Nielsen: 50-50

The first Nielsen poll since the leadership change follows the general trend in finding Labor drawing level with the Coalition after spending a long period in some place lower than the doldrums.

GhostWhoVotes relates that the first Nielsen poll since the leadership change has Labor bouncing from 57-43 behind to dead level, from primary votes of 39% for Labor (up 10), 44% for the Coalition (down three) and 9% for the Greens (down two). Kevin Rudd’s personal ratings are 51% approve and 43% disapprove, while Tony Abbott is on 41% (down three) and 56% disapprove (up three). Rudd leads as preferred prime minister by 55-41. More to follow.

UPDATE: Full tables plus leadership attributes results, courtesy as usual of the ghost with the most.

UPDATE 2 (Essential Research): The ever inflexible Essential Research still has the Coalition lead at 52-48, although Labor is up a point on last week to 39% with the Coalition steady on 46% and the Greens down one to 7%. Also featured are personal approval ratings, with Kevin Rudd on 50% approve and 35% disapprove against 39% and 51% for Tony Abbott, with Rudd leading 50-35 as preferred prime minister. There is also very strong support for Kevin Rudd’s notion that party leaders should be chosen by members as well as caucus, with 56% approval and 19% disapproval. A question on the state of the economy finds a sharp deterioration since April, with good down nine points to 36% and poor up four to 30%, with the usual huge disparities according to voting intention. Thirty-eight per cent thought the economy headed in the right direction, up two since July, against 42% for the wrong direction, up three. There is also a question on respondents’ personal involvement in the past week, showing 56% had watched federal politicians on television, 50% discussed federal politics with friends and family, and 43% had seen television advertising by the parties.

UPDATE 3 (Morgan): Morgan has both Labor and the Coalition up on the primary vote, respectively by half a point to 42% and 1.5% to 41%, with another bad poll showing for the Greens who are down 1.5% to 7%. This causes last week’s attention-grabbing 54.5-45.5 lead on two-party preferred to rein in to 52.5-47.5, but the size of Labor’s lead last week was inflated by a blowout in respondent-allocated preferences which has come down somewhat this week. On the stable measure of two-party preferred using preference flows from the previous election, the change is from 52.5-47.5 to 51.5-48.5. And bless their hearts, they are continuing to provide weekly state breakdowns, which find the position in Queensland returning to a believable situation of parity between the two parties after last week’s blowout of 57-43 to Labor.

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.

2,530 comments on “Nielsen: 50-50”

Comments Page 46 of 51
1 45 46 47 51
  1. Did Mark ask Uhlmann to let him answer the question?
    Uhlmann needs to be challenged.

    By golly Bob Carr doesn’t hold back.
    Think he told Alberici to be quiet if she wanted to hear the answer.
    I’ve also heard Bob ask the interviewer if they want to answer their own question…..go ahead.

  2. Announement: Mod Lib officially dissociates from Mod Lib’s opinion until such time as Tom Hawkins, swamprat, and ruawake change their opinions

  3. scorpio@2242

    Watch Rudd’ s lower lip quiver when he gets the hint of a difficult question. Wait till he gets some serious questions from journalists.


    Blimey eh!~ I saw a clip where Tony Abbott went comatose and lost the power of speech after a Journalist, by the name of Riley, I believe, hit him with a question that he had at least two hours notice of.

    It would would be a wonder of modern journalism and extreme mirth if he got hit with a question straight off the cuff with no warning!

    I’d love to see that!

    Hi scorps, welcome back.

  4. [The Coalition’s Direct Action policy is now a joke. Today is Greg Hunt’s last chance to quit in order to save some dignity and credibility for what remains of his career. It would be more honest for Abbott to disown it and contest the election from a denialist perspective, making the election a referendum on anthropogenic global warming and Australia’s role in causing and abating it. ]
    http://andrewelder.blogspot.com.au/2013/07/sweetening-base.html

    JBishop was certainly well-versed in the denialist lines last night. From memory the audience weren’t buying it though.

  5. The betting stuff reminds me of the Gillard polling days.

    Wowee, we have gone from 44% TPP to 46% TPP, Gillards a shoe-in!

    It amazes me how people can get so excited… so far behind

  6. Even though the question was a bit silly, we all agree Abbott is a bit silly anyway, don’t we?

    The question itself doesn’t really detract from that underlying reality :devil:

  7. [Bob Ellis is a Labor Party member and former ALP speechwriter.]
    I thought Bob Ellis ditched his Labor Party membership????

  8. Okay, Sean. Whatever. From my viewpoint, it’s kinda you who seems like he’s grasping at straws. Added to that opinion is your attempt to trivialise what is an extremely sharp trend in betting odds.

    If and when the odds even (or Labor has better odds) don’t forget to just dismiss the betters as mugs and claim they’re just as clueless as everyone else (or claim the Labor hacks have too much money)

  9. Dee.

    ‘By golly Bob Carr doesn’t hold back’.

    Bob has certainly demonstrated increasing impatience with don’t talk CRAP.

    To paraphrase.

  10. Well, Scorpio.

    Gotta a few hours.

    Otherwise, fine.

    So pleased about your Eli, hope all is well.

    Posted here but I think you missed it.

  11. crikey

    [Bob has certainly demonstrated increasing impatience with don’t talk CRAP.]

    All Ministers should challenge CRAP from uneducated murdochian idiots (formerly known as “journalists”)

  12. Kitchen Cabinet.

    T’was ever tiring.

    Another of Mark Scott’s platforms coming to the aid of (the Liberal) party.

  13. Adams certainly ditched his membership; surprisingly taken in by Rudd’s pretending to be sincere I suppose. Maybe Ellis did too.

  14. 66% of Liberal supporters, over 90% of the Nationals Party Room, and over half the Liberal Party Room think that 97% of the world’s climate scientists are wRONg.

    Abbott of course believes that (a) carbon dioxide is weightless at the same time as he wants to reduce emissions by millions of tons.
    (b) Abbott thinks that the invisible nature of CO2 is, somehow, significant enough for him to make a science idiot of himself.
    (c) Abbott thinks that climate science is crap
    (d) Abbott believes that 97% of the world’s climate scientists combined know far less about climate science than he does. Because they are wrong.

  15. Sean

    [Abbotts Carbon Reduction Action Plan will cut pollution more than a floating ETS]

    But why do the Liberals want to waste money on an invisible gas that does nothing? Is it more Liberal waste?

    A way of paying taxpayer funds to rich mates, for a weightless invisible thingie?

  16. bemused,

    [ Hi scorps, welcome back. ]

    Hello Bemused. I’ve been a fairly constant supporter of this blog for over 6 years and I loved many of its contributors dearly for their wisdom & friendship.

    I have even been tolerant enough to put up with unwarranted criticism but I don’t know that I could ever contribute here with the enthusiasm that I used to after the treatment I was subjected to some time ago by the host & one of his favoured irregular contributors.

  17. Cud

    Bob Carr…..He didn’t appear anywhere today as far as I know.
    I was speaking about an interview he did with Alberici and how he took her combative style head on.

    Think we should see more of it from our ministers.
    It only takes one or two challenges for the message to sink in to the interviewer.

  18. My grandma always said what you can’t see can’t hurt you hence the importance of CO2’s invisibility. Vote 1 Abbott – Abbott and my grandma are more correct than 95% of scientists.

  19. Confessions
    [WAsn’t that Phillip Adams who ditched his membership?]

    Mmmmmmm……….perhaps he didn’t!
    For some reason I thought he ditched the ALP.
    Threw crap all over it and in the meanwhile promoted Battlelines for Rabbott.

  20. Sean Tisme

    [
    Abbotts Carbon Reduction Action Plan will cut pollution more than a floating ETS]
    😆 Your troll parody is coming on in leaps and bo

  21. Hey Boerwar

    Is it when you have bark beetle nightmares that you break out in stupid posts like at @ 2283? You seem to have bark beetles and the 97% crap on the mind. Is there a connection? 😉 😉 😉

  22. davidwh,

    well that one was a bit of a joke(note the spelling) but I do believe Abbotts direct action will cut more pollution than a linked EU ETS.

    Think about this for a moment.. we have no signed agreement with the EU and Australian companies can’t buy EU permits. To get down to $6 a ton the Australian government will need to flood the market with carbon credits.

    Abbotts plan meanwhile involves planting trees, solar, CO2 capture, etc etc. Actual stuff that will reduce CO2 emissions.

    So now you have a choice between Carbon permits pretty much given away for free and Abbotts plan of planting trees.

  23. Dee:

    To be honest, I wouldn’t really know about Ellis. I rarely read anything he writes, just the odd piece that floats across my screen from time to time. 🙂

  24. triton

    [
    Adams certainly ditched his membership; surprisingly taken in by Rudd’s pretending to be sincere I suppose.]
    Even as an LNL listener from the year dot I was amazed and still can not understand PA’s reaction to the dumping of Rudd. It seemed all out of proportion.

  25. Sean I doubt either plan will cut emissions to any material extent at current planned policy levels but I personally support market based policies over regulation. But it’s all more hype than good policy if the outcome is overall reduction of global emissions.

  26. @Sean/2295

    Abbott policy is just green army, which is basically what Howard did.

    Didn’t work and became expansive.

Comments Page 46 of 51
1 45 46 47 51

Leave a Reply

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