Morgan: 50.5-49.5 to Labor

The first federal opinion poll of the new year is from Morgan’s face-to-face surveying last weekend, covering 855 respondents. This finds Labor recovering slightly from the previous poll of December 11-12, which on the headline figure had them trailing for the first time in a Morgan face-to-face poll since June 2006. However, Morgan has been somewhat erratic in choosing which of its two-party measures to use for the headline: “preferences distributed by how electors say they will vote”, or “preferences distributed by how electors voted at the 2010 election”. Lately they have been using the former, although the latter is universally recognised as more reliable. The score on the former measure has gone from 51.5-48.5 in favour of the Coalition to 50-50, while on the latter it has shifted more modestly from 50-50 to 50.5-49.5 in favour of Labor. My policy is to ignore the Morgan headline and favour the previous election measure. However, more significant than the distinction between the two is the obvious systematic bias to Labor in Morgan face-to-face polling – once this is factored in, the poll points to a fairly solid lead for the Coalition.

The primary vote figures make clear that the Labor recovery on the headline two-party result is entirely down to a larger share of non-major party voters nominating Labor as the party to which they would direct their preference, which coming from a sample of about 150 is unlikely to be very meaningful. Labor’s primary vote is in fact up by less than the Coalition’s, by half a point to 38.5 per cent, with the Coalition up a full point to 44 per cent. The Greens are down half a point to 13 per cent.

UPDATE (16/1): The first Essential Research for the year finds no change on voting intention whatsoever since December 20: the Coalition leads 52-48 on two-party, with primary votes of 46 per cent Coalition, 38 per cent Labor and 10 per cent Greens. However, Julia Gillard has enjoyed a spike in her personal ratings: approval up eight points to 51 per cent and disapproval down four to 36 per cent (her best figures since July 19), with an increase in her lead as preferred prime minister from 45-34 to 47-32. Tony Abbott’s ratings have improved as well: approval up three to 42 per cent and disapproval down two to 37 per cent. Other questions relate to respondents’ online shopping activities.

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.

2,666 comments on “Morgan: 50.5-49.5 to Labor”

Comments Page 53 of 54
1 52 53 54
  1. no confessions , just yrs of state & Fed govt’s not proving eg Howard spent money recd today eg all on middle/upper class welfare instead of putting some away for ACTUAL supa tthat his govt employees were to be in futres to be pd by Fed govt

    and howie wasted 400 bill form mining boom one , and nort virtualy there confessions , little also net on educ & hospitals & under fund vital Intrastruct as well , so he/Costello a complete econ failure

  2. Gweneth @2593,

    I really think the PM and the government will handle this and handle it well both in delivery and selling.

    My optimism is now recorded for all time. No turning back.

  3. Rom,
    [so he/Costello a complete econ failure]
    That is a totally true statement with which I completely agree.

    Howard and Costello were about as useful to Australia as an outbreak of clap in a brothel.

  4. Puff Hope your sister stays safe. My brother is okay but when it is happening you can’t help but worry. My son flies home tomorrow. Yah! I will have to smother the poor adolescent with mother hugs! Too bad for him – that is my job! 🙂

  5. Ron:

    That doesn’t make sense. Australia’s greatest treasurer ever is in charge of the Future Fund. How has it gone into the red on his watch?!

  6. Ron @2605,

    Interesting to see if that will still hold.

    Most of the people I worked with are on the way out and they have all been there for on average 25-30 years.

    In the old Commonwealth scheme there is a quirk that has been nicknamed 54/11 which results in a significant better super payout if you resign at 54 years and 11 months and then claim your super at 55 rather than staying and retiring at 55.

    I don’t know how but geez it works.

  7. Mod Lib 2367

    If yes, why did you make false claims about what they said?
    If no, why do you make stuff up, like the claim that they don’t deal with non-CO2 gases?

    Sorry? Can you elaborate please?]
    First answer the questions: do you claim to have read the IPCC3, IPCC4, Stern or Garnaut reports? If yes, which ones?

    Second, I will elaborate. You said the following way back at 1209:
    [Yes we need to act, yes we need to reduce CO2. My question was do we need to do more than just CO2 abatement. Zoomster has said this to me repeatedly, but apparently my concern that a CPRS or carbon tax addressing only the CO2 bits are criticised as well. In relation to CO2 abatement my questions are how much is it going to cost and who is paying? I accept these questions are considered ridiculous (and Boerwar?? will ask me how I will explain asking these questions to my grandchildren) but I think these questions are perfectly reasonable.]
    and this at 1227:
    [All of the additional CO2- well by definition “additional” is excluding natural, but how much of all the CO2 if human and how much is natural. The IPPC says the modelling doesnt show natural causes would be enough to explain current CO2 levels which is fair enough, but that is not the same as saying that there is nothing but human CO2 in the atmosphere.
    Think Big said that the natural CO2 is in balance. That may be so, but my understanding of the evidence is that the we dont know everything about natural CO2 cycles.]
    I answered these questions at 1239, 1240 and 1246. I saw no reply from you.

    My concern with your argument is as follows: at 1209 you ask questions expressing your concerns, and at 1227 you refer (incorrectly) to what the IPCC modelling says. If you had read IPCC (3 or 4) you would have known the answer; your concerns were discussed in IPCC3 and 4. The cost concerns are also discussed in Stern and Garnaut Yes we do need to do more than CO2 abatement. IPCC simply converts the other GHGs to CO2 equivalents. They were always included under Kyoto and any proposed CPRS. The cost of the CPRS is still less than the damage from AGW.

    So my question stands: have you actually read IPC3, IPCC4, Stern or Garnuat? If yes, which one? If no, why did you say what IPCC modeling said? You were either making stuff up (about what IPCC contained) or falsely asking questions that were clearly answered in the reports you referred to. Finally, please quote where IPCC 3 or IPCC4 says what you claimed at 1227.

  8. Gweneth,
    I still ask mine if they have washed their hands before sitting down to dinner. I tell them it is in my job description. 😆

  9. Doyley @ 2604 I share your trust. Julia and her very capable team will deliver. I know that. It is a massive task though. One day at time – that is how Julia will deal with it. I like to think ahead but you have to do a bit of both.

  10. Confessions

    Fed net liab has gone down from where it was , and thats net of accruing liabs Rho States has not Problem was not addressed yrs ago and it was Howie who had net moneis to start on it and pretty well much did not

  11. Sorry for the rant at 2615; I have tried three times now to engage with Mod Lib making some obviously false claims about CC and IPCC reports but he scurries off to bed before answering.

  12. Mod Lib is also answering Q’s from me from a diff direction , and stopped a last hurdle
    but will persist

    BTW “but that is not the same as saying that there is nothing but human CO2 in the atmosphere” , for christ sake all is incl in coversions to make it easier to talk about thats all

  13. Socrates
    Some of the ‘questioning’ on CC from one or two posters has become a bit circular and … er … unresponsive to explanation and factual material, that’s for sure.

  14. Gus

    I know, but I think he crosses the line. It is one thing to say “I think Tony Abbott is sane”; that might just be a misinformed opinion. But to say “I know the IPCC4 report says Tony Abbott is sane” is a lie. The report doesn’t say that, and you are either lying about what you know the IPCC report says, and/or lying when you say “I know the IPCC report”.

    Anyway, night all.

  15. Socrates @2621 Mod lib is frightened by your logic. And he does like to scurry. But I will give him this – he can admit, albeit grudgingly, when you have him cornered. My guess he is quite young and brave to come and play with dragons. I think you have done very well, and zoomster too.

  16. I look at it from a harm minimisation pov. If the science is right (and you would have to be a dill to think it wasn’t), we have to act. To not do so is disastrous. If the science is wrong the worst we would have done is cleaned up some pollution.

  17. Puff the science is as right as it will ever be. My OH is a scientist. He has now written off the entire human race as doomed by its own stupidity. He is not alone in the scientific community 🙁

  18. Gweneth,
    I believe it. And I never underestimate the stupidity of the human race. Even bugs don’t crap in their own nest.

  19. Knee Replacements
    The discussion on this subject can only really be understood by people who have had knee surgery
    I was being crippled about ten years by chronic arthritis. The pain simple required daily pain-killing medications with resulting side-effects…walking was becoming a problem,let alone any more vigourous exercise
    Now with both knees done I can walk freely, do some gardening and undertake various exercise routines. No pain killers now ….
    It has changed my life

  20. Good to hear deblonay. I have arthritis in one (quite small) toe and it hurts like hell. It doesn’t stop me doing things but suddenly I see into a whole new world.

  21. confessions @ 2423,

    [Brown is usually a canny operator, but as with his misstep on the online shopping tax thing, here too Brown has shown poor judgement. Perhaps he’s starting to slip.]

    Here I was thinking he was just a populist according to the PB meme.

  22. [SOUTH Australia is set to get a new Deputy Premier within weeks and it will be Employment Minister Jack Snelling or Attorney-General John Rau.

    Whoever wins the race will be the frontrunner to replace Premier Mike Rann and lead Labor to the 2014 election.

    Deputy Premier Kevin Foley on Monday announced his intention to quit politics at the next election – the clearest admission yet that he would be stepping down as deputy and Treasurer before Parliament resumes on February 8.

    “I won’t be contesting the next election,” Mr Foley said before flying out to the US.

    However, he also made it clear that he expected to remain in Cabinet as Defence Industries Minister until the election.

    As Mr Foley flew out there was intense lobbying within the Labor Party’s powerful Right faction for him to be replaced by Mr Snelling over Mr Rau.

    Hardheads in the Right acknowledged Mr Rau was the best prospect but he was not a “creature of the Right”.

    They are worried they might not be able to deal with him as well as they could with Mr Snelling, who has been brought up in the culture of the Right faction.

    Mr Snelling, who is on leave, is backed for promotion by former senior powerbrokers including former attorney-general Michael Atkinson who remains a key figure behind the scenes despite his decision to stand down from the ministry after the 2010 state election.]

  23. Re Knee replacement………………. …………………,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Gweneth…the operations were painful…and that lasted about 10 days.. in hospital…though the process of physio begins on day three…when I found it still very painful…but…as the days passed I got more mobile…and a month of physio(which is boring and tedious!) and I was vastly improved. I had a year between ops….and had a new life as a result….DO get some help with that problem…arthritis is a bugger of a thing !

  24. [confessionsPosted Tuesday, January 18, 2011 at 1:01 am | PermalinkBrown is a populist. Which makes his failure to tap ‘popular’ sentiment all the more remarkable.

    And you can be Canny AND a Populist at the same time – Ask John Howard 🙂

  25. Deblonay – dopes it start small and then grow? Should I see someone about it now? I think it is only one toe so don’t take it to the doctor.

  26. [Brown is a populist. Which makes his failure to tap ‘popular’ sentiment all the more remarkable.]

    Awesome logic. Did you like the ‘populist’ route he took on the online shopping tax?

    He’s slipping!

  27. [And Tony Abbott.

    Bob Brown’s in stellar company really.]

    East Timor off-shore processing? Citizen’s Assembly?

    Guess who came up with those rippers?

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 53 of 54
1 52 53 54