Essential Research: 52-48 to Coalition

The weekly Essential Research remains the only regularly reporting opinion poll in town, and it continues to show the Coalition with a weaker lead than they scored at the election.

Essential Research is still the only opinion poll operating to its regular schedule, Morgan having sat out last week and Newspoll presumably holding off at least until Labor sorts out its leadership. The latest weekly result has the Coalition’s two-party lead steady at an unspectacular 52-48, from primary votes of 43% for the Coalition (steady on last week), 35% for Labor (down one) and the Greens on 9% (steady). Other questions relate to internet privacy, including a finding that US surveillance programs such as Edward Snowden revealed are opposed by 45% and supported by 24%, and the importance of our various foreign relationships, showing “very important” ratings of 56% for New Zealand, 51% for the United States, 46% for China, 42% for the United Kingdom and 35% for Indonesia.

UPDATE: And now Morgan comes through with its normal multi-mode poll which was skipped last week, carrying the striking headline that Labor leads 50.5-49.5 on respondent-allocated preferences. However, Morgan produces a strikingly different result from preference flows as per the recent election, with the Coalition lead at 53-47. But I find this hard to reconcile with the primary votes: the Coalition is at 42%, 3.5% lower than at the election, Labor at 37%, which is 3.6% higher, and the minor parties only slightly changed at 9% for the Greens, 4.5% for the Palmer United Party and 7.5% for others. Somehow though, two-party preferred comes out as very similar to the election result, which as best as anyone can tell is about 53.5-46.5.

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.

1,828 comments on “Essential Research: 52-48 to Coalition”

Comments Page 36 of 37
1 35 36 37
  1. feeney:

    The historical record more generally might tell us that this is a first term Labor opposition, but the recent history tells us that the ALP should not be complacent.

    Anything can happen, based on recent events, and as we continually see, voters are decoupling from attachment to major parties at a rate of knots with each election. Abbott is unpopular. Do the maths.

  2. j34etc:

    While there is no declared Labor leader I’m okay with no Newspoll.

    As others have said, however, it would be nice to see how Abbott ranks against an empty chair.

  3. J341983

    RE Newspoll – as long as there is broad public acceptance of the process (or disinterest) & no obvious leadershit issues they’ll stand back. When they see a contentious issue develop they’ll be in like Flin.

  4. Having observed many preselection contests over the years, sometimes the members get it exactly right – and sometimes they get it spectacularly wrong.

    Ordinary members vote on personality – they vote for someone they like (or against someone they dislike). Often even quite long term members don’t seem to understand the skills required by an MP, and will vote for someone they like even if that person is clearly unsuited for the role.

    They do get it right when it’s a question of local connections – they’re better able to judge who is genuinely a part of the local community, as opposed to someone who holds a lot of empty titles.

    The factions sometimes get it right and sometimes get it wrong. They get it right because they’re better able to assess whether somebody is going to make a good MP. They get it wrong when they put factional considerations first.

    I’ve seen good candidates rejected by the members and lousy ones elected. I’ve seen good candidates supported by the factions and lousy ones elected. Neither cohort gets it right every time. To suggest that one group is ‘better’ at selecting someone for a particular office than the other is simply wrong.

  5. Confessions @ 1751

    I don’t disagree with much of what you say. I merely point to the reality of what we (Labor) face with a hostile media, and thus our immediate prospects of success.

    We all know that Abbott is a rude, crude, sexist dickhead whose only goal in life was to become PM.

    Despite my reservations about women in prominent Leadership positions-have a look at how Gillard was continually bagged about her appearance, voice,ear lobes, clothes etc -Isincerely hope Tanya Plibersek has a prominent position in the Shadow Cabinet.

    I feel she may be the future for Federal Labor.

  6. Don’t want to lose Louise Pratt, but it may be better if Scott Ludlam and the Sport Party bloke make it into the Senate rather than Pratt and the PUP man.

  7. [Shorten wins. He gets 60 out of 86 causcus votes.
    Thank Albo’s mother for the rabbits.]

    That seems about right from what I’m hearing. The Vic Left have mostly supported Shorten, and there are only a few Ruddites – maybe only Rudd himself – going the other way.

  8. Feeney,

    Labor will always have a problem with business controlled media.

    Our objective has to be reform and sticking up for the family. Everything else is fluff.

  9. Notice on SportsBet that Billy has shortened (sic) from $3 to $2 in the last day.

    Albo has blown from $1.33 to $1.80.

    But as we know, the betting markets mean nothing.

  10. http://www.democracycorps.com/Republican-Party-Project/inside-the-gop-report-on-focus-groups-with-evangelical-tea-party- _+and-moderate-republicans/

    A stunning report/survey by former Clinton aide James Carville
    Based on reports by focus groups
    _____________________________

    This quite brilliant report tells much about the state of the USA today and the Republican Party

    It’s the work of James Carville who was a central figure in Clinton’s first campaign election in 1992
    He coined the phrase”It’s the economy Stupid” and was central to the Democrat strategy in that year

    For this report Carville set up focus groups of Republican voters and used his analaysis of the results to try to answer the reason for the seeming political madness of some Republicans
    He found 3 groups in the main at work .inside the party supporters and voters

    (!)The christian evangelicals
    (The tea Party”
    (The Moderates …old Republicans

    The Evangelicals feel their whole culture is being slowly destroyed and worry about homosexual activists and the gay marriage debate. They also see the decline of “small town American life “which to them is central to the American dream..
    Abortion is also a key issue for them,and they also worry about schools and secular teaching

    They see Obama as a very evil figure,and central to this attack on their world

    (2) The Tea Party

    Largely inspired by Murdoch’s Fox and men like O”Reilly.the Tea Party people are not too worried about the religious or cultural matters,but see the spectre of Marxist Socialism everywhere They hate all government and see Obamacare as a central issue in pushing Obama’s communist agenda (YES really !)

    They also fear Islam and think Obama may be a secret Moslem abd wabts to destroy US capitalism…all conspiracy theories are in play

    (3) The old”moderate ” republican s who share some of the above fears but on the whole are despairing of the party the support fearing that it’s most extreme supporters on the far right will destroy

    The great thing in the report is that the real comments of people are given and often give a vivid impression of their very alarmned state of mind

    Carvile and others have done a superb job with this report which I would commend to any who want to underatand the US crisis
    One is shocked however by the hatred of Obama which come out from manyt in the survey
    Obe hopes his bodyguards are on the alert

    This is brilliant report on the Republican Party

  11. If the triathlon expenses are certainly not legitimate then why did Albanese give it a tick? That’s the problem I have with those of you here who are so certain Abbott was not entitled to claim the trip.

  12. [davidwh

    If the triathlon expenses are certainly not legitimate then why did Albanese give it a tick? That’s the problem I have with those of you here who are so certain Abbott was not entitled to claim the trip.]

    You must realise that to achieve in The Liberal Party one seems to have to be academically challenged but politically smart.

    Sadly the opposite seems to apply to Labor, i.e. accademicaly gifted but politically challenged (stupid?).

  13. Swamprat perhaps but when a person who has been DPM, Leader of the House, a senior minister and possibly in three days LOTO is prepare to give a tick to that sort of travel claim surely that’s an indication of a much wider problem than just Liberal rorting?

  14. davidwh

    i do not know the situation so cannot comment but I was trying to say that Labor MPs tend to be surprisingly passionless about anything.

    Unless you are in the ALP right wing and you get a backbone if “union” rights are threatened or someone supports gay rights. Apart from that you just doze until you get your nice pension.

    Most ALP MPs are probably more comfortable with the Libs mis-managing the show than fighting a losing battle against the status quo!!

    Or am i too depressed and cynical??

  15. Feeney

    Under normal circumstances i would agree with you but this government has been hap-hazard in its early days.

    The first 100 days set the tone for a new government, this one has thus far been sloppy.

    Can it mature of time, yes it can but it wont want to take much longer to get into gear.

  16. The workings of Kim Carr’s mind are a mystery to many. He was not really a Ruddite. He supported removing Rudd in 2010, but then went cold on Gillard and supported Rudd’s various challenges. Apparently he and Albo don’t get on, so presumably he’s done a deal with Shorten. Vamvakinou and Marshall would never vote for Shorten without Carr’s permission.

  17. [He was not really a Ruddite.]

    *Splutters*

    KCarr unhinged big time supporting Rudd over Gillard back in March, presumably on the understanding that he’d get something in return for joining the termite faction. He’s therefore a Ruddist.

  18. davidwh
    Albanese thought Abbott had legitimate official business to attend to while he was in town for the triathlon. He had it all wrong and confused 2011 with the 2010 event. He really should have corrected the things he said.

    victoria – from earlier
    Abbott became LOTO in December 2009, so there was little publicity for his first half iron man. he wasn’t all that important then. The second one was different. He was the new leader and the media were all over him throughout the event. There might as well have been no other competitors, all the coverage was of Abbott with an ‘Oh yeah, some other bloke won’ mention.

  19. Ruddite v Gillardite???

    Apart from ALP wankers, no other Australian cares, about either.

    The immaturity of the personality cults, probably a result of the lack of having anything to say to Australia ….. no wonder the ALP is out of power.

  20. Tasmania’s unemployment rate is an absolute disgrace. Lets all hope abbots focus works for the labour / green state govt seem to have no idea on what they are doing. During a recent visit was astounded at the number of houses for sale in virtually every town I went through. Was just so depressing. Is no wonder the state swung against the labour / greens at the election.

  21. Not that Carr hasn’t voted for someone he doesn’t like before.

    I believe he wont voted for a leadership contender that he didn’t like

    But then again this is politics

  22. Neither Gillard nor Rudd came across as believing in anything fundamental. Neither had a vision for Australia.

    Of course Abbott has zero vision apart from being not- Labor.

    I hope I am wrong, but I find it hard to believe that Shorten, a right-wing union organiser, will have any saleable vision either.

  23. I will re-write that

    Not that Carr hasn’t voted for someone he doesn’t like before.

    I believe he once voted for a leadership contender that he didn’t like

    But then again this is politics

  24. I think Gillard did the leadership thing, particularly her pet topic being education.

    Rudd was side tracked by the GFC and never really seemed to have a policy passion

  25. Psephos,

    I have few views on democracy, as it is an ancient form of government no where followed in the 21st century.

    What are your lofty views of democracy?

  26. Gillard’s pet topic of education led her to “believe” in the New York USA system, a country with close to the worst educational system in the west in terms of equality or quality.

Comments Page 36 of 37
1 35 36 37

Leave a Reply

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