that it is generally to Labor’s disadvantage.
Please don’t ask me to give examples as I will be quite happy to list them all night !
We seem to have reached an impasse about what our Navy does when it comes across a boat of asylum seekers.
Ahh Killer… beautifully gives Costello a serve and praise at the same time
David Mar’s got the look: Joe your goose is on a slow boil.
The events of Tampa, 9/11 and the Howard Govt. has left a lot of people spooked and holding to an assumption that any such issues are electoral dynamite. Those following politics more closely might tend to over estimate the effect of such issues.
Howard won that election with a bit of a come back but he didn’t blitz it and that was with the very frightening issue of 9/11 that we assume would have caused people to be less likely to change govts. There was no massive swing.
ER showed people thought the Govt weak on border protection 52/21 but it made no difference to TPP. And people thought the Liberals wouldn’t do any better 21/26.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2009/11/02/first-big-polling-on-asylum-seeker-issue/
I agree that emotive issues like this can get the public’s attention and cause concern and influence voting – but unless the Opposition offers a distinct alternative that directly taps into assuaging that concern it may just float around and lead to nothing. The Opposition offered no alternatives at the critical time and it is too late now.
The Liberals may have missed the ‘boat’ on this issue but are trying their hardest to keep it going as is the friendly media in the hope that they can get something out of it.
The options is still there for Rudd to close the deal decisively and snatch a permanent advantage. The slippery ball is still bouncing around and the Liberal party seem unable to grab it. People like Stone and Abbott are an embarassment.
Luv the line that costello is now rudd’s employee
Bludgers: wake up. Poll question.
I’m postulating a situation in which a whole zone of the tropical world, including most of Africa and the Middle East and a large part of Asia, and containing perhaps a billion people, has been rendered practically uninhabitable by drought, rising sea-levels and other effects of climate change, and in which tens of millions of people are trying to survive by reaching the developed countries of the temperate zone. In those circumstances it will be every country for itself and international law, such as it is, will cease to exist. You know this is a perfectly possible scenario if we don’t succeed in stopping climate change.
Please, please, please make Hockey OL
[We seem to have reached an impasse about what our Navy does when it comes across a boat of asylum seekers.]
Diog, What impasse? Herr Doktor wants his ships to fire on them and i want my submarines to torpedoe them. Methinks my solution is more effective and deadly and will scare the shits of the refoos more. Tough and not very humane but effective.
Cherry is drowning, not waving.
Marr is absolutely ripping Hockey hahahaha
Guess what everyone… of all the issues that the Libs could fight an election on in Victoria it has decided to fight it on Law and Order. I thought they would win, but if they go to next with this as their main issue than they can forget it.. What a vacumous lot they are, been in opposition in Victoria for ten years and this is their main issue. Talk about pathetic and hopeless.
Joe says clever Rudd, I say astute. Clever has negative overtones.
How hilarious is Sloppy raving on about Rudd being a media manipulator after 11 years of Howard lol
Psephos
The number I saw from the UN is 300 million by 2050. But it will be a gradual change. There will be a lot of “challenges” before international law breaks down.
It never works, whining about your opponent, even if people agree with you. People knew what Howard was like for years. You have to be a viable alternative or forget it and whining makes you look like a loser.
Joe coming out as a happy clapper?