A ReachTEL automated phone poll of 3500 respondents, conducted on Monday and released today by Channel Seven, has the Coalition leading 53-47, unchanged from the last national ReachTEL poll on August 10. The only primary vote provided at this stage is that Labor is down 1.2% to 35.7%. The poll also finds the Coalition paid parental leave scheme supported by 30% and opposed by 48.4%, Tony Abbott leading Kevin Rudd on ReachTEL’s idiosyncratic preferred prime minister measure by 53.6-46.4, 41.9% believing Labor made the right choice in replacing Julia Gillard with Kevin Rudd against 40.5% for the wrong choice and 74% expecting the Coalition to win the election.
We also had yesterday a Galaxy automated phone poll of 575 respondents from the northern Adelaide fringe seat of Wakefield courtesy of The Advertiser, which is presumably treating us progressively to polling from South Australia’s most marginal seats. This one showed Labor’s Nick Champion leading his Liberal challenger Tom Zorich 55-45, suggesting a swing to the Liberals of between 5% and 6%. The primary votes were 45% for Champion and 35% for Zorich.
Further raw material for tea-leaf reading from The Australian, whose lead story yesterday essentially consisted of an account of where its reporters believe things to stand. This was consolidated into a “call of the card” laying out which seats might change hands and with what likelihood. Those of you who might wish to write this off as a contrivance of Murdoch propagandists can feel free, but since the aggregate findings sit pretty well with BludgerTrack, I’m inclined to regard it as welcome intelligence as to how the campaigns are seeing things.
UPDATE: BludgerTrack has since been updated with big-sample state breakdowns provided to me by ReachTEL, so some of the numbers cited below have changed quite a bit.
Where BludgerTrack presently counts eight losses for Labor in New South Wales, The Australian’s list sees six as likely if you include Dobell (which I do) plus one strong chance and two possibles. Aside from Dobell (margin 5.2%), the seats listed as likely losses are Labor’s five most marginal: Greenway (0.9%), Robertson (1.1%), Lindsay (1.2%), Banks (1.5%) and Reid (2.7%). However, the picture of a uniform swing breaks down with Werriwa (6.8%) being rated a strong chance and Kingsford Smith (5.2%) and McMahon (7.9%) as possibilities. So while Labor has fires to fight all over Sydney and the central coast, it appears set to be spared in its seats further afield, namely Eden-Monaro (4.2%), Page (4.2%) and Richmond (7.0%). There also appears to be inconsistency in Sydney to the extent that Parramatta (4.4%) and Barton (6.9%) are not listed.
In Victoria, The Australian’s assessment is well in line with BludgerTrack’s call of three Liberal gains in having two listed as likely (Corangamite on 0.3% and La Trobe on 1.7%) and another as a strong chance (Deakin on 0.9%). Labor’s next most marginal seat in Victoria, Chisholm (5.8%), is evidently considered a bridge too far. The only seat featured from South Australia is the “strong chance” of Hindmarsh (6.1%), but BludgerTrack is not quite seeing it that way, the swing currently recorded there being lower than what most observers expect.
Redressing all that slightly is a list of seats which Labor might gain, albeit that it is very short. Brisbane (1.2%) is rated a “likely Coalition loss”, and despite what published polls might say Peter Beattie is rated a strong chance in Forde (1.7%). The Western Australian seat of Hasluck (0.6%) is also listed as a possible Labor gain. However, a report elsewhere in the paper cites Labor MPs saying hopes there have faded, while Andrew Probyn of The West Australian today relates that Liberal polling has them leading 53-47 from 46% of the primary vote against 36% for Labor and 9% for the Greens.
Queensland and Western Australia also have seats listed on the other side of the ledger, especially Queensland. With Queensland we find the one serious breakdown with a BludgerTrack projection, one which in this case I have long been noting as problematic. The Australian lists Moreton (1.2%), Petrie (2.6%) and Capricornia (3.7%) as likely Labor losses, to which are added the strong chance of Blair (4.3%) and the possibility of Kevin Rudd indeed losing Griffith (8.5%). However, the latter seems a bit hard to credit if neighbouring Brisbane is to be deemed a likely Labor gain, and Lilley (3.2%), Rankin (5.4%) and Oxley (5.8%) left off the chopping block.
In Western Australia, Labor’s possible gain of Hasluck is balanced by a possible loss of Brand (3.4%). This tends to confirm my suspicion that BludgerTrack, on which Labor’s numbers in WA have soured considerably recently, is erring slightly on the harsh side with respect to Labor. Bass and Braddon are listed as likely Labor losses for Tasmania, with Lyons (12.3%) only rated a possibility and Franklin (10.8%) not in play. Powered by what may have been an exaggerated result from ReachTEL on the weekend, BludgerTrack is calling it three losses for Labor in Tasmania with only one seat spared. The Northern Territory seat of Lingiari (3.8%) is rated by The Australian as a possible loss, while BludgerTrack has it as likely.
LNP ad!
A vote for Katter is a vote for Rudd.
Come now Confessions, awkward quotations are always of interest.
[We have a carbon price.
It’s an ETS.
What does Abbott call it? A TAX!]
Rudd calls Labors Carbon Tax a Carbon Tax.
Are your mob still in denial?
CONFESSIONS
Yes thank you about 80% OK now
[Troy Bramston @TroyBramston 34m
Peter Dutton told me @SkyNewsAust #CampaignSaturday that there were good/bad MedicareLocals. Didn’t rule out shutting any after a review.]
Abbott is on record now, however.
yes, no probs
AA @1223
Wow. You are really unhinging tonight. Personal attacks and far more mindless rhetoric than usual. Sure you are feeling right ?
Hockey love him or loath him has released more information today (and recently) than the slimy hypocritical ALP at any time in the history of time before the election. I guess by ALP standards, 15 hours before the election is still the benchmark.
Why don’t you get your head out of your government paid arse and actually critique the costings presented ? Or are you too scared that the massive propaganda campaign paid by your masters has now been called out for what it is ; mindless bullshit ? The ALP drones cry about “show us the costings” and when they are they cry “they are shit costings”. FFS why don’t you just make up your minds ?
And on the PPL, Shorten on Q&A couldn’t bring it upon himself to say the PPL actually is better for ALL working women and Messiah Kev still hasn’t answered why his staff are entitled to better PPL than other workers.
ESJ:
Abbott has an entire career’s worth of them.
@Dee/1251
No problem.
Katter is a colorful person, compared to Abbott.
I skipped the debate because I was busy and frankly I doubt it’d make much difference, unless Abbott’s dacks fell down – which they didn’t.
Of course, I am unsurprised to see the usual hacks on both sides calling it a glorious victory for their guy. I note that the “worms” for the different channels all call it for Rudd, except 7 again. I guess they’re still using the “opt in” system. It’s all irrelevant of course.
I believe the bookies have widened the price since the end of the debate, demonstrating Rudd’s failure to land a knockout blow has closed one of the few remaining avenues to victory.
Funniest comment on here of the night: Edward StJohn, trying to convince everybody he’s an independent and had reached the conclusion that Abbott had won with an open mind. This is in spite of literally everything else he’s posted.
[And on the PPL, Shorten on Q&A couldn’t bring it upon himself to say the PPL actually is better for ALL working women]
It was a terrible slip by Shorten. He had two options: either say no, women would be worse off under the coalition’s PPL, and leave it as a ‘he said, she said’ nowheresville. Or reply that he couldn’t say because nobody knows any of the details of the coalition’s policies.
@morpheus/1257
ha, And who is better off when you tax companies and people just to have a kid? No one.
Morpheus Something like this?
GROSS COST of the leave scheme——————-$9.8B
Removing existing Labor scheme——————-$3.7B
Removing existing commonwealth/state schemes—–$1.2B
Other adjustments to government spending/revenue-$1.6B
NET COST of the leave scheme———————$3.3B
PLUS
Income from 1.5% company tax levy—————-$4.4B
IMPACT ON BUDGET BOTTOM LINE——————–+$1.1B
————————————————————————————–
Income from 1.5% on 3000 companies = $4.4b
Loss of income from 3000 companies 1.5% tax cut = $4.4b+
Plus because the 1.5% tax cut is on ALL companies
Budget overall has a negative income
[Abbott vows to keep Medicare Locals]
Headline at ABC news online.
I reckon that will come back to haunt Abbott when he’s trying to slink away from his election promises post election.
[Rudd calls Labors Carbon Tax a Carbon Tax.
Are your mob still in denial?]
Nope you are still lying. There is no excuse it is just a lie.
And a pretty stupid one.
The ALP drones cry about “show us the costings” and when they are they cry “they are shit costings”. FFS why don’t you just make up your minds ?
Because they are shit costings. They are a sham. They are a lie. They are so from being factual they could have done by the Brothers Grimm in one of their fairy tales.
Sean Tisme
Posted Wednesday, August 28, 2013 at 9:20 pm | Permalink
We have a carbon price.
It’s an ETS.
What does Abbott call it? A TAX!
Rudd calls Labors Carbon Tax a Carbon Tax.
Are your mob still in denial?
———————————————————
Pretty much all Labor call it a tax when talking to Liberals. Got to keep the wording simple so they understand
Did someone say David Speers was good on Teh Debate tonight?
k17
[Serious query. Is the heavy pro-Lib betting a manifestation of the same delusion that saw the republicans ignore all the polls and adopt an almost religious conviction they were going to win. I think a lot of Libs have indoctrinated themselves that after 3 years ahead in the polls they must beat an illegitimate labor govt.]
I sense that it’s more the feeling that libs have been in front for so long in the polls, and the media reminding the punters relentlessly that its a forgone conclusion.
I swear some people actually think that the market is some sort of magic all knowing predictor regardless of the opinion polls.
If the polls show 50/50 on, say the 5th september, and the odds are still heavily favoring the libs, it won’t be an accurate predictor. Unless there are some decent marginal polls about.
The polls as they are now sort of reflect the odds , but should imo be about alp $5.00. Depends on the amount of money flowing I guess.
Never think that one’s vote is not influenced.
I think I may well have become an undecided voter. And for the first ever time, informal.
At this point, in Boothby, I am voting Julia Gillard.
At this point, after various swing points, Nick Xenophon is helping me to decide my vote.
Which is not vote for him.
morpheus
Posted Wednesday, August 28, 2013 at 9:23 pm | Permalink
AA @1223
Why don’t you get your head out of your government paid arse
——————————————————–
Not that’s its really any of your business but I don’t work for government or the Labor Party – I am now a small business owner.
I retired and started my own business and doing very well.
Ducky. You cannot believe!
This little black duck
Posted Wednesday, August 28, 2013 at 9:33 pm | Permalink
Did someone say David Speers was good on Teh Debate tonight?
—————————————————-
he scored well according to the worm….hehehe
The only worm I’m interested in is the one at the bottom of a bottle of tequila
Crikey,
The rate of refresh here is thirty seconds or more. It is not only in peak hours but always.
Problem?
What?
What what!
Who knows.
Here’s an oldie but a goodie from 2008 – audio of Heavy Kevvie and Bowen announcing fuelwatch. Makes one have a chuckle these days
http://australianpolitics.com/audio/2000-2009/2008-archive
[The only worm I’m interested in is the one at the bottom of a bottle of tequila]
The ones in our compost heaps are doing great work and not complaining.
Still up, ESJ.
Glad you are enjoying your VCR’s.
@Edward StJohn/1278
You still going on about that, geez.
Impossible land a knockout blow in these heavily Abbott friendly environments. He is protected.
Here’s some lovely memories of the Home Insulation Scheme too.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-02-19/garrett-scraps-insulation-scheme/336610
ESJ.
Can I help you out. Old Dear. Spare you rising to early. After such a late night.
Edward StJohn
Posted Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 6:22 am | Permalink
Only 9 more sleeps to the day of fundamental injustice mk2
ESJ is recidivising.
Good to see. Much fun to be had.
[ Here’s an oldie but a goodie from 2008 – audio of Heavy Kevvie and Bowen announcing fuelwatch. Makes one have a chuckle these days ]
schadenfreude mate it comes back to bite
And Labor…ffs more ads directed to retirees…..and with very clear upfront message…you would think they would be saturating this message everywhere..the message that Abbott will be cutting their retirement income, it is his policy.
I know it was Joe that started it but from my understanding the $70 Billion was always incorrect and the actual number is closer to $50 Billion although in recent times economist have forecast a budget shortfall of $30 Billion
So lets forget the $70 Billion which leaves us with a $30 Billion to $50 Billion dollar hole.
Business Spectator keeps saying the Liberals have a 30 page action plan, we the voters would like to see it sooner than later.
Carey Moore
Posted Wednesday, August 28, 2013 at 9:25 pm | PERMALINK
I skipped the debate because I was busy and frankly I doubt it’d make much difference, unless Abbott’s dacks fell down – which they didn’t.
Of course, I am unsurprised to see the usual hacks on both sides calling it a glorious victory for their guy. I note that the “worms” for the different channels all call it for Rudd, except 7 again. I guess they’re still using the “opt in” system. It’s all irrelevant of course.
I believe the bookies have widened the price since the end of the debate, demonstrating Rudd’s failure to land a knockout blow has closed one of the few remaining avenues to victory.
Funniest comment on here of the night: Edward StJohn, trying to convince everybody he’s an independent and had reached the conclusion that Abbott had won with an open mind. This is in spite of literally everything else he’s posted.
——–boo hoo and you trying to convince of good commentary about a debate did not see (it is readily available to review?)
to each their own …. how can you knock out someone punch drunk? i can remember to overlook for entries – rudd went very well
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-20/swan-dumps-surplus-pledge/4438508
And of course some of the Laboristii budget discipline should never be forgotten and wont be forgotten.
Do you need any more reminders as to why day of fundamental injustice mk2 is coming?
No doubt covered already but Morgan reactor gave a clear win to Rudd.
Malcolm Fraser became Prime Minister in November 1975, the Government sector had net financial assets – that is, there was negative net government debt equal to 2.7% of GDP.
The Fraser Government, with John Howard as Treasurer for the bulk of that time, ended its time in office with net government debt equal to 7.5% of GDP in 1983-84.
Mr Abbott recently said “prudent fiscal management is in the Coalition’s DNA”. The facts suggest otherwise.
[boo hoo and you trying to convince of good commentary about a debate did not see (it is readily available to review?)
to each their own …. how can you knock out someone punch drunk? i can remember to overlook for entries – rudd went very well]
Okay, geoffrey. Unbiased source that you are. BTW, my post was just reporting the things I have seen (for instance, betting prices widening has nothing to do with whether I watched or not)
That the PM could win the RH Forum audience’s vote when they were hand-picked by one of Murdoch gun-for-hire pollsters is downright Homeric.
Galaxy’s boss will catch hell from Rupes now, just like the Murdoch newspapers’ boss who was recently sacked for failing to pile up a sufficiently high manure mountain to suit the American Billionaire’s “taste”.
Those 30-year bans on Howard’s time as treasurer will soon be up. We look forward to reading the cabinet papers. In the meantime, all we have to work on are the figures in the Reserve Bank Bulletin.
They show that John Howard is the only treasurer in Australia’s history who’s been able to engineer – simultaneously – double-digit inflation (December 1981 to June 1983), double-digit levels of unemployment (April to October 1983) and double-digit interest rates (November 1980 to October 1983).
In the June quarter of 1983, inflation was 11.1%, the unemployment rate was 10.2% and the official cash rate averaged 12.08%.
The election in March 1983 meant that Labor presided over this economic misery, even though they obviously had not created these outcomes.
Hark.
Tanya Plibersek’s voice on 891.
@Edward StJohn/1290
Yet Joe Hockey earlier this year was claiming Budget Surplus & Surplus every year.
Yet ignored by the election campaign?
http://www.news.com.au/national-news/joe-hockey-pledges-coalition-will-deliver-first-year-budget-surplus/story-fncynjr2-1226563213170
“But Mr Hockey says he hasn’t abandoned a pledge made last year to deliver a surplus in the coalition government’s first year.”
“”Based on the numbers published today we will deliver a surplus in our first year and every year after that.””
By April, no longer that promise:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/04/19/joe-finally-sees-the-light-on-the-road-to-treasury/?wpmp_switcher=mobile
“Opposition Leader Tony Abbott, for once on the same songsheet as his shadow treasurer, reinforced this by saying “all bets are off” on a surplus yesterday. He also indicated the Coalition was preparing to dump its 1.5% cut in corporate tax.”
Now election time, Back to committing back to surplus sooner than Labor.
To still archive this aim, massive cuts need to be taken into consideration.
Malcolm Fraser and for most of his prime ministership, treasurer John Howard, recorded six deficits in seven years.
The $70 billion came from one of those throw away lines politicians make when they should no better and which never was a confirmed savings amount.
Make that three minute plus, Crikey.