Morgan face-to-face: 52-48 to Coalition

Last weekend’s Morgan face-to-face survey echoed other polls conducted at the time in showing little change on earlier polling despite Labor’s leadership turmoil, though as always it failed to echo other polls in having Labor’s primary vote several points higher. In this case Labor’s primary vote was up half a point on the previous week to 37.5 per cent, with the Coalition also up a point to 42.5 per cent and the Greens down 3.5 per cent from an anomalous 14.5 per cent last time. As usual with Morgan (though not Nielsen), there was a substantial difference between the two-party preferred results as derived by respondent allocation (52-48 to the Coalition) and using preference flows from the previous election (50-50).

NOTE: Due to server upgrades which will hopefully put an end to Crikey’s notorious technical gremlins, comments will be closed through the entirety of Sunday morning (i.e. about midnight to about noon).

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.

2,750 thoughts on “Morgan face-to-face: 52-48 to Coalition”

Comments Page 55 of 55
1 … 54 55

  1. http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/03/05/simons-how-the-fink-nailed-the-media-inquiry/

    Monday, 5 March 2012
    Simons: how the Fink nailed the media inquiry
    by Margaret Simons

    Start with this. You will find it difficult to get an idea of what the Finkelstein report on news media regulation actually says, or why it has reached its controversial conclusions, from reading the mainstream media.

    The irony is lost on no one, judging from all the eye-rolling in the ministerial offices this morning, except perhaps those editors and reporters who will deny it is so.

    worth a read

  3. Mike Long, towards the end of his analysis just now on ABC24 of Swan’s NPC address highlights two of the issues that need some action if “a fair go” means anything: NewStart and flat rate of taxation for superannuation which advantages the well-off. Tellingly, the level of single parent payment rarely rates a mention.

  4. DavidWH

    I don’t believe Swanny was saying people can’t make big fortunes. In fact from memory he said he was defiitely not against it. He was protesting against people with deep pockets using their millions to influence the parliament against the general good, such as Big Tobacco.
    IMHO that was the bext speech I’ve ever heard from Swan.
    Interestingly, he said he was essentially repeating his maiden speech in parl, and several others since then.

  5. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-05/swan-versus-miners-at-national-press-club/3869142

    Swan accuses Abbott of ‘singing for his supper’
    By chief political correspondent Emma Griffiths
    Updated March 05, 2012 13:04:09

    Treasurer Wayne Swan has fired the latest salvo in his battle with some of the country’s richest people, this time attacking Opposition Leader Tony Abbott for “singing for his supper”.

    The Treasurer has told the National Press Club that Mr Abbott’s opposition to the mining tax and a carbon price “is about more than his reflex for negativity”.

    “He is of course singing for his supper – we can see that in the donations from the likes of Clive Palmer that have flooded into the Coalition’s coffers in recent years,” Mr Swan said.

    “In choosing to kneel down at the feet of the vested interests, rather than stand up for the interests of Australian workers, Mr Abbott has encouraged them at every turn.”

    more in the article

  6. But there was one thunder cloud during the proceedings: the face of Senator Kim Carr.

    The newly-appointed Minister for Human Services looked downcast throughout the official ceremony at Government House, and the group portrait on the steps.

    Jesuz, the fate of the Govt & the Nation has come down to making one person’s face not gloomy

  7. Victoria tell me an age and a system where a few individuals haven’t accumulated obscene amounts of wealth and exercised their power to protect what they have?

  9. http://www.news.com.au/national/class-warfare-wayne-swan-takes-aim-a-wildly-irresponsible-billionaires/story-e6frfkvr-1226289376455

    CLASS WARFARE: Wayne Swan takes aim a ‘wildly irresponsible’ billionaires
    By Malcolm Farr, National Political Editor
    From: news.com.au
    March 05, 2012 12:58PM

    TREASURER Wayne Swan has dedicated himself to protecting Australia’s middle class during Asia’s economic explosion as he renewed attacks on “wildly irresponsible” billionaires.

    Mr Swan said he feared Australia’s “proud egalitarian tradition” was in danger from the huge economic changes of the Asian Century.

    He said manufacturing and tourism workers were concerned about their futures as the high Australian dollar battered their industries, but vested interests were opposing remedies such as the mining profits tax.

    more in the article

  10. DavidWH

    these specific people are easy targets for a political swipe.

    They made themselves targets by becoming involved in political campaigns against the government. Swipe away Swannie!

  13. DavidWH

    tell me an age and a system

    So that makes it right? It’s not the number of $, it’s how it’s applied.

  14. DavidWH

    Swan isn’t against people making money – he explicitly said so.

    And he thinks the vast majority of those who do make money are responsible and reasonable.

    What he did say is that no one makes money by themselves – they do so because the society they live in helps them, and thus it is only fair that they give something back.

    Again, he recognised that the majority of those who make money recognise this – which is why the mining tax was able to be negotiated.

    What he objects to is a minority of those who make money objecting to the idea that society has some kind of claim on them, or deciding for themselves what that claim should be.

    Being incredibly wealthy should not mean that the rules of society are different for you than they are for anyone else. Nor should your societal obligations be less than anyone else’s.

  15. Swannie looked the most relaxed I can ever recall seeing him.

    Maybe he is feeling secure about his position at last?

  16. I was told Carr (Kim) was instrumental in the downfall of Rudd.

    If so, he has not only switched sides but made it clear to everyone by doing so that he is not to be trusted.

    Grim position for any factional leader to be in.

  17. DavidWH

    I not really sure what Swan is trying to say other than these specific people are easy targets for a political swipe.

    I thought the message quite clear.He has not said “No” to wealth and the wealthy. He has said “No” to people distorting democracy by using their personal wealth to bend the political system for their own personal benefit. See Leveson Enquiry. See also Russia’s recent history and “Oligarchs”. Yes the wealthy and the powerful have always tried to do so. Just as it is also true we must not allow them free reign to do so.

  19. Victoria tell me an age and a system where a few individuals haven’t accumulated obscene amounts of wealth and exercised their power to protect what they have?

    The current era: Warren Buffett and Bill Gates have both pledged to donate 99% of their fortune to charity and are indeed conducting philanthropy now. Both will not pass on their money to their children. Rockefeller was similarly conducting large scale philanthropy – setting up research hospitals, universities etc. Aust billionaries by comparison are misrable, selfish fools only interested in playing partisan games through the media to increase their largese. their fortunes could be used to create a meaningful legacy for the nation setting up research centres, educational endowments, medical research etc but no all they are interested in is debunking global warming and buying more yachts. they are failures of humanity.

  20. I liked the way that Swan got in a few digs at the attendant media. That fellow from the Oz was the only once who looked very sullen after he sat down – he wa the one who said “what about the power of the unions?” I think. Obvious slapdown from Swan.

  21. I not really sure what Swan is trying to say other than these specific people are easy targets for a political swipe.

    It’s about equity.

    If it was a Liberal PM or treasurer mounting this argument (in bizarro world) they would be lauded as standing up for the battlers.

  22. Victoria tell me an age and a system where a few individuals haven’t accumulated obscene amounts of wealth and exercised their power to protect what they have?

    DavidWH, Gee what sort of question is that?

    You might just as well:

    Victoria tell me an age and a system where a few individuals haven’t accumulated obscene amounts of power and exercised their power to stay in power?

    Intellectually bankrupt

  24. Peter Martin is good bloke and yes Newstart is way below what it should be, Swannie. Those on it also deserve “a fair go”.

    But not too much of a fair go, otherwise they lose the drive to find a job!.

  26. Essential Research steady at 56-44.

    Great!, now only 6 in one hundred need to change their mind, and they have eighteen months to do it!.

  27. ruawake

    Swannie looked the most relaxed I can ever recall seeing him.

    Maybe he is feeling secure about his position at last?

    Something sure has changed with Swannie since Rudd resigned.We have been seeing the “Swan Unleashed”.

  29. Poverty Report by ACOSS, October 2011 update: http://acoss.org.au/images/uploads/ACOSS_Poverty_October_2011.pdf

    Past research commissioned by ACOSS and conducted by the Social Policy Research Centre at the University of NSW in 2007 estimated that the number of Australians living in poverty has increased. Approximately 2.2 million people, or 11% of Australians lived in poverty in 2006 – the latest date for which statistics are available ‐ compared with 10% in 2004 and 8% in 1994. These figures were determined using the OECD’s measure of 50% of median income poverty line, a stringent one by international standards. Using the measure of poverty that is currently used by the European Union and the UK (less than 60% of median income), the number of Australians living in poverty would nearly double to 3.8 million, or 19% of the 2006 population. These poverty lines are shown in Table 3. By way of illustration, 50% of median income poverty for a single adult in 2006 was $281 and 60% of median income poverty was $337.

    The Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey is a nationally representative panel study of Australian households that seeks to provide longitudinal data on the lives of Australian residents. It has been running since 2001, and data is available between 2001 and 2008. Based on this survey, 35% of the Australian population has been in poverty (50% of median income poverty line) at some stage during the period 2001‐2008. Of these, 46% were in poverty for one year only, and a further 20% were in poverty for two of the eight years.

    Child poverty is of particular concern. According to the Social Policy Research Centre, 12 per cent of Australian children ‐ over 500,000 – in 2006 lived in households with equivalent income less than 50 per cent of the median.2 UNICEF points out that countries which spend more on social security payments have lower child poverty rates. 3 Yet Australia spends much less (4.3% in 2007) than the OECD average (6.4% in 2007) on income support as a proportion of GDP

  30. Something sure has changed with Swannie since Rudd resigned.We have been seeing the “Swan Unleashed”.

    Poroti, i fed Swannie plenty of red herrings. Kinda like spinach for Popeye

  31. lizzie
    Posted Monday, March 5, 2012 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    I liked the way that Swan got in a few digs at the attendant media. That fellow from the Oz was the only once who looked very sullen after he sat down – he wa the one who said “what about the power of the unions?” I think. Obvious slapdown from Swan.

    That was David Crowe – recently moved from the AFR to the OO.

    He is a pretty good reporter but I’m disappointed to see him working for Murdoch.

    But then Stuchbury the new AFR editor moved from working for Murdoch at the OO to edit the AFR – and the tone of the AFR is getting more and more right wing.

    After reading the AFR for well over 30 years am thinking seriously giving it the flick because of the *Stuchbury effect*.

  32. More BISON material.

    Hiring intentions have reached their highest level in more than three years as a report shows the jobs market has posted solid growth for the second consecutive month.

    The monthly ANZ job advertisement series shows the total number of positions advertised rose 3.3 per cent in February on a seasonally adjusted basis, driven by a strong 3.8 per cent rise in online job ads.

    This follows a solid upwardly revised jump of 7.5 per cent in January.

    ANZ chief economist Warren Hogan believes the labour market will see gradual improvement throughout 2012 based on this result.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-05/job-ads-hit-three-year-high-survey-shows/3869114

  33. I was told Carr (Kim) was instrumental in the downfall of Rudd.

    Really? That would be remarkable given his public support for Rudd.

    If true, suggests he was trying to play both sides of the fence, but cocked it up big time.

  34. 1934pc

    But not too much of a fair go, otherwise they lose the drive to find a job!.

    Is this tongue in cheek, or ru being serious?

  35. The problem with the entire mining tax evolution is that it has been poorly managed and communicated and the end result we end up with a flawed policy. The better approach would have been to engage/involve all parties fully from the beginning. That necessitated the federal government, the states because under our Constitution they own the resources and are responsible for a less than efficient royalty system and the industry sector. The federal government and tried to force a bad system on the sector and ended up agreeing on a less than efficient tax system as a result.

    Much of what Swan is complaining about is due to his own poor handling of the process.

  38. Wayne Swan is not attacking the rich.

    I personally have no issue with people having money on the grounds that they or their family have actually earn it.

    All Wayne Swan is doing it the super rich like Twiggy (paid no corporations tax) and the likes of Clive and Gina need to be less selfish

    Swan mentioned the many well off that have preformed outstanding community work and ironically the first person that came to my mind was Dame Elizabeth Murdoch.

  39. The real problem with the billionaires is their readiness to set up astroturfing operations, claiming they are groundswells of people power, when in fact they are finely targeted, undemocratic, front organizations designed to appear as if they spontaneously just arose from nowhere.

    Clive Palmer’s new Soccer outfit would be a case in point. It was ready to go, with its own logo and two of Palmer’s nephews as as executive directors.

    The Consumers & Taxpayers’ Association is another example: three people run it as a private organization, yet it is depicted as a major public institution. We don’t know who funds that one, but John Singleton (another Swan target and mate of Gina’s) sure gives them a lot of free air time under the guise of talkback radio “listener feedback” calls from its directors that usually go on for 5-10 minutes at a time. Poor Candeloris, for all Generic’s shilling for the Libs, have to pay for a lot less.

    The elephant in the room was Rupert Murdoch. His flagship newspaper runs at a loss and has for years, yet it keeps on churning out anti-Labor, anti-NBN, anti-Carbon Tax, anti-MRRT bilge, day after day. It’s a sheltered workshop that only survives as a newspaper at the political pleasure of its malignant owner and backer. None of the jobs there are real jobs. They are subsidized bully pulpits.

  40. At least we Libs know how to pronounce hyperbowl

    Perhaps; but as some of Abbott’s biggest fans are bogans from the backblocks, a prudent person would say “some Libs”.

    Additionally, since the PM is most likely to have encountered the use of hyperbole where most of us did – in secondary school – I assume none of her English teachers could pronounce it correctly, or, if they could and were doing their job, should have corrected her mispronunciation; so it’s her teachers fault! I bet they weren’t all non-Lib voters!

    BTW, few Australians (inc Libs) pronounce ‘gymnasium’ correctly, even fewer use its correct plural – or the correct plural of ‘stadium’ (or, indeed, most Greek – note the hard G), or correct Latin plurals like Foci, loci, fora and many others.

    I might add I’ve heard Lib supporters – including very rabid up-themselves ones – pronounce ‘clivia” as ‘clive (long i)-a”. Cilvia is the plant’s botanical (as well as common) name; which like most botanical names, is Latin/ Greek: so it’s cliv (short vowel) ee, a.

    S/he who never pronounces anything incorrectly, let her/him cast the first aspersion.

    You need to get a life, David!

  41. Centre ??? Why are you sledging the monkey’s at Toronga Park ? Their IQ is much higher than the average Coal-ition member

  43. So, what is the correct way to pronounce ‘gymnasium’ and ‘hyperbole”?
    Hyperbole I always thought was high-per-bowl and gymnasium as jim-nayz- eeum.

  44. From Dessert Fox some pages back

    Wayne Swan is a national embarrassment. No sooner does he bag Clive Palmer then Palmer is endorsed by ordinary Australians as a national living treasure! How out of touch the federal government is! Why shouldn’t ordinary Ausralians have a say in who is a national living treasure?

    I new a person who was a “National Treasure”. He was married to my Great Aunt (does that make him my “Great Uncle” ?)
    Speaking personally (and knowing why the person I knew was a “National Treasure”) I think its a discrace that Palmer was awarded this “honnour”. I don’t know how they award anyone with the title “national treasure” but Clive Palmer certainly hasn’t done anything of significance that has added to our nations fabric, in the way that most “national treasures” have.

  45. davidwh@2699:

    If these people have rorted the tax system the ATO has powerful methods to investigate and prosecute. If the tax laws have loopholes that these people take advantage of the the government has the power to change the laws. If Swan thinks people shouldn’t be able to accumulate obscene amounts of wealth then he needs to clearly set out what changes need to be made to prevent the accumulation of obscene wealth.

    David, I don’t know about Swan, but I object to people with obscene wealth running advertising campaigns using their millions in an attempt to stop the government from changing the laws to benefit the vast majority of Australians.

  47. If this is the politics of envy and class warfare, so be it, bring it on. If these people choose to use their wealth to disadvantage the community and further their own political agendas, let the battle begin. They lost me when they got on that flat-bed truck.

Comments Page 55 of 55
1 … 54 55

Comments are closed.