Newspoll: 58-42 to Coalition

GhostWhoVotes reports the latest Newspoll has the Coalition with a 58-42 lead on two-party preferred, compared with 55-45 a fortnight ago. The primary votes are 27 per cent for Labor (down -3), 49 per cent for the Coalition (up +3) and 12 per cent for the Greens (up +1). More to follow, though probably not until tomorrow.

UPDATE (13/7/11): Very bad news for the government from a Galaxy survey of 500 respondents conducted on Monday night, which finds essentially no change in opinion on the carbon tax: only 29 per cent say that, “based on what you have seen or heard about the carbon tax”, they are supportive; fully 60 per cent are opposed. Galaxy has again pointlessly asked respondents if they think Gillard has a mandate for the tax or should instead call an election, a false dichotomy I railed against when they asked it six weeks ago, but since they have also asked the more sensible question it’s not such a problem. Terrifyingly for the government, only 10 per cent believe they will be better off under the carbon tax against 68 per cent worse off, despite what the Treasury modelling has to say on the subject.

UPDATE 2 (14/7/11): Essential Research has also published results for a question on the exclusion of fuel from the carbon tax, conducted for the Ten Network. I presume this formed part of last week’s survey, and was thus conducted before Sunday’s announcement. It has 30 per cent declaring themselves more likely to support the tax on the basis of the exclusion of fuel, 11 per cent less likely and 52 per cent saying it will make no difference.

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.

7,896 comments on “Newspoll: 58-42 to Coalition”

Comments Page 157 of 158
1 156 157 158
  1. [RT @DRoseTimes: Rebekah Brooks: “I have given Rupert and James Murdoch my resignation…. this time my resignation has been accepted” #notw ]

    She had to go, her position was untenable really.

  2. [SpaceKidette Space Kidette
    Antony Green points out the earliest a DD election could be held would be 2015 given requirement for a sitting of the senators. #auspol #cp
    ]

  3. [Business has been so desperate for certainty over the carbon price for several years and from the next sitting of parliament certainty can be had. So does anyone think business will be all for uncertainty out to 2015 ?
    From BK]
    Very good point. I was thinking this today and I figured that a D.D. in late 2014 was the earliest, but nice to see Green point out that it would have to be even later.

    The Coalition won’t repeal the ETS.

    Anyone who votes LIberal or National is asking to be misled.

  4. Can anyone link to Antony’s advice re the requirement for a sitting of the new Senate? I’m not sure I’d agree with that analysis.

  5. Morgan

    Carbon Tax

    Support 37% (+5), Oppose 58 (+5)

    Guess what? That’s with Julia Gillard included in the question, and the support level is way above Galaxy which was about 29%. Opposition is about the same level as Galaxy.

    The poll also shows that voters are evenly split on repealing the tax once it becomes legislation. Support Repeal 48, Oppose Repeal 45.

    http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2011/4686/

  6. [“I have given Rupert and James Murdoch my resignation…. this time my resignation has been accepted” ]

    Er why was it rejected previously?

  7. [Correction…Minority Government :lol:]
    I’d rather be in Minority Government rather than in Majority Opposition.

  8. [TurnbullMalcolm Malcolm Turnbull
    @
    @whereitsgoing no and yes – failure to raise the debt level would be disastrous for the us and the global economy.]

    It sure would.

    But let’s face it, they’re just like Greece.

    They’re never going to be able to pay-off $14.5 Trillion anyway. Or $14.7 trillion. Ever.

    What they’ll do is print lots of dollars and short-change the Chinese on their T-Bills.

    That’d at least should get a laugh out of the Repugs, even if the place is headed for skid-row (thanks to them and their crappy wars). They’ll at least be able to tell themselves: ‘We gutsed ourselves one last time in that gook restaurant and short-changed Chairman Mao on the way-out the door. He He He’

  9. [Er why was it rejected previously?]
    Cos Rupert and James have no decency and only care about their increasingly corrupt company.

  10. 2015

    Assume that it takes a few months to hold an election a couple more months to destroy everything and a year to get bids in and accepted for the Direct Action Plan. Let’s say the accepted bids start work at the beginning of 2016 and that, on average, they take a year to put and get doing their stuff -whatever that is. This gets us to the beginning of 2017.

    That gives Mr Abbott 3 years to achieve 5% by 2020. That is not going to happen. His 5% target will not be achieved. Someone orta ask Mr Hunt, please explain.

    The Do-nothings are doing excellently well.

    The Liberal Party 400ppm victory celebration party should be a humdinger.

  11. [George –

    If you can before it gets removed can you convert the streaming audio of Delroy’s Issue of the Day into a more permanent format please ?]

    Sorry Frank, dinner call.

    Can you please let me know where that is so I can try and record it?

  12. Thefinnigans The Finnigans
    Rebekah resigned and announced She is coming to Australia to repeal her resignation #newscorpse #auspol
    17 seconds ago

  13. [The poll also shows that voters are evenly split on repealing the tax once it becomes legislation. Support Repeal 48, Oppose Repeal 45.

    http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2011/4686/%5D
    LOLOLOLL

    SO when it is actually law, the people wanting it repealed will be less than the people wanting it to remain.

    SO Abbott will be arguing the minority position.

    Couldn’t happen to a nicer moron.

  14. [Correction…Minority Government]

    And one that is very functional indeed. Not much Abbott has been able to “oppose” to, other than yelling to himself

  15. I spend quite a bit of time driving as part of my job, so I occasionally succumb to listening to the “shock jock” brigade on 2GB & 2UE.

    Strangely, they hate the ABC (and SBS as well), especially Alan Jones, with putrid comments.

    Yet here on PB, it’s their ABC.

    I do notice of late a new intrusion into the debate along the lines of “God is in control, he will not permit global warming, did not create the world that way, etc., etc.” Is the Hillsong Church marshalling to assist it’s Lib allies in NSW?

    Ray Hadley on 2GB having two bob each way – “It is not about whether global warming is real, it’s about “she lied” ….. (oh dear!!!)”

  16. Glen, Bill Shorten won’t be PM, no matter how or when change occurred. I think the caucus will regard him as being tainted as a “faceless man”. Certainly the public would. Greg Combet is much more acceptable. Bill’s name is thrown around because he wants job and he is now notorious, but why go for a new leader who’ll set you back?

    However, I think think Julia Gillard will stay as PM to the scheduled late 2013 election. If she loses, then there’ll be a change of course, but if she wins it could be a long way off.

  17. The wonderful figure in the Morgan poll is that people are fairly balanced in their readiness to accept that the carbon price, once in, should stay in.

    That number will almost certainly rise from the middle of next year when the sky does not fall in.

  18. [Er why was it rejected previously?]

    Because Murdochs rule and power has never been as seriously questioned as it has now.

    Murdoch closed NoTW because the advertisers withdrew their advertising, not because of the bugging or hacking or lies, it was a simple money decision. Rebecca offered her resignation before the advertisers withdrew their money, like a run on a bank.

    Now the two Murdochs have been summonsed to appear before the HoC, they ignored the invitation, but not the summons. They can now appear and show them the head of rebecca and say we have cleansed the evil.

  19. Generally, there are about four variations on the carbon tax question:

    1. Do you support a carbon tax? (Support 35-38%, Oppose 48-51%)

    2. Do you support a carbon tax that provides compensation to low and middle income households and small businesses? (Support 50%, Oppose 35%)

    3. Based on what you know, do you support a carbon tax? (Support 30%, Oppose 60%)

    4. Do you support Julia Gillard’s proposed carbon tax? (Support 30%, Oppose 60%)

    5. Thinking about the carbon tax proposed by Julia Gillard, based on what you know, on balance, are you in favour or oppose this tax? (Support 28-30%, Oppose 60-65%)

  20. [She apparently combines several qualities to a heroic degree: ignorance, arrogance, and stupidity. Oh, and a self-satisfied pride in her accomplishments.

    I congratulate you for not throwing her in. Not worth it.]

    Thanks Boerwar. I was beginning to feel guilty for not doing it.

    We had just inspected the reactor in the process of making its daily output of radio isotopes for hospitals. These are supplied free of charge all over Australia. The tour guide (himself a retired paleontologist and a cracking good bloke to boot) had explained, with pictures, how nuclear medicine had helped to extend life expectancy and quality of life (just as important).

    He explained how the PhD students were doing breakthrough research on intelligent metals, but made the mistake (if you can call it that) of saying, in the case of the two young blokes inthe pit, that NASA was the first to use this technology by designing it into self-repairing space vehicles, to protect astronauts from micro-meteors.

    That was enough for her. Why should Aussie taxpayers’ money be used to send men to Mars? There was enough misery on Earth. To worry about a few space jockeys on Mars was foolish and wrong, she said. I tried to make the point that we are still benefiting from the technologies developed for the Moon landing. The guide gave nme the “cut throat” signal, telling me to shut-up and not be controversial. So I did, but continued the conversation later on privately with her.

    She wouldn’t busge.

    She had also “felt threatened” by the amount of money being spent on Global Warming research at ANSTO. She thought Global Warming was being shoved down her throat, when (look around youse), it’s so freakin’ cold outside! I said I thought that inside ANSTO there was no argument about Global Warming. That seemed to prove her point, somehow.

    She complained that “the people” don’t have a say in these things. As her intelligence and knowledge quotient was about 1 point above “absolute ignorance” (as evidenced by her performance in the first, lecture-style part of the tour when the Q&A session was conducted), I said that sometimes “the people” don’t understand the science, and can’t understand it, because it requires years of academic work to do so.

    Her only response was, “I don’t see what a nuclear reactor has to do with Carbon Dioxide”. This, apparently, when decoded meant that, all you had to do was put your wetted finger out into the air and you’d see how cold it was. No need for nuclear science to tell her the Earth was cooling. It was all a conspiracy and a con, according to her.

    Just as I was about to ask her “Then what the f**K are you doing here, you moron?” the tour guide – embarrassed – called us all into the bus and the conversation lapsed.

    Right in front of her she could see the great work being done. She had been told of the nuclear medicine side of it. She had seen animated demonstrations of just how advanced all this work was, and how well-respected all around the world.

    Water off a duck’s back, sadly. All she could think of was “uni students” bludging off the taxpayer. She held onto that though, maybe even clung to it, and I think probably went home thinking she’d told me “a thing or two” about the real world.

  21. The other good news in the poll is the slow but sure increase in the numbers supporting. Is early days but time is on the Govts side and slowly but surely upwards will do me.

  22. Rebekah’s teary farewell on the Road to Mandalay:

    [10.03am: Here’s the statement Brooks emailed to staff:

    As chief executive of the company, I feel a deep sense of responsibility for the people we have hurt and I want to reiterate how sorry I am for what we now know to have taken place.

    I have believed that the right and responsible action has been to lead us through the heat of the crisis. However my desire to remain on the bridge has made me a focal point of the debate.

    This is now detracting attention from all our honest endeavours to fix the problems of the past.

    Therefore I have given Rupert and James Murdoch my resignation. While it has been a subject of discussion, this time my resignation has been accepted.

    Rupert’s wisdom, kindness and incisive advice has guided me throughout my career and James is an inspirational leader who has shown me great loyalty and friendship.
    I would like to thank them both for their support.
    ]

  23. [Er why was it rejected previously?]
    .
    Because when she goes there is nobody between the mob and The Family ! Also from what I have read the old global media tyrant seems to be genuinely fond of her. Well before now people said she was like a fourth daughter to him.

  24. [Do you support a carbon tax that provides compensation to low and middle income households and small businesses? (Support 50%, Oppose 35%)]

    surely this is the most sensible question.

    on SBS news abbott” if the world changes we change”

    what was he on about

  25. [Rupert’s wisdom, kindness and incisive advice has guided me throughout my career and James is an inspirational leader who has shown me great loyalty and friendship.]

    “And I’m now an international pariah”

  26. [Posted Friday, July 15, 2011 at 7:10 pm | Permalink
    Rebekah’s teary farewell on the Road to Mandalay:]

    so not coming here then, where will she find word

  27. [Generally, there are about four variations on the carbon tax question:]

    spur thanks for compiling them but they are irrelevant. Legislation will pass both Houses later this year despite what the polls say.

  28. SK & others… You are very welcome…got the link from Twitter and will keep it in circulation there from now until the election in 2113….Keep up your great work in the Twittersphere SK…and all the others I meet there from time to time… 🙂

    Glen…. you confirm my opinion of you expressed yesterday…just before you scuttled of to ignoranceville… Bet you haven’t bothered to read the FACTUAL links I’ve provided this evening…..

    William…what’s the definition of a Troll again?….

  29. Have now read Mr Green’s analysis. I’m not sure I agree with all of it but think some of it’s good. I think as long as it was rejected by the ‘new Senate’ once it’d probably be enough. It’d still come down to whether the GG accepted the PM’s advice though and I suppose they’d want to play it safe.

  30. spur 212 at 7826:

    [Generally, there are about four variations on the carbon tax question:

    1. Do you support a carbon tax? (Support 35-38%, Oppose 48-51%)

    2. Do you support a carbon tax that provides compensation to low and middle income households and small businesses? (Support 50%, Oppose 35%)

    3. Based on what you know, do you support a carbon tax? (Support 30%, Oppose 60%)

    4. Do you support Julia Gillard’s proposed carbon tax? (Support 30%, Oppose 60%)

    5. Thinking about the carbon tax proposed by Julia Gillard, based on what you know, on balance, are you in favour or oppose this tax? (Support 28-30%, Oppose 60-65%)]

    There’s a bit of room for Labor to get-out and sell it’s package there, methinks.

    The answer to Q2 makes no sense in relation to that to Q4, unless the respondent hasn’t a clue about the whole package and it’s effects.

    These answers are clearly the product of ignorance, not of some informed, balanced decision.

  31. Stunt for the Day…

    Wayne Swan saying the Telegraph is not a balanced newspaper. What a dill!

    You know Labor are in trouble when they start attacking the Press 😀

    😆

  32. Zed Seselja seems decent enough, a bit sooky. It was just a case of Labor policies being more to the Greens’ liking.

  33. [SpaceKidette Space Kidette
    Cost of 2010 House of Reprs & half-senate elections $161,342,861. The amt Abbott wants to piss away to chase his personal ambitions.#auspol
    ]

    Bludgers who tweet. Could you help me retweet this one.

  34. Regardless of the result of the next election.
    The Governemt will have passed the CT/ETS, The MRRT, NBN Rolled out, Pokies reform, balanced the Budget, and will have conducted a much needed inquiry into Media propiety in Australia. (Wouldn’t be surprised to see cross-media laws remade)
    And for any Tories lurking, gloating with Hubris consider this.
    Malcolm Turnbull, is sitting on the side-lines considering his priorities:
    He wants action on climate change, personally agrees with the proposed Carbon Pricing Scheme, and regards “Direct Action” as infanitle.
    He is ambitious, no doubt, he wants to be PM, and, if the polls are to belived, it appears that the only thing standing between himself and the Lodge, is Tony Abbott.
    Tony Abbott is simillarly ambitious, so far his campaign of fear,loathing, and uncertainty, spun on misprepesentation, is seeinmg him surfing a two year wave into victory and the Lodge. Therefore Tony aint going to step aside, and his tea-party faction owns the party.
    So does Malcolm,knowing that he’ll never likely achieve his ambition if he sticks around the Liberal party, what do you reckon hell do ?
    They say of Tony that he is prepared to wreck the place in order to become PM, however, what comes around goes around.

  35. [Leroy
    Posted Friday, July 15, 2011 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

    Glen, Bill Shorten won’t be PM, no matter how or when change occurred. I think the caucus will regard him as being tainted as a “faceless man”. Certainly the public would. Greg Combet is much more acceptable. Bill’s name is thrown around because he wants job and he is now notorious, but why go for a new leader who’ll set you back?

    However, I think think Julia Gillard will stay as PM to the scheduled late 2013 election. If she loses, then there’ll be a change of course, but if she wins it could be a long way off.]

    Precisely Leroy, and Greg Combet is a very intelligent man, he will be in no hurry, plus all indications are he is a loyal Gillard man, which I would expect coming from their respective backgrounds.
    Shorten will survive on the front bench but I doubt very much he will ever get the leaders job. As in Arbib, treachery is thy middle name sir.

  36. Glen, it’s a fair comment. The Daily Telegraph and Australian are not balanced. There’s no requirement to be of course.

  37. [Stunt for the Day…

    Wayne Swan saying the Telegraph is not a balanced newspaper. What a dill!

    You know Labor are in trouble when they start attacking the Press]

    If you think the MSM are balanced on the CT Glen you are delusional.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 157 of 158
1 156 157 158