GhostWhoVotes tweets that the latest Nielsen poll, conducted for Fairfax from a sample of 1400, has the Coalition’s lead blowing out to 57-43 after a relatively mild 54-46 last month. The primary votes are 29% for Labor (down three) and 47% for the Coalition (up three). That becomes 50-50 under a Kevin Rudd leadership scenario, with primary votes of 40% for Labor and 42% for the Coalition. The poll also finds Julia Gillard crashing on preferred prime minister from 46-46 to 50-41 in Tony Abbott’s favour.
I don’t normally give too much coverage to the internals in these polls, but there is very interesting movement beyond the margin of error in the gender breakdowns. Whereas all voting intention figures and personal ratings are little changed on the last poll for women, Labor’s primary vote among men is down seven to 24%, with Gillard down eight on approval to 28% and up ten on disapproval to 69%, and Tony Abbott’s lead as preferred prime minister widening from 48-42 to 56-35. The other noteworthy feature of the breakdowns is a big movement away from Labor among respondents under 40, but little change in the older cohorts.
We also had a Galaxy poll of 996 respondents published in the Sunday News Limited papers, which had the Coalition’s lead up from 54-46 to 55-45, from primary votes of 32% for Labor (down two), 47% for the Coalition (up one) and 11% for the Greens (up one). With Kevin Rudd as leader, the primary votes became 38% for Labor, 43% for the Coalition and 11% for the Greens, with two-party preferred at 50-50. Nonetheless, only 34% said Gillard should make way for Rudd with 52% opposed (32-60 among Labor and 33-51 among Coalition supporters).
UPDATE (Essential Research): Essential Research has Labor down a point on the primary vote to 35%, but is otherwise unchanged on last week with the Coalition on 47%, the Greens on 8% and two-party preferred at 54-46. Respondents were also asked who they voted for in 2010, an exercise which is generally recognised as being blighted by the tendency of some to mis-remember having voted for the winning party. Sure enough, once “didn’t vote” and “don’t know” are excluded, the results are 44% for Labor, 42% for the Coalition and 8% for the Greens, compared with election results of 38.0%, 43.6% and 11.8%. Respondents saying they had changed their vote were given a list of choices for why, but the samples here are very small and no clear pattern emerges from the results.
The poll also inquires about importance of election issues and the best party to handle them, which for some reason has “management of the economy” declining in importance since February (47% nominated it as one of their three most important issues, compared with 62% in February), with “political leadership” increasing (from 14% to 22%). Labor has gone substantially backwards as the best party for political leadership, along with environmental and population issues. Further questions on asylum seekers have 38% rating the Coalition as having the best policy against 13% for Labor and 7% for the Greens. A five-point scale of the issue’s importance has 37% rating it in the middle, 34% as important, and 24% as less important or not important.
UPDATE 2 (Morgan): The weekly Morgan multi-mode poll defies Nielsen in recording a shift to Labor on last week’s result, their primary vote up two to 33% with the Coalition down 1.5% to 44.5% and the Greens down 0.5% to 9%. The Coalition two-party lead narrows from 56-44 to 54.5-45.5 on previous election preferences, and from 56-44 to 53.5-46.5 on respondent allocated preferences.
[ I’m a B.Sc, M.Sc & MBA. You don’t know me so please don’t throw me your ideologically driven clap trap. ]
Pot. Meet Kettle.
Wow. Alphabet soup. I am particularly impressed by the MBA. Harvard?
This Letter a couple of days old but worth posting:
First Word: Letter of the Morning
“I simply don’t understand all the fuss about Julia Gillard talking about a women’s issue (abortion) to a group of women (“PM’s cynical ploy fails to win voters”, June 17). It would have been more surprising and inappropriate if she’d discussed problems in manufacturing industries or treatments for prostate cancer. How is it playing the gender card to raise concerns which are relevant to your audience? And why are men so angry that she should do so? Women make up more than 50 per cent of the population but this is not reflected in their representation in parliament nor in the time given to issues which concern women deeply.
The sad history of Australia is that decisions which will affect the lives of women (and affect men not at all) have largely been made by conservative men – whether they’re wearing blue ties or pin-striped suits. Women do not have the numbers in parliament to adequately represent women’s views and women need to be reminded of this, especially when they attend a meeting with the Prime Minister. Men like Tony Abbott can deal with an unwanted pregnancy by simply walking away and marrying someone else but they’ve salved their consciences with support for making sure that for women it’s not so easy. It would have been reprehensible of our Prime Minister not to remind women of this and encourage them to vote accordingly.”
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/letters/the-pm-did-not-deal-the-gender-card-20130617-2od4c.html#ixzz2Wf5AQpb3
[So I do not think you can make that conclusion of Gillard putting her personal views first and overturning party policy.]
My point is that like Rudd and pretty much every leader before her she isn’t necessarily bound by party policy.
BA=Bullshit Artist
PHD=Piled Higher and Deeper
EE Doc Smith
Boerwar
MBA stands for Master Bullshit Artist.
Abbott is anti women’s choice by religion. Madigan may have the BOP in the Senate and his as anti women’s choice as Abbott. Both of them are religiously inclined to want to control women’s bodies. The Pope makes them do it.
The difference between the two is that Madigan tells the truth and Abbott misrepresents his religious convicion.
[Your 500 fires are impressive and I admire your dedication to duty, but 500 is not as impressive as the 19,000 wildfire events that were on the go at or near the time of the Colorado fire.]
No its not, but Australia’s little secret is that we burn more then the USA every year up in the top end but know one but the Cattle farmers on 1000000h care.
[BTW, aren’t you supposed to be putting the fires out?]
Yes, and burning the fuel in front of a large fire is one of the only ways to stop large fires.
WWP
Fair enough point but I think you was putting it too strongly.
Privatising the Commonwealth Bank and Qantas spring to mind as good examples from the Hawke Keating era, It was against part policy at the time from memory.
@BB/3380
The problem is we are trying to get out of a Minority Goverment into a Majority Goverment.
It’s not a matter of getting into the top #1 position.
Well, I should confess that I got tossed out of an MBA economics class for irritating the students who were wearing blue ties and pointing out to the lecturer just exactly why he was talking BS. He was disinclined to intellectual democracy.
A couple of decades later and, lo!, MBAs are not worth a can of beans.
guytaur
[BA=Bullshit Artist]
In my time it was a “Bugger All”. At varsity the graffiti over the toilet rolls all had “Bachelor of Arts Degrees. Please take one ” 😆
[I’m a B.Sc, M.Sc & MBA. You don’t know me so please don’t throw me your ideologically driven clap trap.]
Well if you were those things, you’d know that individual conclusions are worthless, unless they are reviewed by peers and agreed by consensus. The more people who reach the same conclusion, the more likely it is to be true – a method which can eliminate variables like bias and ideology.
Of course, if you were such an accomplished academic, you’d also know that arguing solely from authority is entirely fallacious and doesn’t give your argument any strength.
Can someone tell ADAM CARR
AKA Psephos
AKA THE EMAIL WRITER
That is webpage seems to have a virus. Kaspersky internet security blocks access to his page because it says the page contains malicious code.
[Leroy @Leroy_Lynch
Egyptian asylum seeker who Abbott called a ‘convicted jihadist terrorist’ says he is innocent of all charges http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/19/sayed-abdellatif-breaks-silence-detention … #auspol
9:45 PM – 19 Jun 2013
Sayed Abdellatif breaks silence on detention row
Exclusive: Egyptian asylum seeker whom leader of the opposition called a ‘convicted jihadist terrorist’ says he is innocent of all charges
The Guardian @guardian]
The method by which science is debated is to practice it. Stop arguing and go do some experiments.
r
‘No its not, but Australia’s little secret is that we burn more then the USA every year up in the top end but know one but the Cattle farmers on 1000000h care.’
Rummel, we are as brothers. I was a volunteer firey in the Top End and actually participated in the rather thankless task of putting the annual fires out. It was Firies 0, Fires 1.
You might have seen a recent news clip on Fish River CO2 sequestration program. They are doing early season burns which emit about half as much CO2 as late season burns. The difference in CO2 can be calculated and the Indigenous owners are getting CO2 sequestration payments.
[If Gillard’s position is so strong, why did she have to be saved from a potentially embarrassing vote yesterday?]
That was newspaper talk.
In any case the fact is that caucus deferred the vote unanimously. This was their big chance, to show off their superior numbers that Rudd claims exist… crickets.
The only thing Rudd has going for him is Liberal voters making mischief with polling companies when they phone.
Abbott is in exactly the same popularity position with Turnbull – Labor voters making mischief – except even Turnbull doesn’t seem to have the monumental ego that Rudd has to press home a non-existent caucus advantage that is always being talked up, but never, ever eventuates.
We’re not talkng about the entire Australian voting population. We’re talking about around 800,000 suggestible people out of a population of 23,000,000 who flit from one side to the other.
However bad things seem, the parties are roughly equal in voting support. The slight inequality leads to a disproportionate difference in seats, of course, but support for Labor seems relatively solid, if not a winning position.
But the story Rudd peddles is that Labor MHRs and Senators don’t have to work or even fight to win an election. All they have to do is reinstate him and they can settle back in their hammocks and coast to victory.
It’s wrong, but that’s the fantasy he’s trying to sell.
I doubt strongly whether, in the end, they’ll fall for it, but the damage that has been done – how long has it been since a genuine, full discussion on policy has been run in newspapers on on TV? – is monumental.
Rudd seems to be surviving on pure venom at the moment. Gillard has done the hard yards, consulting, negotiating, crafting legislation, getting it through the parliament, while Rudd is just off with his cutesy catch-phrases being Kevin From Queensland.
She’s been PM longer than Rudd ever was and has held it together where he couldn’t.
There’s more to politics than winning elections. Sure, they’re important, but getting things done is a far greater indicator of professionalism and successful politicking than just winning elections.
Labor needs to give up the Messiah obsession and get down to work.
[Privatising the Commonwealth Bank and Qantas spring to mind as good examples from the Hawke Keating era, It was against part policy at the time from memory.]
It may have been against the 1960 party platform.
[3397
Gauss
briefly
I’m a B.Sc, M.Sc & MBA. You don’t know me so please don’t throw me your ideologically….]
I’m not being ideological. I am simply being observant. You feign curiosity, but you are not curious. You are a thorough-going denialist who toys with the logical content of texts, but who never actually engages with the merits of the case.
Were you genuinely interested to inform yourself about the reality of climate change, you would take advantage of the opportunities to investigate the real, contemporary, 3-dimensioned, palpable, visible, recurring and irrevocable changes in the local environment in WA, where you say you live.
But you have no interest in empirical evidence that might upset your paradigm. So what use is science to you? All it does is validate a polemical but a-scientific scepticism.
[I’m a B.Sc, M.Sc & MBA.]
And Clive Palmer’s a Professor. Big deal.
[WWP
Fair enough point but I think you was putting it too strongly.
Privatising the Commonwealth Bank and Qantas spring to mind as good examples from the Hawke Keating era, It was against part policy at the time from memory.]
My underlying point is that it is hard to split Rudd and Gillard on many fronts, and impossible to make the Rudd bad Gillard perfect case so many her put so very often.
Paul Howse and the the members he controls, as well as any actually independently thinking members have to make a choice about leader and have to be responsible for the outcomes. They chose Gillard and the outcomes look to be absolutely disasterous. Many of them will pay with their seats, hopefully Paul and the other clowns responsible for this mess will pay too.
I know in WA the idiots who with minds firmly turned off handed Barnett power in WA did not pay for their foolish and failed decisions.
LOL if you don’t think that Coalition Party is being sexist or anything:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/abbott-the-thinking-persons-prime-minister-20130619-2oj68.html
“Tony Abbott is the thinking woman’s prime minister.”
Written by Member of Liberal Party, Nicolle Flint.
All I learned from a cumulative seven years at* various Unis was that the engineers had the best fun. And I learned that in first year, so the last six years must have been a total waste of time.
*cleaning, dusting, sweeping, that sort of thing.
@mrbenjaminlaw: “Teach the shock-jocks some manners. Make them endure another four years of Gillard. Vote Julia.” —Germaine Greer http://t.co/3roEt1SI70
[The only thing Rudd has going for him is Liberal voters making mischief with polling companies when they phone.]
And the only thing you have going for you is irrational hope and a conspiracy theory.
Ms. Greer does know the maximum term of parliament is three years, right? Unless there’s another constitutional referendum that I am not aware of…
WWP
The outcome of disaster you refer to are the result of the public reacting to disunity.
That is the fault of those being disloyal.
However we know its all over Joel Fitzgibbon no less has told us so.
[Of course, if you were such an accomplished academic, you’d also know that arguing solely from authority is entirely fallacious and doesn’t give your argument any strength.]
Which rules out our host,along with many others.
Display Name
‘The method by which science is debated is to practice it. Stop arguing and go do some experiments.’
I am working on an something involving ‘E’, ‘M’ and ‘C’. As soon as I sort out the value of ‘C’ youse will be the first to know.
Carey
Maybe its just Ms Greer is not that good at counting.
Boerwar
[‘No its not, but Australia’s little secret is that we burn more then the USA every year up in the top end]
Not deliberately. It was one of the things I learnt after being sent to Darwin in 2006. When the Dry Season set in bloody everything burned. I remember standing on the top of the Darwin LNG plant’s tank and seeing plumes of smoke covering 360 degrees. Our Mitchell St apartment during the Dry Season was continually being covered in soot.
[Ms. Greer does know the maximum term of parliament is three years, right? Unless there’s another constitutional referendum that I am not aware of…]
Twice Greer had the chance to show some respect to the PM (Q&A) and on both occasions Greer chose to make fun of the PMs dress sense and her “big arse”.
🙁
3412
poroti
[>BA=Bullshit Artist
In my time it was a “Bugger All”. ]
‘Bloody Anything’
P
Early monsoon lightning, Indigenous people doing traditional or semi-traditional stuff, and cattlemen burning for a green pick all contributed as I recall.
I remember one particularly big fire on VRD which left the black soil plains, climbed onto the mesas and then burned vivid red along the skyline during the night. Spectacular sight, right along the whole horizon. It started from a cookie’s campfire in a stock camp. Asked how his camp fire started the huge conflagration, his explanation was particularly poetic, IMHO: ‘The wind took it.’
Zoomster 3295
You are u8tterly unbelievable and a traitor to labor.
You are just like the Trots who prefer a liberal government because it will make it easier for the revolution to take hold.
The reality Zoomster is that an Abbott majority with no chance of change for at least 6 years may see the face of Australia change beyond repair.
As in Qld you may see unions BANNED effectively and certainly from political association. There will be no ABC, no NBN and an IR climate that resembles the third world
And why. Just because a guy who was kicked in the guts by your heroine, refuses to say he loves her.
Get real!
You are a disgrace to the labor movement.
[Which rules out our host,along with many others.]
Well credentials establish authority, or ethos, but relying solely on them doesn’t mean shit. You need to actually make valid, rational arguments as well.
gauss provides proof via his own flagrant lack of proof.
contrarian cant.
cant and denial.
revisionist clutter.
muddy puddles.
scorched earth.
“@lesmurraySBS: Last night’s game had an average 1.52 million viewers on SBS nationally. Fox Sports: 549,000. Over 2 million across the two networks. Huge.”
“@lesmurraySBS: And kudos must go to communications minister Steve Conroy for mandating that the World Cup qualifiers must be accessible on free TV.”
Boerwar
Looking forward to it!
If Gauss actually has an MBA and an MSc he may well actually believe that Nobel Laureate Birthers and HIV curers know their climate science. Ditto the creationist denier scientists. I know it sound oxymoronic as well as complicated, but there you go.
[3429
confessions
Of course, if you were such an accomplished academic, you’d also know that arguing solely from authority is entirely fallacious and doesn’t give your argument any strength.
Which rules out our host,along with many others.]
I am constantly arguing with myself, which is a form of mental solitaire if that’s what you’re talking about. Occasionally I reach conclusions, but they are quickly forgotten.
As for authority, well I lost mine many years ago. I think I left it on the passenger seat of my old ute one time when I was out shopping. Anyway, it vanished in the same way that sunglasses vanish and I’ve never seen it again. Perhaps it eloped with an argument.
[You need to actually make valid, rational arguments as well.]
We are fortunate that William does this.
mental solitaire? The catholics say that that is a sin under the ‘sins of thought, word and deed catchall’.
88 green bottles hanging on the wall…
[The outcome of disaster you refer to are the result of the public reacting to disunity.
That is the fault of those being disloyal.]
I have before disagreed and i still disagree, it is the public reacting the Gillard that has driven the leadership speculation, not the other way around. If she’d won the election, or having formed minority government polled half decently we would never ever have heard a single whisper of a suggestion on leadership.
i happen to know for a fact that during Carpenter’s term there were members of the WA parliament working constantly to replace him as leader. They never got the numbers and because his polling was good the media never guessed, or if they did know never bothered to publish.
‘valid, rational arguments’ are the worst sort of thing on Bludger. They spoil the fun.
[The reality Zoomster is that an Abbott majority with no chance of change for at least 6 years]
Rubbish
I remember the chatter here when Labor was riding high in 2008 when we would talk of 6 years with PM Rudd then 6 years of PM Gillard then 3 years of PM Shorten.
There is no way you can call the 2016 election before we’ve even voted at the 2013 election.
CC
What did you think of Morrison’s response to the Artillarists’ bad behaviour?
3432
poroti
[Boerwar
‘No its not, but Australia’s little secret is that we burn more then the USA every year up in the top end
Not deliberately. It was one of the things I learnt after being sent to Darwin in 2006. When the Dry Season set in bloody everything burned.]
The choice is deliberate controlled cool burns in the early dry, or random uncontrolled hot burns in the mid-late dry.
No burns is not an option.
The choice is only getting more stark with the spread of various introduced weeds that are far more dangerous firewise.