Another day (week, anyway), another near-record bad poll for Labor. This time it’s a face-to-face Morgan poll, which used to be the most favourable series going for Labor but has ceased to be so since the recent nosedive in their polling fortunes. The latest result combines the last two weekends of surveying and has the Labor primary vote plunging further from 35 per cent to 31.5 per cent – either a record low for Morgan face-to-face, or something very close to it – with the Coalition up from 46.5 per cent to 49 per cent. The Greens are steady on 11.5 per cent. In keeping with the recent trend, there is a wide gap between the two-party score as measured by respondent allocation (58.5-41.5, up from 54.5 to 45.5 a fortnight ago) and the results of the previous election (56.5-43.5, up from 53.5-46.5).
UPDATE (11/7): The latest Essential Research poll shows – guess what – its worst result for Labor ever. The Coalition lead is now 57-43, up from 56-44 last time, with primary votes of 50 per cent for the Coalition (up one), 30 per cent for Labor (down two) and 11 per cent for the Greens (steady). The monthly reading of leaders’ personal ratings concurs with Newspoll in having Julia Gillard on 29 per cent approval (down five) and 62 per cent disapproval (up eight), and Tony Abbott leading Gillard as preferred prime minister 39 per cent to 37 per cent. Abbott’s ratings are 39 per cent approval (up one) and 49 per cent disapproval (up one). Support for carbon pricing has further deteriorated, with support down three to 35 per cent and opposition up four to 53 per cent. This of course was conducted entirely before yesterday’s policy announcement. Most intriguingly for election buffs, there is a question on the preferred voting system – though they’ve squibbed it in my opinion by not including proportional representation. It is found that 44 per cent would prefer first past the post, which some will no doubt dishonestly interpret as representing majority support for that system. However, the two kinds of preferential voting on offer collectively accounted for 48 per cent – 22 per cent for the compulsory preferential system we have at federal level, and 26 per cent for the optional preferential system which they have for New South Wales and Victorian state elections, and which Britain recently voted against in its “AV” referendum. Eighty-two per cent say they would or probably would vote if voting were voluntary; unfortunately, respondents were not asked if they thought compulsory vote a good idea. There’s also some stuff there on the foreign aid budget.
THBD – I’m not a twitterer – not enough hours in the day for me already.
But – for those that do twitter, I think the line of approach to Latika etc should one of policy, highlighting the benefits of Labors policies compared to Nah Nah Nah from abbott and questioning why his stunts are even covered.
One example today on the MRT – South American countries and now African ones are imposing the same taxes for the same reasons – its our stuff and we demand a fair share.
Has anyone asked Mr Oakes whether he will rule out that he used illegal methods to obtain his anti-democratic scoop during the 2010 campaign?
That was purely political — Prime Minister Gillard would enjoy a majority government if it weren’t for Mr Oakes’ intervention in the political process.
Who elected Mr Oakes? And when can we vote him out?
Briefing – EU Emissions Trading System: failing at the third attempt – published by Carbon Trade Watch and Corporate Europe Observatory. April 2011.
Press Release: http://www.carbontradewatch.org/issues/eus-flagship-climate-policy-destined-to-fail.html
Briefing: http://www.corporateeurope.org/system/files/files/article/EU-ETS_briefing_april2011_0.pdf
Hockey or Turnbull wouldn’t retain such an idiotic policy. They would get rid of it and then just say “Vote for the Coalition for stable majority government”.
Boerwar
Yep sure will. We been waitin up here for it and got Yasi.
Anti-democratic? Geezzzzzzzz
tomorrows final front page of NOTW
Countdown to Frank.
http://www.timeanddate.com/counters/customcounter.html?msg=Frankentimer&day=9&month=07&year=2011&hour=00&min=00&sec=30&p0=5
Diogenes@38
Or that it didn’t happen in other countries including our own?
And why isn’t this topic being given a working over with emphasis on Australia ?
Hugh Grant said it the other day –
What have the Australian media in general got to hide? Why arn’t they commenting on if it is going on here ?
gaff
classic
tell your bro he has done well, played strong
Dio
No his other paper The Sun has been revealed as into it as well. Maybe they shared it on a 60-40 basis.
In Australia a number of News Ltd journos have articles that ” cross fertilize ” between papers in the group.
My understanding is NOTW is a Sunday only publication. Would anyone know if the journos under investigation have had their reporting in the NOTW only or would their stories be printed in other Murdoch papers?
As others have said it would seem strange to me if journos working for the same organization led separate lives and did not exchange stories and ideas especially if the organization itself was pushing a specific agenda and or story line. You just have to see it here where the same theme or story line is pushed across the Murdoch stable. Any disease would have to be contagious ?
puffy, you are norty, but i like you :kiss:
With what policies? 😆
What was “anti-democratic” about it, Darren?
david at 59
lol
Very good
Abbott is supremely unpopular, and Gillard is still barely breaking even with him on PPM.
As it stands now, any other Opposition leader, with a supportive bench, will be even stronger.
I guess if that happens, atleast we won’t have Abbott PM.
dave #61,
Just read your post.
Sorry for asking the same questions in my post at 64.
Just a bit slow on the ol’ keyboard !
“We aren’t Labor, vote for us and we won’t be an unstable minority government”.
The ETS is the best thing Gillard has going for her.
good work
have set that as my home page.
not long now till Frank’s back!
Since when has an Opposition needed policies to knock of a Government?
You’re indeed kind in your assessment of Mega.
However, the fact remains he’s employed by the megalomaniac Murdoch and for that he will be judged by those who judge. Whether it’s now, or in thirty years.
In my view he’s close to being tainted & should opt out before it’s too late.
Doyley . Not a problem 🙂
Which is why I wrote that a Hockey or Turnbull leading would either results in opposing something that is good policy, or accepting it – either way it would not result in either having a strong position for change of government
I am enduring the Robert Downey jr Sherlock Holmes film. Probably the worst Holmes film ever.
Basil Rathbone takes a lot of beating.
Darren Laver
Posted Friday, July 8, 2011 at 8:24 pm | Permalink
Interesting Darren you ask that, I emailed Mr Oakes, asking about his scoop, how he got it and why he is still hiding within the unwritten protection of not revealing a source, the day it appeared the arrest of Andy Coulson was about to happen…he has at this time, not obliged me with a response….once again silence speaks louder than words.
Diogenes
.
“Are we seriously meant to believe that NOTW hacked 4000 people and no other news (esp News) organisation has hacked a single person?”
.
EXCACKERY. As I posted a day or so ago “Remember the Jeff Kennett Peacock mobile phone call intercept here in Australia in 1987 and do you really think they did not continue such a jolly jape?” . So for the enjoyment of non John Howard fans you can listen to Kennett’s full and frank opinion of JWH here. Strong Language warning.
http://australianpolitics.com/1987/03/23/kennett-peacock-car-phone-conversation.shtml
.
Also can anyone tell me who was responsible for this 1987 Australian phone “hack” ?
dyno
dyno
say it aint so, you are one the more moderate conservatives here
do you believe the bloviated one would talk to a cleaner
oakes is just a superannuated mincer
IMHO:
(1) If the Greens have been successful in leaving renewables in the package, then that is a FAIL.
(2) But, that done, if the Greens have succeeded in shifting renewables away from Mr Ferguson into a stat authority, then that is a positive.
William – how about Frank ?
Its Friday ?
True, but if we get Morrison instead? Or B1 the loyal girl.
If any missed Dan Gulberry’s post the other day.
If you have time, must viewing:
http://bbc.in/k4aHSd
I had no idea Rupert was once a young man
And not bad looking, in a voluptuous sort of way.
And Ita worked for him, too?
I thought she worked with the Packers
And it’s easy to see why Lachlan chose the blond model for a wife
Anna is very good looking.
poroti, since you are relative new here on PB. Just remember the Universal Einstein Constant of PB:
DIOG is Always wRONg
Disagree. Turnbull is more credible as Opposition Leader than Abbott.
bk
i respectfully disagree
downey is quirky in the role
Darren Laver
.
.
All the Frank peeps have been playing this on high rotation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idS9P2OeYLU
Gus. R.E.S.P.E.C.T
Um, where do I start?
1/ It subverted our Cabinet process — the Prime Minister could not respond to the allegations without breaking Cabinet in confidence provisions herself.
2/ It also was “anonymous” — so voters could not assess the merits of the claims (ie. difference between a cleaner leaking following a 2nd hand conversation and a Cabinet minister).
3/ It was timed to favourably advantage one side; and
4/ It failed the public interest test — it gave no context, it was not as if the Prime Minister had allegedly argued for something that was illegal or totally improper.
Mr Oakes launches rockets — he cares not where they land.
No answer came the stern reply….
finns
ha
about time
👿
BK, I thought it was a good movie, and RD played the role in a new style
Gus
I was more referring to the film itself rather than Downey. I doubt if I will see out the last 40 minutes.
Isn’t that a journalist’s job? And the definition of impartiality?
Gus, george.
Maybe, in films, I’m a conservative.
People don’t care about whether or not the Opposition Leader supported or opposed a policy of the past. They don’t care.
If the past mattered, Abbott wouldn’t ever have gotten close to being Opposition Leader, let alone two seats from Prime Minister.
Two things are killing Gillard – appearance of instability and lack of leadership/authority.
One thing is holding the Libs back – Abbott.
Replace Abbott with anyone and it’s dire.
BK
Do you think Sherlock Holmes would have worked for NOTW?
I been everywhere man, I been everywhere.
A couple of months ago i was sharing morning tea at 10 Downing with the PM and now i am sharing bergoo with the others at South London lockup.
Hareffinhar.
Cameron=gone.
Boerwar @81,
It all depends what the money will be directed at.
If it is for large scale solar etc power supply development to replace coal supplied power stations I think that is good.
If it is for rebates etc for individual consumers not so good.
I believe the whole push of the announcement on Sunday will be directed towards the need to get big polluters to change rather than individual consumers. As such hopefully big picture renewable investment will be presented as the long term low cost option.