Nielsen: 58-42 to Coalition

The Fairfax broadsheets report this month’s Nielsen result has the Coalition’s two-party lead at 58-42, from primary votes of 28 per cent for Labor (up two), 48 per cent for the Coalition (down three) and 12 per cent for the Greens (up one). Although a bad result for Labor by any measure, this is nonetheless an improvement on their 61-39 from Nielsen the previous month, and it maintains a trend evident throughout this year of Nielsen being a few points worse for Labor than all other pollsters. It accordingly sits quite well with the 56-44 Newspoll and what I am interpreting as a 57-43 result from the substantial Morgan phone poll released on Friday.

Julia Gillard’s personal ratings have risen slightly from the canvas: her approval rating is up four to 38 per cent with disapproval down five to 57 per cent, while Tony Abbott is down four on approval to 43 per cent and up four on disapproval to 52 per cent. Abbott maintains a 47-44 lead as preferred prime minister, down from 51-40 last time. Michelle Grattan’s report tells us Labor has a 52-48 two-party lead in Victoria, compared with a 55-45 deficit in last month’s poll, and that the Coalition lead in Queensland is 65-35, down from 68-32 last time. It should be remembered here that state-level results are from small samples. Further from Grattan:

Victoria … is also where Ms Gillard has a big lead as preferred PM – she is ahead by a hefty 51-40 per cent; in New South Wales she is ahead by 46-43 per cent. By contrast, in Queensland … Ms Gillard is behind as preferred PM 36-55 per cent. In Western Australia, she is behind Mr Abbott 33-57 per cent. Voters are disillusioned with the current leaders as economic managers. Almost three in 10 (29 per cent each) think former leaders Kevin Rudd or Malcolm Turnbull would be ”best to manage another economic crisis if one occurs”. Mr Abbott was rated as best by 21 per cent, compared with 15 per cent for Ms Gillard. A total of 58 per cent prefer a leader other than the current leaders. People remain strongly against the government’s carbon price, with opposition to it steady on 56 per cent and support at 39 per cent. Backing for the carbon price is highest among the Greens (79 per cent) and ALP voters (68 per cent); overwhelmingly, Coalition voters are opposed (82 per cent). More than a quarter of Labor voters are against the carbon price, and one in five Green voters. Regional voters are more likely to oppose the carbon price (62 per cent) than city voters (53 per cent).

UPDATE: Gordon Graham on Twitter:

#Nielsen best to manage another economic crisis if one occurs: Rudd 29%, Turnbull 29%, Abbott 21%, Gillard 15%

UPDATE 2: Full results from Nielsen here. The Coalition two-party vote is 58 per cent in New South Wales (down one on last month), 48 per cent in Victoria (down seven), 65 per cent in Queensland (down three), 61 per cent in South Australia/Northern Territory (steady) and 61 per cent in Western Australia (down two), remembering that the smaller states especially come from small samples. Labor has a better overall result on respondent-allocated preferences (56-44, a five-point improvement) than on the previous-election measure, and while I don’t recommend reading much into this, it’s interesting to note how different this is from Morgan, which has consistently had Labor doing worse on respondent-allocated preferences throughout this year.

UPDATE 3: Essential Research has the Coalition lead unchanged at 57-43 on two-party preferred, Labor has gained a point on the primary vote to 31 per cent, but the Coalition and the Greens are steady on 50 per cent and 10 per cent respectively. As with Nielsen, Julia Gillard’s personal ratings have rebounded from a diabolical result a month ago: most encouragingly for her, this is the first poll since June 14 (Newspoll and Essential results from the same day) in which she has led Tony Abbott as preferred prime minister, now leading 38-36 after trailing 37-39 last month. Gillard’s approval is up six to 35 per cent and her disapproval down seven to 55 per cent, while Tony Abbott is down two to 37 per cent and up one to 50 per cent.

Tellingly, 47 per cent of respondents say they think it “likely” there will be “another global financial crisis similar to the one that occurred in 2009” against 39 per cent who think it “about 50/50”, with only 8 per cent opting for “not very likely”. In that event, 40 per cent would more trust the Liberals to deal with it against 31 per cent for Labor and 20 per cent no difference, while 36 per cent would favour stimulus spending in response against 39 per cent who would not. For all that, 54 per cent believe the government has handled the economy well in recent years against 39 per cent who rate it as poor.

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.

2,327 comments on “Nielsen: 58-42 to Coalition”

Comments Page 1 of 47
1 2 47
  1. [BTW, Van Onselen, Peter; Errington, Wayne (2007), John Winston Howard: The Biography, Melbourne University Press, ISBN 9780522853346 claims that Howard’s father Lyall was a New Guard sympathiser so I think deblonay is owed an apology.]

    Rubbish. For the record, the book says this:

    [Lyall Howard was a logical candidate for membership of a group such as the New Guard. Police records make no mention of his membership, but Bob Howard recalls his father defending the activities of the New Guard and is of the view that his father probably was a member. His brothers disagree. ‘It is simply wrong,’ Walter told us. ‘He was never a member.’]

  2. Diogenes @ 2108 previous thread

    What’s a New Guard sympathizer?

    Someone who was sympathetic to Eric Campbell’s fascist para-military ‘New Guard’ organisation pre WWII. The most famous incident was Capt De Groot galloping up on a horse and cutting the ribbon at the opening of the Sydney Harbour Bridge.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Guard

  3. Gusface, I take the only-make-claims-supported-by-evidence view. Bob Howard, for the record, was born in September 1936, and was three when there ceased to be any New Guard activities for him to recall his father defending – except in retrospect.

  4. William @ 1

    Rubbish? When in your own quotation Bob Howard lends support to his father supporting the New Guard and probably being a member. I left it at supporting. “Bob Howard recalls his father defending the activities of the New Guard and is of the view that his father probably was a member.”

  5. @frank, funny how turnbull is better than abbott, even though neither had been in power nor the ability of the Treasury as PM.

  6. Gus

    Srs. I’m really really bad on Australian history. Was never taught it and the only book I have ever read about it was The Fatal Shore, and I got bored and ditched that half way through.

  7. William @ 6

    I was born after WWII and learnt of a lot of my father and grandfathers views and activities in, you guessed it, “retrospect”. That did not make their views and actions any less real and even had I been around at the time, I would almost certainly not been an eye witness which seems to be what you require.

  8. Bemused, Deblonay sought to link two personages with disreputable organisations based on the most tenuous of links, when their actual records in office should be giving him plenty to go on with if they are really as bad as he inclines to believe. He can do this if he likes, but the assertion that he is owed an apology if criticised for it is, as I said, rubbish.

  9. Diogenes @ 8

    Bemused

    Thanks. That’s fascinating. I’d never heard of them, even the Sydney Harbor opening.

    I grew up hearing all about them. Detested in my family.

  10. Gus

    Something about gold and was in Victoria. A rebellion and a flag spring to mind. My parents took me there when I was a very small kid.

    Never read a word about it since.

  11. Looking at the Herald site, they’re really pushing the Rudd factor hard! I’d have thought that would be more of a News Corp move.

  12. The OO is also carrying the no confidence convoy, declaring it to be a :national Tea Party-style revolt”.
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/mass-convoy-to-make-real-voices-heard/story-fn59niix-1226114844783

    [The call from the convoy participants is not anti-Labor per se, but for a fresh election so that, to quote Mr Whytcross, “the people of Australia can vote for a government with a mandate”. “We are trying to make sure that democracy works,” Mr Whytcross told The Australian.]

    Democracy for Mr Whytcross evidently means we keep having elections until the result is one he agrees with.

  13. Doodling circles and ignored a Roman soldier who killed him after the siege of Syracuse where he held off the Romans for months with his inventions.

  14. 18

    It was mainly about the cost of a a mining licence (30 shillings per month) and that this was decided by a Legislative Council whose elected 2 thirds were elected only by people who met a property qualification.

    The licence was reduced to 1 pound per year and licence-holders were given the vote.

    Its leaders were tried for and acquitted of treason. One of these leaders was Peter Lalor. He became a politician and was Speaker of the Legislative Assembly in the 1880s. A pub in Ballarat, a Northern Suburb of Melbourne and Western Suburbs Commonwealth electorate (held by the PM) are named after him (and almost certainly other things too).

  15. Well, those comments from Alexander will go down well. He seems to take aim definitively at penalty rates:

    [If penalty rates are not productive, if they are not producing efficiency, they cannot be a good thing.]

    Has the standard Fiberal narrow view of what productivity means i guess? Employees get less choice and less remuneration and business profits go up. Still, i’d be happy for the Fibs to run with this as policy.

  16. [imacca

    Posted Monday, August 15, 2011 at 12:34 am | Permalink

    Well, those comments from Alexander will go down well. He seems to take aim definitively at penalty rates:

    If penalty rates are not productive, if they are not producing efficiency, they cannot be a good thing.

    Has the standard Fiberal narrow view of what productivity means i guess? Employees get less choice and less remuneration and business profits go up. Still, i’d be happy for the Fibs to run with this as policy.
    ]

    I’ll bet JA got penalty rates when employed by Ch 7 to cover the Tennis as it involved night and weekend work 🙂

  17. From Phil Coorey’s report on the Neilsen:

    [Ms Gillard spent the end of last week in Western Australia and was expecting a torrid time at a community forum on the carbon tax on Thursday night.

    The forum was anything but torrid and senior ministers have since commented that while opposition to the carbon tax was still strong, much of the sting had gone out of the issue.

    Yesterday, the WA Liberal Party defied the wishes of the Premier, Colin Barnett, and passed a motion at its state conference calling for a royal commission into the science underpinning climate change. ]

    Unbelievable.

  18. [The OO is also carrying the no confidence convoy, declaring it to be a :national Tea Party-style revolt”.]

    Oh joy! Whingers on Wheels begins.

    No doubt Abbott and his neuron bearers will be working out what they want to hear so he can say it to them when they get to Canberra. Bet he’s not going to write it down though?

  19. imacca
    As there are so many whinging exercising their democratic right of peaceful protest about so many different things, Abbott et al will be burning the candles down to come up with that.

  20. [So what happens when the WA Royal Commission finds out the science underpinning climate change is solid?]

    A Royal Commission into the Royal Commission?

  21. The 2PP swing off this Nielsen poll in Victoria is +7 to the ALP

    In Queensland the 2PP swing is +4 to the ALP from 31-69 last month.

  22. [So what happens when the WA Royal Commission finds out the science underpinning climate change is solid?]

    That represents no probs for the likes of Monkton and Nova.

    The commission will simply be declared corrupt and/or illegitimate as they aren’t listening to the people. Also, if they are taking evidence from the likes of CSIRO, well doesn’t everybody know how thoroughly discredited that organisation is??

    Oh, and if the commissioners don’t fully understand all the technicalities of climate change, and accept the advice of an organisation such as CSIRO, then they are “arguing from authority” and their findings can be dismissed.

    Would be interesting to see if Gina R would pay to get her favorite peer out from the soggy isles to give evidence?? 🙂

  23. imacca,
    “arguing from authority”
    I have seen that term on the nutter-tucker site; what the ferret does that mean?

  24. Puff: Some times called “Appeal to Authority”

    http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

    The immediate context for this is that the nutter truckers seem to consider that someone like me saying that:

    “CSIRO reviewed the science and have done their own work on climate change. They say its happening and that AGW is real and i think that’s evidence we need to act.”

    Is “argument from authority” and so below the high standards of evidence and debate that are demanded by the moderator of that site.

    I think they are getting “argument from authority” mixed up with “fallacious argument from authority”.

    After all, Govts are expected to take expert advice on many matters and act on it.

    However, tie in this attitude with the attacks on the people doing the science that are made by the AGW skeptic lobby and you can see why they like the term.

  25. So you can’t argue a the point based on science someone else has done, you have to go out and do you own? So what about them? Now i know they’re crazy.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 1 of 47
1 2 47