Nielsen: 53-47 to Coalition

Nielsen’s latest monthly poll result is little changed on last time, with the Coalition gaining two points on the primary vote and one on two-party preferred.

GhostWhoVotes reports the latest monthly Nielsen has come in at 53-47 to the Coalition, out from 52-48 last time. The Coalition is up two on the primary vote to 45%, with Labor steady on 34% and the Greens up one to 12%. There is also little change on personal ratings: Julia Gillard is steady on 47% approval and 48% disapproval, Tony Abbott is respectively down one to 36% and steady on 60%, and Gillard’s preferred prime minister lead has gone from 50-40 to 51-42. More to follow.

UPDATE: The poll also finds the calling of a royal commission into child abuse, although not without media critics, has the support of 95% with only 3% opposed, which may be the most lopsided poll result I’ve ever seen. Support for offshore processing of asylum seekers in Papua New Guinea and Nauru is at 67% with 27% opposed. Support for the carbon tax is up two points to 39% with opposition down three to 56%. Three per cent think themselves better off because of the carbon tax against 38% worse off, both unchanged on last time, while “no difference” is up two points to 56%. Fifty-three per cent of respodnents believed returning the budget to surplus should be a high priority, against 41% for low priority.

UPDATE 2: Essential Research has Labor losing the point on two-party preferred it scratched back last week, again trailing 53-47 from primary votes of 46% for the Coalition (up one), 36% for Labor (down one) and 10% for the Greens (up one). Also featured are most important election issues (which has health up 10 and “political leadership” down 10 since July), best party to handle them (Labor has gained seven points on interest rates relative to Liberal and three or four on most other measures), live animal exports (supported for “countries which guarantee they will be treated humanely”) and the royal commission into child abuse (88% approve, 4% disapprove).

UPDATE 3 (20/11): Roy Morgan’s face-to-face poll from the last two weekends has Labor up a point on the primary vote to 36.5%, the Coalition down 4.5% to 38.5% and the Greens up 1.5% to 11.5%. This is very like the Morgan result before last but quite unlike the previous poll, the Coalition’s primary vote having gone from 38.5% to 43% and back again. It pans out to a 51-49 lead to Labor on previous election preferences, after they trailed 52-48 last time. Where this poll differs from the normal Morgan form is in having a similar result on respondent-allocated preferences to two-party preferred, with Labor leading 50.5-49.5 after trailing 53.5-46.5 last time. This involves 56% of minor party preferences going to Labor, the highest share of any Morgan poll since January, which all but eliminates the gap between the two measures and brings Morgan closer into alignment with Nielsen, which if anything has found Labor slightly out-performing the 2010 election on preferences in its respondent-allocated measure. Also featured are gender breakdowns, which have Labor leading 55.5-44.5 among women and trailing 54.5-45.5 among men.

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.

5,192 comments on “Nielsen: 53-47 to Coalition”

Comments Page 104 of 104
1 103 104
  1. [The front page of the Telegraph and Herald Sun are surrender announcements.]

    Yep it was their story until it was hijacked by fringe elements (Fairfax ABC Smith Pickering et al).

    News Ltd has not switched sides it has announced with a mega megaphone that the other guys are on their own.

  2. Story headline “AWU scandal: Julia Gillard knew nothing” is on the Daily Telegraph site.

    First paragraph:
    “EXCLUSIVE: JULIA Gillard’s ex-lover Bruce Wilson has declared the Prime Minister knew nothing about a 1990s union fraud scandal. ”

    The old story “Libs claim ‘new material’ in AWU row” appears lower down on the page.

  3. Fran Barlow@5062,
    For the umpteenth time, the question of ‘drownings’ is simply misdirection.

    No, Fran, it’s the inconvenient truth that The Greens and their slavish followers, such as yourself, refuse to deal with. So you keep trying to wish it away from the debate and bully and attempt to humiliate those who keep bringing back to the forefront of the argument.

    Why don’t you just be honest, like frednk, and say that you don’t really care if asylum seekers die at sea, as they don’t conveniently fit into the Green frame of ‘compassion for asylum seekers’?

    Then, like frednk, you can start wittering on about giving ‘all’ asylum seekers a free Boarding Pass with Qantas for their journey to Australia.

    And when you get turfed out of your rented house in Willoughby because your landlord can make more money renting accommodation to ‘all’ the asylum seekers granted refugee status, by building one of your glorious high rises on the block, then what will you say? Will you still welcome ‘all’ asylum seekers with open arms?

    Get real, Fran. The Greens don’t have any answers either. Or, it seems, any real compassion.

  4. CT, FB has said that recently. The last time I asked the question she said thatvAustralia had no legal responsibility for people who don’t make it on shore. So much for moral responsibility.

  5. Do not speak too soon. This is the Lewis sting. No Surrender! More Bullshit, No Surrender.

    [Mr Wilson is alleged by another AWU official, Wayne Hem, to have given him $5000 cash he said he won at a casino, and asked him to deposit the money in Ms Gillard’s bank account in mid-1995.

    Asked whether he had asked Mr Hem to do that, Mr Wilson said: “Look, it’s possible, but I don’t specifically recall.”]

  6. My personal opinion – most people are barely aware of the AWU thing, and those that are are unlikely to be swayed by it. Very few people change their minds about their allegiances on issues like this.

    I reckon that the only times that there have been sudden moves to the coalition (I mean actual moves not statistical noise) have been when BOATS!!!! have been the issue.

    I get the feeling that this is the coalition’s last roll of the boats dice. Whether it works – we will know in a couple of weeks I guess.

  7. can we nominate Leroy reporter of the year

    well done thankyou i often find my slef coming to
    pb just in the nick of time to find news i am worried about, \now we can all sleep better.
    its so nice that mr wilson has spoken out,
    good on him
    thank you le roy

    my prayers of the last 24 hours have been answered

  8. [Craig Emerson MP ‏@CraigEmersonMP
    .@ObservedlaterOn Please forward me the list of Hedley Thomas allegations of wrongdoing against the PM. Oh, can’t find it? Your dog at it? ]

    Tonight is certainly fun on twitter.

  9. I was at the Yandina Market this AM, I overheard a conversation by the guy who sells old farm tools.

    “That Blewitt is a dog, fancy coming back to speak to the coppers and dob your mates in – dog.” The 3-4 people agreed dobbin’ dog Blewitt.

  10. Jolyon,

    [It’s a shame that you interpret her words in such a scurrilous and unworthy manner.]

    Yeah…shame on me for thinking that she meant exactly what she wrote.

    Here it is again (this time with square brackets):

    [The evil of the crime is two fold. First, there are the consequences of sexual molestation for individual victims, which are spiritually and psychologically disastrous. Anyone can see that. Second, an even more serious thing, is the spiritual consequences for the church itself. This is a sin of scandal against the whole body of the church, the laity as well as the clergy. This is worse than a crime. it is a mortal sin against the church itself.]

    I don’t see how anyone can find it even vaguely acceptable to use the words ‘an even more serious thing’ in this context.

  11. [4880

    Hello, briefly! Haven’t seen you since yesterday morning when I finished your pome.]

    Thank you so much for the lyric, Patricia: supple, clear and precise. You have a very personal voice and response. It’s great to see 🙂

  12. I don’t get the $5000 accusation. Is it news when a man puts money (possibly from a gambling win) into his partner’s account? I think half the population has done that.

  13. C@

    What I really resent about fran’s rants is the slurs she puts on the wonderful, compassionate Labor people I know, who genuinely are revulsed (as I am) at the idea that we set some kind of obstacle course for asylum seekers – if they live, they’re worthy citizens and should be embraced; if they drown, well, hey, that’s the price of freedom.

    fran can criticise Labor policy all she wants, I don’t mind. But to impugn base motives to people, just because they belong to a different party, is beyond the pale.

    As I’ve said before, I hope she would mark down her students if they stereotyped any group of people in that way.

  14. [Steve Lewis ‏@lewiss50
    Imagine if journalists actually worked to get a story instead of scouring the Internet for scraps……
    8:36 PM – 24 Nov 12]

  15. Apologies for the lack of service here for the last day. I have a new post up which it’s too hard for me to link to because I’m typing on an iPhone, so if you could all please mosey on over…

  16. Fran Barlow@5098,
    The Refugee COnvention only requires us to protect those who seek it from us, have a bona fide claim and present within our jurisdiction. That’s not tens of millions, or even millions.

    Fran, now you’re having an attack of dystopia. Are you trying to say that if there were no deterrents in place to attempt to dissuade asylum seekers from coming to Australia, that number would NOT rise into the millions?

    Considering the fat profit the People Traffickers are making off each boat, I’m sure they’d be able to employ a few couriers to go to the countries in our region, once the word got around, that have people in camps, and just line them up to come here by the busload.

    Who wouldn’t want a free ticket to a 1st World country and away from a life of poverty in the camps?

    You could start by lining up a lot of people in the Palestinian camps, for a start. Then there’s the Jordanian camps. Not to mention there are groups of Pakistanis who seem to consider themselves among the persecuted. There’s one on Nauru now making regular phone calls to the ABC to complain about his plight.

    Fran, your supercilious, pompous, legalistic & unrealistic attitudes, so neatly paralleled by those of The Greens in parliament, will never solve the asylum seeker issue.

    As I said, it’s time for The Greens to get real about this issue.

    High-minded idealism does not trump realism.

    Nor will high-handed insults directed towards those of us who are trying to balance out all the competing facets of this problem in order to find the best, most humane and responsible way to go, do your cause any good.

  17. why does every word have to analyses
    why not take it on face value
    and say that’s great.
    for goodness sake.

    the general public i do not think will
    mull it over like folk here.
    they are too busy,, they don’t spend time on political
    blogs analysing every word

    why put spin on things leave that to old media
    just be happy

  18. OC:

    [Someone woth 5 mill to invest will be allowed to immigrate under the investment criteria and will not take the place of a refugee.]

    That’s what I saw Bowen promising tonight on TV along with somne real estate guys in Potts Point licking their chops and people counting how many millionaires there are in our region.

    I suppose they are safe from drowning, apart perhaps from in a bucket of money.

  19. I think we can all agree that Australia does not have the strength to help everyone on earth and that we are faced with the unpleasant choice of having to decide whom we help.

    If the goal is to (within our means) help the most number of people we can, and for the moment assuming that we will treat people humanely whether on or off shore and that off shore processing will in fact prevent deaths at sea, it’s fair to ask whether the lower costs of on shore processing would allow us to save more lives (elsewhere) than are saved by processing them off shore and I think it’s unfair to claim callousness on the part of those asking.

    Before even getting to that (unpleasant) calculation, I’m not convinced that those assumptions even hold, though I’ll wait and see before passing judgement and will be happy to be proven wrong. As others have pointed out, the entire suite of recommendations are not yet in place, and evidence either way may not show for years (decades, even?).

  20. The “GET GILLARD” Brigade hits a stonewall – PM “knew absolutely, categorically nothing” about the fraud -bwahahahahahahaha

  21. I’m knackered. Just this minute back from being first responder unit to a fire that required 11 units plus support. Out from 3 to 9. Now for some tucker.
    Did Abbott do any more to disgrace himself today?

  22. Peter Hartcher – The story that won’t go away will dog PM for the four remaining parliamentary sitting days of 2012 & beyond bwahahahaha

  23. Nick Styant-Browne, told the ABC’s 7.30 on Thursday night – There is absolutely no doubt that Ms Gillard not only knew – bwahahahaha

  24. On he question of the cricket and Shane Watson …

    I’m not a believer in the theory that every well-balanced cricket team needs an all-rounder. It’s a great thing for a team to have one, but if the best you can come up with is someone who isn’t particularly good at either batting or bowling you’d be better off with an extra specialist bat or bowler.

    At test level a standard set of attributes for a good all-rounder is someone good enough to have a batting average the high side of 30 and a bowling average the low side of 30. If the player can hit a half century or better from 6 once every 8-10 innings completed innings and take 1 wicket per innings at and bowl with an economy of about 3 runs per over for 15 overs an innings, (s)he’s a real asset to the side.

    So with this in mind:
    Watson with the bat …

    Tests Innings Ave 100 50
    35 64 37.54 2 18

    Watson with the ball in hand …

    Innings Wkts Ave Econ 5W(i) 4W(i)

    55 59 28.91 2.92 1 2


    Watson is ticking most of the boxes. Admittedly, he’s averaging only about 10 overs per innings, but he’s going at less than 3 RPO averaging under 30 per wicket over 55 innings and taking a tick over 1 wicket per innings. He can bowl in the low 140km range.

    He has batted as opener for substantial parts of his test career, facing the new ball and shielding other strokemakers from it while scoring at a good rate overall and averaging well above 30. As he demonstrated recently in T20 he also has an attacking game when batting for a declaration and is a very good fielder, including from the deep (where bowlers often field). His ability and strokemaking against the new ball also makes him an asset at 6 when the new ball is taken post the 80th over.

    If he is fit, he deserves a place in the side, IMO.

  25. Watson appears to me to be the sort of individual who plays well individually but who is not really a team player.

    BW – WTF? WTF? And once more , WTF?????????

    Very unworthy of you.

  26. c@tmomma

    [Why don’t you just be honest, like frednk, and say that you don’t really care if asylum seekers die at sea, as they don’t conveniently fit into the Green frame of ‘compassion for asylum seekers’]

    The question is better directed at you. Like the rest of your tribe, your principal concern is the integrity of ALP spin, and if citing drownings is needed, you will say it loud and often, even when it is at odds with other concerns you ticky tack on to your special pleading.

    Really though, saying one ‘cares’ is cheap. Anyone can say that, and most feel a need to do so, whether they do or not. Certainly it sounds better than affecting indifference if you are pushing for a policy aimed at brutalising those 96% who avoid drowning.

    What you don’t acknowledge is that the palpable but small risk of drowning is taken on by those who presumably see their alternative life prospects as inferior to the risk of drowning. You imply that you know their interests better than them, but of course you don’t, and can’t. Yours are crocodile tears uttered with arrogant disregard not just for the IMAs but reason as well. You believe those boats are sinking your preferred regime. That’s all that matters to you and you and your tribe will utter shameful nonsense in defence of it if you think it needed.

    If you really cared primarily about the safety of IMAs you’d press for them being processed more rapidly at aggregation points. You’d insist on rapidly shipping the successful ones here by orthodox means. You’d press for conditions in the camps that were protective of vulnerable people. You’d be arguing for the first world especially to contribute much more to the relief of FDPs.

    I hear none of this from you or your tribe. When foreign aid was cut, I heard no protest from you. When Carr said more of it would be spent in this region I heard no pleas for “those languishing in camps in Africa” from you.

    Your tribe is big on cant — not the type with a “K” obviously. You have no standing at all to hector me or the Greens about “getting real”. There’s not a skerrick of honesty or integrity in any of your pleading on this issue.

Comments Page 104 of 104
1 103 104

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *