The latest weekly Essential Research result maintains the outfit’s record of consistency with the major parties unchanged on last week – the Coalition leads 48% to 36% on the primary vote and 54-46 on two-party preferred – and the Greens up a point from last week’s unusually poor result to 9%.
Whereas attitudinal questions often point to a social democratic bent among the population at large, questions posed this week on Newstart indicate that this particular buck stops with unemployment benefits. Fifty-three per cent agreed with the proposition that the current welfare system created a “culture of dependency”, with only 30% opting for the alternative proposition that current benefits are “the least a civilised society should provide”. In relation to Newstart benefits specifically, 33% said they were not high enough, 30% about right, and 25% too high. As Bernard Keane notes in Crikey today, variation by party support was not as pronounced as it often is in relation to such questions.
Further questions dealt with trust in various industries, with good rankings for agriculture (72%), tourism (68%) and manufacturing (56%) and poor ones for banking (33%), mining (32%), media (30%) and, tellingly, power companies (18%). Crikey will tomorrow publish Essential’s biannual “trust in media” results, which always makes for fun reading for critics of the fourth estate.
UPDATE (25/1/13): An automated phone poll for the Tasmanian seat of Bass, conducted by ReachTEL for the Launceston Examiner, has produced a dire result for Labor, with incumbent Geoff Lyons trailing Liberal candidate Andrew Nikolic 60.3-39.7 on two-party preferred. The primary votes are 54.7% for Nikolic, 26.7% for Lyons and 8.7% for the Greens. The sample size for the poll is 543.
Not true Diog, I just advised you of the Newspoll/Nielsen scenario. She comes out ahead v Rudd.
Sorry again post 3789 should have read “sorry about the other post 3875 ..which came up inadvertently”
[However, as has been pointed out about ten times now, Gillard doesn’t have to beat Howard, or Hawke, or Keating, or Pitt the Younger. She only has to beat Abbott,]
Abbott is the best thing that Labor has going for it, followed by Newman.
[Carey Moore
Posted Friday, January 25, 2013 at 11:55 pm | PERMALINK
The problem with a few of your analyses is that you are assuming that somebody who voted for Hawke, Keating or Rudd all disapprove of Gillard or rate her badly.]
…but the same applies for Howard. The non-Howard voters may well have respected him, but not thought he was the best PM ever.
For the sitting PM to get 5% is bad.
For the sitting PM to get the same rating AMONG ALP VOTERS as one of the most detested Lib PMs for ALP voters is bad.
Henry
Did they ask who was the best prime minister over the last generation or was it a different question?
Diogs,
I’ve said before the Ruddistas are the ones holding back the Government’s re election campaign.
It’s a case of wheher they want to continue their games or live with a Liberal Government for the next ten years.
It’s up to them.
You’re just spinning Mod Lib.
[In the US, the current President always rates very well no matter who they are.]
G W Bush didn’t by 2007
[or live with a Liberal Government for the next ten years.]
is that a prediction?
Pesphos.
Quite.
Julia should be Dirty Harry to a few more ALP hacks in the parliament, senator and HOR.
My local member, John Murphy, is a good bloke and I live next door to him but by gee by jingo by crikey he is not the most inspiring bloke in the world. Bit of fresh blood would be nice in the seat. His opponent, whilst gormless, is a relative youngster.
Noticed he had his shingles on a few lawns around the suburb last week. Interesting…
Fran
[G W Bush didn’t by 2007]
His approval ratings sucked but a lot of wackos still rated him highly in best President ever surveys.
oops
Psephos.
I suspect the ones who are defending Gillard’s poor showing are the spinners here Carey:
Gillard won 11% of the vote for best PM among ALP voters
Howard won 35% of the vote for best PM among all voters!
Howard was wiped out shortly after scoring 32% for Best PM in Australian history…..I wonder how the 5% bodes for Gillard?
Head to head Dio, ie more relevant.
Oh and ML Julia is still preferred pm over budgie boy 🙂
GG
Ruddistas are a convenient scapegoat.
I type faster with my left hand than my right. It destroys my accuracy and makes for some interesting words.
psphos,
No, it’s a consequence.
BTW and here’s some gratuitous advice, this Fellowship crap you go on with is likely to lead to you being banished from PB.
I’ve only got history on my side.
Diogs,
Is that meant to mean anything?
[Henry
Posted Saturday, January 26, 2013 at 12:04 am | PERMALINK
Head to head Dio, ie more relevant.
Oh and ML Julia is still preferred pm over budgie boy]
You mean like Keating was preferred pm over Howard in 1996 (just before he was trounced by Howard at the election)?
Henry
It’s quite a different question though. Galaxy asked who did you like better; the others asked who should lead Labor.
Julia Gillard is the Prime Minister. Everything else is breadcrumbs under the picnic table.
Mod Lib. There was a word for you in school. Try hard.
Won’t stop u trying harder, I know.
Yoda: No. Try not. Do… or do not. There is no try
GG
[BTW and here’s some gratuitous advice, this Fellowship crap you go on with is likely to lead to you being banished from PB.]
I remember Edward St John and I had a DeathWatch competition (choosing famous people who would die in the next year) which was banned.
Puff, mere dust, on a gnat’s eye lash.
Diogenes
[His approval ratings sucked but a lot of wackos still rated him highly in best President ever surveys.]
I wonder how he’s have gone with Reagan and his father in the list…
How would Dems have rated him v Clinton?
[However, as has been pointed out about ten times now, Gillard doesn’t have to beat Howard, or Hawke, or Keating, or Pitt the Younger. She only has to beat Abbott, who is the most despised opposition leader since, oooooh, let me guess, Dr 7%, Brendan Nelson.]
Yes.
Meanwhile, is there any analysis of the PM’s national security announcements in OM?
I get that party hacks here are less inclined to want to do policy substance, but I’d at least expect the press gallery (paid to report on these matters) would be all over the announcement the other day.
Since you are on a Tolkien kick this eve ML, you may like this. There is a download link for the english PDF on the page. Not a bad read. In it the Fellowship are right prats of little consequence. 🙂
http://ymarkov.livejournal.com/270570.html
For Friday-night dating, that was shall we say: non-optimal!
[Ruddistas are a convenient scapegoat.]
After the observed whiteanting behaviour of the Rudd Cult the last few years, that is an extraordinary comment.
Diogs,
Yes we’ve had our fill of rude, crude and disgusting over the years.
These young uns don’t know how piss weak they are these days……..
However, Mod Libs fantasy to insert themself into a marital couple’s bed to “listen to the patter”, is right up there imho.
imacca:
Thanks for the link, might be interesting, but I am a little worried about the little virus issue….don’t think I will download it.
[Jessica Wright @jesswrightstuff
@janecat60 I reckon I rang Mal 20 times. He has never responded to a single message since ashby yarn.]
Brough said he hadn’t been contacted by any journalists in the wake of Ashby.
Lying seems to come naturally to Liberals.
Diogenese, totally different scenario.
Labor had 4 pms to choose from. Libs one.
Totally contrived.
Thank God ALP types like Obeid don’t lie…
fess
Basically everyone in politics is being whiteanted by someone from their side.
It’s what these people do.
No ML, like Julia is preferred pm over Abbott in 2013.
No connection to 96 at all. You can’t deny the acts. 😉
or facts…
Why is the format different tonight, cannot quote posts.
Mod Lib,
Your fearless leader has been caught out on this isssue before.
Do you really think politicians’ lying is a wiiner for the LIbs.
Henry
I can’t see how they could have asked it any differently.
If they included Fraser and Whitlam, it would have been more interesting but wouldn’t have affected Gillard at all.
I am not denying the facts at all
Fact1: Gillard is preferred PM over Abbott.
Fact 2: Keating was preferred PM over Howard (just before getting thrashed by Howard at the election.
I take it you accept these facts too?
[Greensborough Growler
Posted Saturday, January 26, 2013 at 12:20 am | PERMALINK
Mod Lib,
Your fearless leader has been caught out on this isssue before.
Do you really think politicians’ lying is a wiiner for the LIbs.]
Gillard being perceived as a liar is a huge winner for the Libs, yes.
Diogs,
You are the only person I know who white ants themself.
Must be the water.
Diogenes@3777
This is PB Diogenes. We are not reality based here. Do not use facts, it is most disconcerting. 😛
[I take it you accept these facts too?]
Who cares! You may as well ask whether Santa Claus or the tooth fairy are real, for all the meaning derived from that poll.
Honestly Mod Lib, you are carrying on so.
Mod Lib@3833
I did, scanned with three different updated tools. No prob.
Oh and speaking of the tooth fairy….
😆
Mod Lib,
Howard was called a liar continually over his whole career and it did not stop him.
The propagation of this myth by the Libs will not have any effect on the election result. It may sure up the vote of those who always vote Lib, it may get a few feversished acolytes their five minutes of fame and ir might keep the MSM busy for a couple of years with censorial coverage.
However, won’t make a skerrick of differnece on the day.