The Courier-Mail has published a Galaxy poll of 1009 respondents “conducted over the weekend” which shows Labor with a 52-48 lead on two-party preferred, the same as recorded in the snap poll of 800 respondents conducted on the day Julia Gillard assumed the leadership. However, Labor has lost ground on the primary vote to the Greens, down two points to 39 per cent with the Greens up three to 14 per cent. The Coalition is steady on 42 per cent. In spite of everything, two-thirds of respondents are said to support the plan on asylum seekers announced last week by Gillard, although “about six in 10” believe the measures “were not well thought out and were rushed”. The Fairfax broadsheets should come good with a Nielsen poll later this evening.
UPDATE: The Nielsen poll, conducted Thursday to Saturday from a sample of 1400, concurs on every particular except the Greens vote, which is at 13 per cent rather than 14 per cent. The sting in the tail for the government here is that it comes off the back of a quirkily favourable 55-45 result from Nielsen immediately after the leadership change. The poll has Julia Gillard leading Tony Abbott as preferred prime minister 56-35, little different from her 55-34 lead previously. Approval ratings for Gillard have been gauged for the first time, and they have her at 54 per cent approve and 32 per cent disapprove. Reversing the last result, Tony Abbott is up on both approval (three points to 43 per cent) and disapproval (five points to 51 per cent), the latter shift probably reflecting an unfriendly sample last time.
A series of “best party to handle” questions turns up a surprise in giving the Coalition only a very slight 44-42 lead on asylum seekers, and when the Greens are included in the mix Labor’s score shows a six point improvement since the question was last asked in March. However, Labor would be alarmed to have slipped a further three points on the economy, with the Coalition opening up a dangerous 53-39 lead. Labor has taken four points off the Coalition as best party to handle health since March, now holding a commanding 57-33 lead that goes a fair way to explaining their latest television ad. Labor retains commanding leads on education (53-36), the environment (51-35) and industrial relations (58-34).
UPDATE 3: Essential Research has Labor up slightly from 54-46 to 55-45, although the primary votes suggest rounding has a fair bit to do with the improvement: both parties are down one on the primary vote, Labor to 41 per cent and Coalition to 38 per cent, with the Greens up two to 13 per cent. The supplementary questions are interesting: Julia Gillard’s mining tax changes have gone down well, supported by 50 per cent and opposed by 28 per cent, with 58 per cent rating Gillard’s handling of the issue “good” against 25 per cent “poor”. However, 41 per cent believed mining companies wielded “too much influence” in the process. The asylum seeker announcement slightly improved Labor’s position on the issue, which 56 per cent continue to think “too soft” (down 11 points) against 21 per cent for “taking the right approach” (up three), and the Coalition lead as best-party-to-handle has narrowed from 34-23 to 31-24. In spite of everything Gillard’s handling of the issue has 42 per cent approval and 33 per cent disapproval. Questions on the likelihood of WorkChoices being reintroduced under a Coalition government are little changed since the question was asked six weeks ago, with most believing they would and few happy about the prospect.
Truthy is right. There are a lot of conservatives who will vote Green 1st in protest. Also, with the increase of Labor’s primary vote, we may see a drop in Green-Labor preferences…
[Your claim is not supported by the recent opinion poll facts.]
We’ll see.
My old man was a Turnbull supporter, but no doubt he’ll be voting Green this election.
Conservatives will make up a large portion of the “new Green” voter base.
People who believe in right wing values, but want real action on climate change.
[what is the fibs CC policy?]
It’s absolute crap. Both the ‘policy’ and what they believe climate change to be.
[Lib climate schemes ‘costly, inefficient’]
The Age, 21 April 2010
http://www.theage.com.au/environment/lib-climate-schemes-costly-inefficient-20100420-srrg.html
[Emissions to rise by 13% under Abbott plan, critics charge]
Sydney Morning Herald, 04 February 2010
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/emissions-to-rise-by-13-under-abbott-plan-critics-charge-20100203-ndj9.html
[Truthy is right. There are a lot of conservatives who will vote Green 1st in protest. Also, with the increase of Labor’s primary vote, we may see a drop in Green-Labor preferences…]
I think this is bunk.
It’s just a hypothesis. We won’t truly know the distribution until after the election.
I daresay, if the hypothesis is correct, it will only be by a couple of % ie. not enough to really change anything…
Things seem to be moving onto an imminent election footing now. Even Bob Hawke is getting into the swing of it already.
[Pep talk for candidates from Silver Bodgie in corduroy suit ]
[FEDERAL Labor candidates received a rallying call from former prime minister Bob Hawke at a snap election campaign meeting in Sydney yesterday.
He arrived at Labor’s NSW headquarters in Sussex Street in a blue corduroy suit and said: ”I am giving a bit of a talk.”]
http://www.smh.com.au/national/pep-talk-for-candidates-from-silver-bodgie-in-corduroy-suit-20100710-104sr.html
[BUT what is the fibs CC policy?]
Irrelevent… it’s the Labor policy that matters.
If these conservatives don’t support Labor, who knows where their preferences are headed after they vote green.
I would hazard a guess to say the “new Greenies”(7% ontop ontop of the current 7%) are 50% traditional Lib voters and 50% traditional Labor voters.
There is no evidence that conservatives are switching their support to the Greens. On the contrary, the conservative PV has consolidated at around 41% following their defeat of Labor’s CPRS/ETS.
This is another version of the “Labor will win Kooyong” mythology from last time. People vote for particular parties essentially for class reasons. Most rich people vote Liberal, and they do so for good reasons of self-interest. Very few will vote for a left-wing party over a non-economic issue like climate change or refugees. And most of those who are ideologically motivated to do so, already do so.
Wow, 2pp still languishing in the 30’s
what next, if the neilsen does 38 on 2pp?
Tell us how Abbott will turn back the boats, Truthy.
[Your claim is not supported by the recent opinion poll facts.
The most recent Morgan poll published on Friday, and using preference flows as nominated by the respondents (instead of 2007 actual preference flows) showed Green preferences flowing to Labor at 81% to the Coalition’s 19%, compared to the near 80% to Labor at the 2007 election.]
You’re using one poll. This Galaxy poll of 52-48 has a high green vote… 56.5-43.5 is a honeymoon poll given the quickly changing dynamics in federal politics. Gillard is not the progressive some whipped her up to be, the Green vote will rise back to ~15% again. Many people who feel more at home with Labor than the Liberals are more than ever apathetic of the party they still wish they could still hold high standards of. Rudd/Gillard Labor thinks the best way to be a well-liked government is to do what the polls say and back down when it’s too tough or controversial. This just wrong. Respect is gained by arguing for and explaining policies, and bringing the country with you, rather than following the country which is essentially a directionless path.
[And much like Abbott’s “we’ll turn back the boats”. Tell us TTH, how exactly would one “turn back the boats”, without leaving people to drown? (I gather Abbott has ruled this out, which is jolly decent of him.)]
Howard turned back the boats.
The key is not to advertise the fact so that you give the crews time to prepare/sabotage your effort. In that respect Abbott has failed.
Though I still do not believe a word Gillard says about actually doing anything about boat arrivals. Do the Labor voters actually believe Gillard is telling the truth or are you just playing coy
Ummm… ok?
I thought the election would have been called this weekend, but 52-48 is not a great result for Gillard in her honeymoon period.
have i missed somthing is truthy back
[Tell us how Abbott will turn back the boats, Truthy.]
Ask them nicely?
Couldnt hurt eh Adam 😀
[Wow, 2pp still languishing in the 30’s ]
Err, no, the 2PP is 52%.
oops read that wrong. 2pp => primaries.
it’s been a long day.
[Irrelevent… it’s the Labor policy that matters.]
Absolute rubbish TTH, if your mob were in government you know full well you’d be harshly criticising Labor if they had no policy on an issue.
[Ask them nicely?
Couldnt hurt eh Adam]
Abbott has apparently said he won’t leave them to drown. So he has to explain how he will turn them back. If they are blocked, or taken in tow, they will just scuttle the boat. Then what? He won’t say.
Toorak Toff
[I thought the election would have been called this weekend, but 52-48 is not a great result for Gillard in her honeymoon period.]
52-48 is a solid-good result for the incumbent 6 weeks from an election.
anyway many people weren’t happy at 35,
are we going to play with the ETS if we get there again?
[Abbott has apparently said he won’t leave them to drown. So he has to explain how he will turn them back. If they are blocked, or taken in tow, they will just scuttle the boat. Then what? He won’t say.]
He won’t say because he’s not being pushed.
well is the neilson poll out tomorrow then will that then be a new thread
any thoughts on that.
I am a little dissapointed at the primary vote any thoughts on that
primary vote was better with the first newspoll with Julia was is not?
the liberal primary vote is of course the national and liberal together
It’s the same primary vote with which Labor comfortably won the 1990 election.
Glens back. Any fat jokes Gusface?
[Then what? He won’t say.]
Because his policy aint a solution.
It is to appeal to certain sections of the public nothing more.
Polls do show that the only policy area where the Greens are regarded as better is environmental policy. This Greens swing has been a long time brewing because I think that although ALP tries to perpetuate the lie that Greens don’t support action on climate change because they voted against the CPRS, it won’t get traction because the fundamental reason for the Greens existence in the public’s eyes is to stand up for the environment. While the ALP appear to be stonewalling the Greens on environmental policy, the only way the Greens vote will go is up.
So the ALP is happy to fling some softballs the Greens way this election, because they can’t afford to fight a war on two fronts, I don’t think the Greens’ll have it so easy ever again. That’s ok because Greens’ attack dog Lee Rhiannon will take the fight to Penny and Cory – should make Senate QT much more engaging!
As for allegations that Greens misused parliamentary cards: doesn’t quite compare to the thoroughly corrupt NSW government – just look at Palanazzozizzo out at Penrith.
And considerably better than the 37.5% with which Rann won the SA election.
It may be the case as some hypothosise that the rate of Green preferences flowing to Labor will decrease if the Green primary vote rises in 2010. However, this is the exact opposite of what has happened at every election from 1996 to 2007. As the Green vote has risen at every previous election, the rate of Green preferences to Labor has also increased.
Also, if you look at the vote from seat to seat, the rate of preferences to Labor always increases as the Green vote rises, and the rate of increase usually corresponds to each extra vote above the minimum preference rate flowing back to Labor, which is why the rate rises.
Make of that what you will.
[125 Psephos
Posted Sunday, July 11, 2010 at 11:24 pm | Permalink
It’s the same primary vote with which Labor comfortably won the 1990 election.]
i do not quite understand the primary vote re seats etc is there some sort of nutshell quick explanation
[As for allegations that Greens misused parliamentary cards: doesn’t quite compare to the thoroughly corrupt NSW government – just look at Palanazzozizzo out at Penrith.]
She at least had the decency to resign. When is Rhiannon going to do so?
That kind of begs the question. I’m not sure if Gillard actually is having a honeymoon. As I said before, I think what we may be seeing is Gillard cancelling Abbott’s honeymoon, rather than having one herself.
Also, this poll remains virtually unchanged from the last Galaxy. Which in itself, stands as less Labor friendly than its competitors (as it has a history of doing). This is just something to occupy our minds until Nielsen is published.
may be when we start talking health and work choices the primary vote will rise.
I know abbott said that work choices is dead once again but i hope the unions and labor do not fall for that one
Well my prediction is Gillard will hold off on an election, with her backbenchers getting nervous and demanding she call an election straight away.
And the election will be held in September rather than August.
[Make of that what you will.]
The obvious explanation is that the rising Green vote consists almost entirely of disaffected Labor voters, who make their protest by voting Green but still preference Labor. This may well cost Labor Senate seats, but it won’t hurt Labor vis a vis the Libs.
[Abbott has apparently said …]
What Abbott says and what he really thinks, or might say or ‘think’ next week, are likely to be entirely different things.
[When flip-flops hurt your feats]
The Age, 02 April 2010
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/when-flipflops-hurt-your-feats-20100401-ri4w.html
[That’s ok because Greens’ attack dog Lee Rhiannon will take the fight to Penny and Cory – should make Senate QT much more engaging!]
Is it gonna be anything like SHY’s “fight”?
If so, it may be good for a laugh!
Will FF disband once they lose their only Federal Senator?
[i do not quite understand the primary vote re seats etc is there some sort of nutshell quick explanation]
My Say, what exactly don’t you understand?
[Make of that what you will.]
this is where you very bright people leave me i like an explanation.
[Will FF disband once they lose their only Federal Senator?]
They still have seats in the SA upper house, so probably not.
[My Say, what exactly don’t you understand?]
how the primary vote translates to seats e,g how many seats would we win with that primary vote or would it be similar to we have now or less or a couple more
My Say – the primary vote is the amount of people who choose that party as their first vote, given as a %.
[And considerably better than the 37.5% with which Rann won the SA election.]
I’d probably not exploit and/or rely on a 48.4% 2PP win Psephos…
hmm. work choices ads were already run, will they work a second time or do people just ignore them if they’ve seen them.
we need to get that laugnan guy to do the scary voice over at the end.
[They still have seats in the SA upper house]
The place where parties are born, and where they also die! 😉
So how about the all important CEC vote??
[There’s no evidence at all for that. There may be a few “doctors wives” Liberal votes drifting to the Greens in safe Lib seats, but not many, and almost none in marginal seats.]
I disagree.
It’ll be the marginal seats you’ll see the biggest impact. Traditional conservative voters pieved off about global warming inaction.