Morgan: 53-47 to Coalition phone poll; 51-49 to Labor face-to-face

Roy Morgan has published two sets of poll results, one a face-to-face poll combining a fortnight’s worth of its regular weekend polling, the other a small sample phone poll targeting 519 respondents. Neither are good for Labor: the face-to-face poll has their two-party lead on 51-49, using the more reliable method of distributing minor party preferences as per the previous election, while the phone poll has the Coalition leading 53-47. Given the face-to-face series’ normal lean to Labor, that’s a below par result for them, although it’s essentially unchanged on a fortnight ago. Labor is up half a point to 39.5 per cent, the Coalition is steady on 43 per cent and the Greens are down a point to 11.5 per cent, with Labor down half a point on two-party to 51 per cent. The phone poll has Labor on 36 per cent and the Coalition on 45.5 per cent: very unusually for a phone poll, it has the Greens vote on single figures at 9.5 per cent, comparing with 13 per cent in Newspoll and 12 per cent in the previous week’s Nielsen. The phone poll is more obviously unhappy for Labor, but with a margin of error approaching 4.5 per cent a grain of salt is required. Taken together though, they constitute evidence Labor is still bumping along below 50-50, rather than popping above it as Essential Research and Newspoll suggested.

The phone poll also inquired into leadership approval, and it turns up an anomaly in showing a disastrous plunge for Tony Abbott which isn’t reflected in voting intention. Abbott’s disapproval is up ten points on three weeks ago to 56 per cent, seven points higher than it was in Newspoll. Most of this came at the expense of “can’t say”, with approval down a relatively modest three points from 39 per cent to 36 per cent. Since early December, Morgan has had Abbott’s net approval go from plus 11 to minus 20. Allowing for the very small samples, the gender gap has blown wide open: where three weeks ago Abbott’s net approval was minus seven among men and minus six among women, the respective figures are now minus 13 and minus 28. However, Julia Gillard’s personal ratings are less good than in Newspoll. Her approval rating is 46 per cent (four points lower than Newspoll and level with Morgan’s previous figure), her disapproval 40 per cent (a point higher than Newspoll and two points lower than the last Morgan), and her lead as preferred prime minister is 51-35 (compared with 53-31 in Newspoll and 49-36 in the last Morgan).

The phone poll also asked about preferred leaders for the two major parties, and it backs up Essential Research in finding Julia Gillard performing unconvincingly relative to Kevin Rudd, whom she now leads as preferred Labor leader by just 29 per cent to 27 per cent. This compares with 31-26 last time, and 52-21 a month after she took the job. Given that Gillard’s current net approval ratings compare with minus 19 for Kevin Rudd in his last Newspoll as prime minister, it would seem his absence has made hearts grow fonder. For Tony Abbott the situation is even worse: only 20 per cent favour him as Liberal leader (down four from last time), with Malcolm Turnbull up six points to 34 per cent and Joe Hockey up one to 26 per cent. Abbott enthusiasts would point to the fact that Turnbull is particularly favoured, and Abbott particularly disfavoured, among Labor and Greens voters.

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.

3,972 comments on “Morgan: 53-47 to Coalition phone poll; 51-49 to Labor face-to-face”

Comments Page 78 of 80
1 … 77 78 79 80

  6. al do you know i am not sure about the polls.

    when kev was there so many people wanted the policy and so so many young people where in cluding my children very very upset and that was when the polls changed re kev and labor.
    remember also telstra are loosing 6000 land lines on average every couple of months.
    its the young ones that are missing out on being polled.
    soon sorry william polls will become irrelevant

  9. [lso – what is the word that dare not speak its name that Abbott was asked to withdraw]

    can you spell in phonetically in code or somthing what was it

  10. [Burgey
    Posted Monday, February 28, 2011 at 11:57 am | Permalink

    Lizzie – yeah I imagine it would.

    The thing I’d like Labor to be out there doing, when they have the opportunity, is explaining to people how they have to negotiate now with disparate interests to get things through]

    Agreed, Burgey. And once again Windsor (as he did with NBN) has articulated the case better than the government. When questioned about this promise, his answer wtte Gillard didn’t win government. So it’s a new paradigm.

  11. ModLib

    and Julia never ruled out putting a price on carbon. And putting a price on carbon implied, even under the models she supported, a temporary carbon tax.

    It’s a semantic game.

    As you say, the scheme she’s brought to the table is modified. It’s still very much the same scheme that was always on the table – the only difference is that the tax component of it has been stretched out a couple more years than Labor originally proposed.

    Howard said he was going to bring in a particular kind of GST, and he didn’t. Fair enough, I think most people at the time accepted the changes and even saw them as beneficiail.

    Gillard said she was going to bring in a particular kind of ETS and she isn’t. It’s still recognisable as the same scheme.

    If people had wanted Gillard to stick to the letter of her promise, they should have voted labor in greater numbers. By not doing so, there was an implicit rejection of what was on the table.

  16. [Also – what is the word that dare not speak its name that Abbott was asked to withdraw?]
    Liar, lying, lied; take your pick based on context.

  19. BK
    Ironically, it’s the atheists who are more likely to support the saving of the ecosystem, because the fundamentalists are only here for a while until going up to their heaven.

  21. lizzie,

    He gets 20 minutes and one from the govt gets 20. Others can have ten each. I think I got that right. The whole shebang is limited to 90 (?) minutes.

    Anyone can move that the member be no longer heard – at any time, as far as I know

  23. [It’s Time
    Posted Monday, February 28, 2011 at 2:51 pm | Permalink
    The little fact that many here are missing is that if Julia is so wonderful and Tony is so pathetic how is it that Tony is beating her?

    As p[referred Prime Minister? Where?]

    The only poll that matters is the election. The next most useful is TPP. The least useful is the PPM. IMO anyway!

    If you think a tie with Tony Abbott is a good result for Julia then I am happy for you. ALP should have won 90+ seats based on 2007 and 2008- so something happened, and I think it was Rudd’s backflips (on Gillard’s orders according to the leaks)

  28. @Lizzie #3869
    Unfortunately you are right. Fundamentalists are often stuck on waiting for the ride out. The bible however tells humanity they have a duty to care for the earth. Again Christianity is maligned the most by those who claim to uphold it.

  29. Can anyone tell who is the guy to the left of Hockey and what is his position in the shadow ministry?

    The PM is just waiting to give back better than the crap she is getting!

  30. It’s Time
    Well, Hockey is just using lie, liar, lied, in every conceivable shade, and no-one’s stopping him.
    BTW, John Alexander always looks in 7th heaven when Abbott is raving, but gets all frowny when anyone else does. Perhaps he, too, only understands 3-word slogans.

  33. You will love the phone call I’ve just had. Friend rang and heard Abbott’s ranting and asked what was going on. I said ‘Tony Abbott is screaming at Julia Gillard in Question Time in Parliament House’.

    Friend said ‘Poor Tony. They give him a hard time’. WHAT!!

    Yep – she’s another Jones’ fan of the over 65 variety.

  35. [If you think a tie with Tony Abbott is a good result for Julia then I am happy for you. ALP should have won 90+ seats based on 2007 and 2008- so something happened, and I think it was Rudd’s backflips (on Gillard’s orders according to the leaks)]
    Been through this before. Given the circumstances a tie was amazing. Just ask Graham Richardson.

  37. [FIRSTDOGONMOON | 31 seconds ago
    “And get a mandate for your bad tax” and with that, Joe Hockey explodes covering everyone with pastry cream! #qt]

  40. [you think a tie with Tony Abbott is a good result for Julia then I am happy for you. ALP should have won 90+ seats based on 2007 and 2008- so something happened, and I think it was Rudd’s backflips (on Gillard’s orders according to the leaks)]

    you must be very up set to bring this back up its all under the bridge for us mate

    for get it got the future to worry about now. not the past
    my kids done want us to live in the past and may be yours dont either.

  41. Dong,

    [Fundamentalists are often stuck on waiting for the ride out. ]

    Except for the ones that expect to be fast tracked out with the Rapture! 😉

  42. [Well, Hockey is just using lie, liar, lied, in every conceivable shade, and no-one’s stopping him.]
    They are not referring directly to a person in the House or what someone has said in the House.

  43. [Been through this before. Given the circumstances a tie was amazing. Just ask Graham Richardson.]

    Yep. Its rare when both sides of the political spectrum are ecstatic with the result, so lets enjoy all being happy.

  47. Coalition copped a caning duirng QT and looked it. Vintage Gillard.

    The censure motion gives them a bit of airtime. Abbott’s voice failed him just a bit during his stint. Hockey doing a bit better. But not all that much, really.

    Gillard responding now. Whoopsie. Gillard accidentallky refers to a time when the Leader of the Opposition ‘shat’ on…

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 78 of 80
1 … 77 78 79 80