No sign yet of a sample size (UPDATE: It turns out to be a modest 505, with a margin of error approaching 4.5%), but The Australian reports a weekend Newspoll survey of the neighbouring Labor marginals of Robertson and Dobell on the New South Wales central coast points to a combined swing to the Liberals of 7%, more than enough to account for the respective margins of 1.0% and 5.1%. On the primary vote, Labor is on 35% (compared with 43.0% at the 2010 election) and the Coalition is on 50% (41.9%). No detail is provided for other parties and candidates, but evidently Craig Thomson is unlikely to trouble the scoreboard much in his bid to retain Dobell as an independent (UPDATE: The poll has the Greens at 8%, compared with 8.8% in 2010, and others at 7%, compared with 6.3%). On two-party preferred, the Coalition leads 54-46 (53.0-47.0 to Labor in 2010).
The poll also finds the leaders’ personal ratings to be markedly different than the rest of the country, with Kevin Rudd on 39% approval and 54% disapproval compared with 53% and 41% for Tony Abbott, and Abbott leading 47-41 on preferred prime minister. In the national survey conducted on the weekend, Rudd was on 39% and 48% disapproval comapred with 38% and 52% for Tony Abbott, with Rudd leading 46-37 as preferred prime minister.
UPDATE: Now newcomer automated pollster shows a diabolical result for Labor in Lindsay, conducted on Tuesday night from a big sample of 1038. Liberal candidate Fiona Scott’s primary vote is put at no less than 60%, up 17% on 2010, with Labor member David Bradbury on 32%, down 13%. The Guardian quotes the pollster saying a question about how respondents voted in 2010 aligned with the actual result – I will assume this took into account the tendency of poll respondents to over-report having voted for the winner. I am a little more puzzled by the claimed margin of error of 3.7%, which should be more like 3% given the published sample size.
UPDATE 2: Now the Financial Review has a JWS Research automated poll of 568 respondents in Forde with remarkable figures on every front: LNP member Bert van Manen leading Peter Beattie 54% to 33% on the primary vote and 60-40 on two-party preferred, for a swing of 8.4%. As low as van Manen’s national profile may be, the poll gives him a 49% approval rating against 19% disapproval, with Peter Beattie on 35% and 51%. Kevin Rudd’s net approval rating is minus 18% against minus 1% for Tony Abbott. This is one of seven electorate-level JWS Research polls for which results will appear in tomorrow’s Financial Review.
UPDATE 3: Another automated phone poll for Forde, this time from Lonergan in The Guardian, and it’s just as bad for Labor as the JWS Research result. Bert van Manen leads 56% to 34% on the primary vote, with the Greens at just 4% compared with 12% at the 2010 election. While no two-party preferred figure is provided, it would obviously be very similar to JWS Research’s 60-40. The poll has 40% saying Peter Beattie has made them less likely to vote Labor against on 22% for more likely. As with the Lindsay poll, the sample was very large: 1,160.
@davidwh/1345
Yup.
Although it’s kinda funny I was just reading this:
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/8/5/economy/whos-responsible-australias-debt-crisis
“So what does this tell us about whether Rudd or Abbott would be a better economic manager? That the question is irrelevant.”
Reachtel was conducted on the night of August 15.
Has to be something wrong with that Reachtel Poll.
Kingsford Smith is a giveaway
@JJ/1348
2 places not bad for labor, the other two are bad for Labor.
McMahon!
I predict that the requirements for party registration will be tightened up in the next Parliament.
The number of candidates required for an above the line box may increase as well.
I am not saying “yikes!” at those marginals because, frankly, they’re unsurprising.
matt 31 i could allow 46 for a few days … still haven;t given up on unhinging of abbott – but dont expect it to go so low but with this teaparty national msm culture you just dont know. those murdoch front pages are killers … cant believe hes can do this still … what happened to media reform, a real gillard failure
I really don’t mind the tablecloth. Democracy survives and thrives on participation.
That is about a 10% swing in the marginals
Why would they include Blaxland in a group of marginals?
Brandis in a world of trouble on GST
[zoidlord
Posted Friday, August 16, 2013 at 11:03 pm | PERMALINK
@JJ/1348
2 places not bad for labor, the other two are bad for Labor.]
The best result out of those 4 poll results is a 7% swing to the LNP.
“Not too bad”?
Labor won’t lose Bowen surely?
[Why would they include Blaxland in a group of marginals?]
Maybe to demonstrate that Labor are in a dire position in NSW, enough so that even one of their most prime seats is threatened…
Although, it probably is safe.
The ALP will hold Blaxland in my view, but they will also lose 5-10 seats
I’m starting to enjoy this election more and more.
Zoidlord the growth in private debt up to 2008 is a fair argument about why we have been so cautious post-GFC.
@1364 Bloody well hope so – Bowen out with the rest of them. Shame we have to save Albo’s arse.
@Mod Lib/1363
Yes, 150 per marginal polling.
I just did a little summary of the seats likely/possible to fall in NSW:
Greenway
Robertson
Lindsay
Banks
Reid
Page
Eden-Monaro
Parramatta
Dobell
@davidwh/1368
Stopping spending does not stop private debt.
[Yes, 150 per marginal polling.]
Huh?
Six years is a pretty good trot for a reformist government, actually. Well above industry standard. Whitlam only last 2.9. Good effort against hostile forces: outside and in.
Not that I’m conceding: COME ON!
Someone needs to work out a real way to get rid of all politicians. Voting informal doesn’t work :P.
Geoffrey @1358 – “tea party”
aaaahh yeah?
Who is advocating on issues about the US Constitution?
@Mod Lib/1373
Sample is 600 total over 4 seats.
Zoidlord the sample was 600 per seat which is a workable number.
zoidlord:
I think you are confusing an ALP win in Blaxland in this poll with a good result for the ALP. However, given the ALP won Blaxland 62.2% to 37.8% in 2010, the fact that it is line ball now is NOT GOOD NEWS! 🙂
Also, JJ said it was 600 per seat, not 600 across 4 seats:
[James J
Posted Friday, August 16, 2013 at 11:01 pm | PERMALINK
Reachtel
Bennelong 65-35 to Liberal
McMahon 53-47 to Liberal
Kingsford Smith 52-48 to Liberal
Blaxland 52-48 to Labor
Sample size is 600 per seat]
Ah correct myself, 600 per seat.
Do you work for Treasury, zoidlord?
(Just kidding everyone, dont go feral! )
Zoidlord I agree. We need to continue to grow to repay debt over time.
Bad ML 🙁
lefty
What were you saying a few minutes ago .. let’s wait for the polls. Be my guest courteousy of JJ:
[Reachtel
Bennelong 65-35 to Liberal
McMahon 53-47 to Liberal
Kingsford Smith 52-48 to Liberal
Blaxland 52-48 to Labor
Sample size is 600 per seat]
Not surprised by Bennelong – another supa-dupa captain’s pick flown in from beijing “.. that’s the Asian vote secured”, now Beattie ” .. that’s the Qld vote sewn up”. Rudd is making Gillard look good.
[DisplayName
Posted Friday, August 16, 2013 at 11:16 pm | PERMALINK
Someone needs to work out a real way to get rid of all politicians. Voting informal doesn’t work]
Better than telling one side or another that you are happy with how things are right now.
Dont you reckon it would send a very strong message if the informal rate doubled or tripled this election?
Compact Crank
Posted Friday, August 16, 2013 at 11:16 pm | PERMALINK
Geoffrey @1358 – “tea party”
aaaahh yeah?
Who is advocating on issues about the US Constitution?
—-o yeah. so who is advocating anything?
New thread.
Sorry, I just couldn’t resist.
I agree that I should have though, if that is any consolation! :devil:
Belated thanks to James.
They sure are very ugly numbers for the ALP in western Sydney, no escaping that.
Mod
No. How are they supposed to know what you’re telling them? In other words, you need some other mechanism for sending messages anyway. It’s best to solve problems in the right place :P.
What the people need now is a spell of GREY TORY MEDIOCRITY!
I for one will enjoy one aspect: let’s see how the LNP go in tough times. This is normally when they get turfed, when the going gets tough.
Lets examine the historical record:
WW1: War breaks out in middle of election campaign. Cook Liberal government TURFED!
1929; Depression. Bruce government TURFED!
1941: Menzies/Fadden government TURFED! pacfiic war ensues.
1972, oil shocks, Britain joins common market, inflation high,unemployment at 10-year peak (2.14% – LOL): McMahon government TURFED!
1983 Old Australian settlement (protectionism) at dead end: Fraser govt TURFED!
2007 Everyone bored shitless – national crisis levels. Howard government TURFED!
Its no coincidence punters.
So lets see now. Put the Tories in the headlights at a difficult time of change.
I predict one term.
Abbott has the election in the bag.
The question now is how big will the majority be and can the conservatives win control of the senate
Sean Tisme
Posted Friday, August 16, 2013 at 10:05 pm | Permalink
People who quote the 40% figure rely on wikileaks
The Australian Parliamentary Library
A total of 1637 people had been detained in the Nauru and Manus facilities. Of these, 1153 (70 per cent) were ultimately resettled in Australia or other countries. Of those who were resettled 705 (around 61 per cent) were resettled in Australia.
FFS… Are you purposely being stupid? You brought this crap up a few weeks ago and you got pulled up on it and now you are spouting the same crap again.
Look very very carefully at the words:
“Of these, 1153 (70 per cent) were ultimately resettled in Australia OR other countries”
“Of THOSE who were RESETTLED 705 (around 61 per cent) were resettled in Australia.]”
Now what is 61% of 70%?? And there is your answer 42.7%
Now please stop with the crap, only around 42% of people sent to the Pacific Solution ended up in Australia.
—————————————————–
You argument about the numbers/percentage is an admission that the boats didn’t stop. How could all those people be settled in Australia or anywhere else if the boats weren’t coming.
It is an admission that the PS stopped the boats is a lie. The Govt stopped counting the boats because the landed on territory that had been excised form the Aust Immigration Zone by Howard
Of these, 1153 (70 per cent) were ultimately resettled in Australia or other countries.
Sean Tisme
Posted Friday, August 16, 2013 at 10:39 pm | Permalink
This is why we need online voting would make things much easier and it means I don’t have to get out of bed to vote
——————————————————–
Perhaps arrangements could be made for you to vote Centrelink when you hand in your dole paperwork