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.
Ross Gittins has it right in the SMH today.
The LNP attitude is this; The disadvantaged will soon be back at the back of the queue where they belong.
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/rich-win-big-with-class-warfare-in-session-20130827-2so67.html#ixzz2dDL0pykZ
Vote for anybody but Abbott.
I have spoken to a number of disengaged voters this week. None had heard of the Riley video. None.
I have spoken to many of disengaged voters these past weeks. Most had not heard of the gospel truth interview. Most.
And don’t believe it because they can’t believe anyone would be that stupid.
[Trade Minister Richard Marles has challenged Opposition Leader Tony Abbott to use the final leaders’ debate to reveal just what cuts he’ll make if he becomes prime minister.
But Mr Marles reckons that’s unlikely because if Mr Abbott did come clean, people wouldn’t vote for him.
“The challenge tonight in the debate – and given this will be the last debate it’s an important challenge for Tony Abbott – is to actually come clean and explain to the Australian people how he is going to fund a $70 billion black hole,” he told Sky News.
“But I tell you what, he won’t do it tonight because he knows that if he told you, people wouldn’t vote for him.”]
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/18685173/abbott-challenged-to-come-clean-in-debate/
you guys better stop calling Gina names now that she is batting Rudds sav.
Kevin just said therefore
Andrew:
Labor have left it too late now. This sort of framing should’ve happened from day one when he was out scaring the bejesus out of people in his budgie smugglers with his chest fur.
Back then he could’ve been painted as a himbo party boy with no guts for the hard work required as PM. But it’s too late now.
Rosey – I assume he then started alphabetising or numbering stuff.
@tom_watson: I keep getting asked if I think @rupertmurdoch’s papers break the law in Australia. Well, well well. http://t.co/lzZV2Flg4p
Where the hell does it suggest that Gina is backing Rudd?
Kevin just said therefore again
Kevin just said do you know something
Wayne Swan @SwannyQLD 5m
Hockey is planets away from meeting Costello’s Charter of Budget Honesty – about time journos actually called him on it
andrew! numbering stuff now
[Mr Hockey is expected to release PBO estimates that show the $5.5 billion-a-year parental leave scheme will actually make money for the budget over the first two years it operates, according to The Australian.]
LOL Apparently we should introduce more massive schemes like this – thatll get our budget right under control!
numbering and therefore similtaniety
To try and simplify for those who follow Hockeynomics and don’t really understand numbers
Parliamentary Budget Office costings for the forward estimates (2015-16/2016-17)
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
**Tax cut 1.5% to all companies—-Minus $5.5+billion
Real budget bottom line —– MINUS $4.4Billion+
**This is a conservative figure. I can’t imagine that 3000 companies pay 80% of the company tax collected.
It would be a lesser percentage.
In the 1980s Ronald Reagan’s claim that cutting taxes would increase state revenues by increasing economic activity — supply side economics — was dubbed voodoo economics. It turned out upon examination to trade $6 in revenue for every $1 IT recovered.
Today, JoHo will try to show that spending big on PPL will make the regime money as soon as it begins despite no new net revenue being associated with the program. It’s magic pudding day.
Wonder what Tony’s scene stealing stunt will be tonight
Rosemour
It will be a Facebook posting from a waiter upset at no autograph
Mad nodder needs to go viral. If it was Rudd doing it, it would compulsory viewing in Murdoch re education camps for the criminally progressive by now.
I’ve never thought the ‘gospel truth’ as big a gotcha as some here believe.
So Gina backing Rudd?
J341983 Fairfax are not evening trying to hide it any more.
I have been watching their papers over the last couple of weeks. And the evidence is now clear they are towing the labor party line.
Have a look if you want. Find a really damning article of Rudd.
Even yesterdays confrontation with BOF over moving the Navy North got a and I quote ” met a mixed response from defence experts.” from the SMH. You would think that a sydney news paper would be more concerned about 4k jobs been moved out of the state but not when it is a Rudd news paper.
Geoff
News for you. That is callled a balanced approach. It’s not pro Labor. You have been reading biased Newscorpse too long
Geoff Fairfax provides a modest amount of balance to News. Overall though the News bias has trumped Fairfax.
[A LARGE section of Sugarloaf State Conservation Area has been destroyed by greater than predicted mine subsidence from Glencore’s West Wallsend Colliery.]
http://www.theherald.com.au/story/1735241/mine-subsidence-devastates-sugarloaf-photos/?cs=305
‘I’ve never thought the ‘gospel truth’ as big a gotcha as some here believe.’
It’d be an effective way to revive core and non core promises from the mean and tricky party though…
@abcmarkscott: The 20 seats where voters are most divided: the new Vote Compass report. http://t.co/PF63vItGbt
Fundamentally Rudd had a very ordinary day yesterday. He is back to the big thought bubbles lacking any real substance. He is looking very desperate which is not a good sign.
The election campaign has come down to thought bubbles verses simple slogans at 20 paces. We deserve so much more.
haha incorrect guytaur I only have abc news radio going in my car and recently have been looking around to see what news paper I might actually sign up for so have been looking closely at what coverage they have.
There is now a clear trend in fairfax.
Better stop calling her twiggy now guytaur.
[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]’
How does removing the state schemes help the commonwealths budget? What are the “Other adjustments to government spending/revenue-$1.6B”
AA
I follow your accounting method, but strictly speaking, it’s tidier to note that those businesses paying the levy are revenue-neutral vis-a-vis the ATO,so the cost of the scheme is not offset againt the 1.5%, because there is no 1.5%. There’s no new revenue. So it’s $4.4bn down for that reason. The other company tax cuts are a separate revenue giveaway of $5.5bn (less the 1.5% levy I’ve already counted — so about $1.1bn on those figures).
There are clawbacks from the states — assuming the states agree — and since most are LNP states that could be politically tricky.
Geoff
No I am dead right and you are dead wrong. The very example you raised proved it.
Not the result Libs like but it is balanced because it is not propaganda for Labor.
@davidwh/128
FYI, I think both parties done that, they don’t deserve to have majority gov.
Take a fresh look Davidwh tomorrow after the debate and see what headlines fairfax run.
Geoff
Posted Wednesday, August 28, 2013 at 9:30 am | Permalink
Even yesterdays confrontation with BOF over moving the Navy North got a and I quote ” met a mixed response from defence experts.” from the SMH. You would think that a sydney news paper would be more concerned about 4k jobs been moved out of the state but not when it is a Rudd news paper.
========================================================
“Defence experts” can rant all they want. The move was recommended in the White Paper. This is not a Rudd “thought bubble”.
2013 Defence White Paper
Page 49
5.38 The Government has decided not to proceed at this time with long-term planning for establishing
a supplementary east coast fleet base in Brisbane (which had been recommended by the Review).
The significant preliminary cost estimate (in the order of $6 billion), challenges associated with land
acquisition, environmental considerations, the need for extensive dredging and the wider dispersion
to a third fleet base of Royal Australian Navy personnel and training, all suggest that establishing a
fleet base in Brisbane would be challenging and require significant continued investment for it to
remain sustainable
The move to Brisbane was recommended in this White Paper.
Rudd, Gillard, Abbott and a real life Julian Assange appear in a rap version of the election campaign
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWU6tVxzO1I#t=341
Geoff
There are these pesky things called facts. Much as Libs like to ignore them they do count.
poor guytaur you can no longer complain about media coverage. that was the corner stone of your election campaign.
Geoff
Calling a factual paper like the New York Times pro Democrat is a typical Right Wing US tactic.
That way they can convince their side the propaganda is based on facts. End result people believe Limbaugh and you get the Tea Party Candidates.
Actually,( please correct me if I’m wrong Guytaur), but I believe that Guytaur is a Greens voter and as a Greens voter he can complain about media coverage as much as he likes because the Greens get no coverage at all..
kevjohnno
Posted Wednesday, August 28, 2013 at 9:36 am | Permalink
How does removing the state schemes help the commonwealths budget? What are the “Other adjustments to government spending/revenue-$1.6B”
——————————————————
The $1.6B is an unknown. And belongs in the same column as “we will cut costs but don’t know where we will cut and even if we did we won’t tell you because you won’t vote for us if we do”
The Liberals are counting the money from the states because they are expecting the states to give them the money they would usually spend on their state based PPL schemes.
Geoff
Watch Monday’s Media Watch
Abbott presser now 24
zoidlord we seem to be agreeing a lot lately. Should we be worried?
“@xadammr: #ImVotingLiberal because my Indonesian uncle has a fishing boat for sale.”
Poor Geoff seems to be in a bit of a flap when one newspaper group (Fairfax) is being balanced, wonder why?
Primary votes from Reachtel:
ALP 35.7% (-1.2)
LNP 45.5% (-0.4)
Green 10.1% (+1.2)
I think the evidence is clear that the Greens vote is holding if not improving slightly. Can they hold their 3 seats they are defending (Tas, SA, WA), and maybe pick up Vic and NSW? Either way the odds are that they will at least win 3 to keep their number of Senate seats at 9.
I have always thought Fairfax tends to the progressive side of things however they are nowhere near as biased as News has become. Best thing to do is take it all in, be sceptical and challenge and hold your own opinions to yourself.
Thanks AussieAchmed
Sounds a bit like my budget’s fudge factor.
Morning all
Sneaky by hockey to release costings one by one, only does part of three story as pointed out earlier. 4.4b comes in but goes out a well through the tax cut. 1.6b is the franking credit change imo
Palmer was on with Faine very briefly today
Bombers got what they deserved for part 1 of the penalty. ASADA will deliver part 2. I hope North make the 8
Have a great day all, bring on Bowen v Hockey