Morgan: 52.5-47.5 to Labor

The Christmas-New Year poll drought ends courtesy of a new result from Morgan, which suggests little has changed over the break.

Morgan has released what it describes as the “first major public opinion poll of 2014”, though it could just as easily have dropped the “major”. It provides no indication of festive cheer softening attitudes towards the new government, showing the Coalition down 1.5% on the primary vote to 39% with Labor also down half a point to 38%, the Greens up half a point to 10.5% and the Palmer United Party steady on 3.5%. That translates to a 53-47 lead to Labor on 2013 preference flows and 52.5-47.5 on the headline respondent-allocated figure. As has been Morgan’s form for a while now, this poll combines its regular weekend face-to-face polling with SMS component, in this case encompassing 2527 respondents from the two weekends past. The first Essential Research result for the year should be with us tomorrow.

UPDATE: Little change also from Essential Research, which opens it account for the year with a result from the polling period of Friday to Monday only, rather than its two-week rolling average. This has the Coalition leading 51-49, with the Coalition, Labor and the Greens each up a point on the primary vote to 45%, 38% and 8% respectively, with the Palmer United Party steady on 4% and others down two to 6%. Also featured are the monthly personal ratings, showing a slight improvement for Tony Abbott – up two on approval to 47% and down three on disapproval to 43% – and a softening for Bill Shorten, down four to 35% and up one to 32%. Preferred prime minister is little changed, Abbott’s lead shifting from 43-33 to 42-31. The poll also finds strong opposition to fees for GP visits, with 28% approving and 64% disapproving, and 47% support for Australia becoming a republic at the end of the Queen’s reign against 32% opposed.

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.

1,586 comments on “Morgan: 52.5-47.5 to Labor”

  1. Steve Price on 2GB clears up this climate change thingy about 2 minutes ago. Heatwaves and record temperatures ? “It is just summer weather events”

  2. [Steve Price on 2GB clears up this climate change thingy about 2 minutes ago. Heatwaves and record temperatures ? “It is just summer weather events”]

    There is a real danger that people like Steve Price will have an input to the review of the school curriculum on science and history.

  3. Player One 1195
    ___________
    While I agree with you in the main…I am still amazed at the veenmence and sheer madness of the hard-line Denialists

    On Menzies House there is a fine example of same
    I have posted some critiques of their views and have received a torrent of nasty,ignorant …and silly..comments..and the Blog owner is also given to such
    every tactic is used to denigrate scientists and science.

    I have e seen the same in the US on sites like that…but I am sad to see the denialists here are just a mad and obdurate as their US
    counterparts

    DO have a look and see….

  4. [ Steve Price on 2GB clears up this climate change thingy about 2 minutes ago. Heatwaves and record temperatures ? “It is just summer weather events” ]

    Summer on Mercury, perhaps.

  5. [97% of scientists know more than a bunch of paid Murdoch mercenaries.

    End of story.]

    If only it *was*!

    What I think is happening is that we are seeing Plan B.

    Most people around the world now accept thatClimate Change is really happening.

    So the Denial gang is trying to – to use one of their favourite words – “adapt” to that general acceptance. They have to figure out a way to admit that Climate Change is real, like their target audience does, or risk losing them altogether.

    This would have all been focus-grouped to within a millimetre of its life. If you outright deny Climate Change is real, most punters will switch off then and there. This is progress for the Climateers compared to a couple of years back.

    The message to sell now is “adaptation”… “It’s effin’ hot! Get used to it!”

    In the meantime, do nothing to reverse the warming trend.

    On the Climateer side, the most powerful argument is one mentioned above: put more energy *into* a closed system… get more work *out* of it. That energy has to go somewhere.

    More climate energy (heat) equals bigger storms and droughts, more disruptions to normal global air and ocean circulation patterns and, as a result, apparently counter-intuitive events like Polar Vortex shifts and ice fields forming in Antarctic summers. Extra heat has been pushing that vortex around, and causing those bergs in the Antarctic to break up, drift into floes, and then weld themselves together elsewhere.

    We already DO have a big drought happening in Australia now. It just hasn’t made it to the coastal areas yet. But it will. And when it does, the weight of public opinion will shift back to a warming planet that we need to do something about, rather than just loll around waiting for others to “adapt”.

    We could be seeing the breakup, not only of ice in Antarctic zones, but of the Denial industry.

    Sure, they’re covering it up with bluster, but maybe only because they realize the game is about to be comprehensively up. Another year of drought and bushfires world-wide and the majority who already believes in AGW will start wanting something done about it.

    I was always in despair at how Labor let the argument get down to nitpicking over a few bucks here or there in compensation for the Carbon Tax.

  6. [ I have e seen the same in the US on sites like that…but I am sad to see the denialists here are just a mad and obdurate as their US counterparts

    DO have a look and see…. ]

    I do sometimes, just to cheer myself up – it is actually a good sign that they are becoming so shrill – it means the gap between their idiotic rantings and the objective science is now wide enough to drive a planet through.

  7. Leone

    You are a gem for locating the quore by Abbott.

    I was having a look at hansard for that day and found nothing

    [TONY ABBOTT:

    I think that’s the problem. The Prime Minister is running away from scrutiny and if you run away from scrutiny you’re running away from democracy.]

    Darn can now provide the link to when and where Abbott made this statement.

    Thanks again!

  8. re attacks on science and CC
    ___________

    after all …the revival of the campaigns against evolution and Darwin and others.. speaks volumes for the ignorance of most denialists

    In the US recently I read of one bunch in the Tea Party who rejoice in the label The No Nothings”…this all goes along with fundamentalists religious views

    They are hypocrites though ..as faced with a medical problem they would embrace every new scientific techniques or medication available and noscon for science then…they want to pick and choose what sceince they embrace…but climate change will effect all with terrible consequences

  9. [The message to sell now is “adaptation”… “It’s effin’ hot! Get used to it!”]

    A comedian on one of those shows requiring a snappy answer was asked “what should we do about global warming” and came back with “give everyone an air conditioner”.

    That was a comedy show but depressingly that is what many in the denial industry are proposing.

  10. [This approach begs the following questions,

    What approach? Are you talking about number 1?
    If you are I was pointing out that it was positive (maybe overly positive) because the unprepared will die.

    by Geoff on Jan 15, 2014 at 2:13 pm]

    And BB

    ‘adaptation’ was always going to be the absolutely last refuge of deniers. As you point out, getting closer all the time.

    Geoff

    Newman/Switser’s position basically has two components:

    (1) A stated belief in AGW. Even though this is accopanied by cherrypicking the 1% of climate scientists who do not believe in AGW and cherrypicekd and context-free scientific factoids that undercut AGW. You know, like a ship stuck in Antarctic sea ice.

    (2) A stated view that it is not as bad as some people claim it is going to be. Therefore it is better to adapt to the consequences of AGW than it is to try to stop AGW.

    This approach obligates having clear and detailed positions about two things:

    (1) What kinds and degree of AGW consequences (positive and negative) will be generated by BAU, and by when.
    (2) Just how much adaptation to these consequences will actually cost.

    Since Newman, Switzer and yourself avoid these issues like the plague, they (you) have no credibility.

  11. deblonay

    Yesterday morning, Zoomster and I were reflecting on fhe issues in fhe Eltham region re dangerous fire zone.
    As I am not too far from the area, it greatly concerns me.

  12. Shorten should be visiting service station after service station. He should be wearing a fluoro vest. He should be repeating a mantra: Abbott promised to put downwards pressure on the COL and since the Abbott Government started, the average price per litre has gone up by x cents per litre.

  13. [g

    Crone may be in trouble at Senate Hearing over evidence given

    by guytaur on Jan 15, 2014 at 2:48 pm]

    Sounds like a clue from a cryptic crossword. Who and what do you mean?

  14. And, of course, talking about ‘adapting’ based on how things are now is to completely (presumably deliberately) miss the point.

    Whatever is happening now with respect to global warming is only the very beginning. This is an ongoing process that, regardless of what we do now, will only intensify for decades to come.

    But there is still a big difference between taking action and not taking action. If we take action now we may be able to limit warming to 3 or 4 degrees. If we take no action … well, the sky’s the limit really, 6, 8 degrees – absolutely severe, world redefining stuff.

    So we can take action and adapt, or take no action and accept that a lot of people are going to have find new places to live (or a lot of people are going to not live at all – there’s adaptation for you).

    Talking about ‘adapting’ as if what the climate is like now is about the extent of what we are talking about is a sick joke.

  15. Shorten should have a basic list of areas where Abbott is putting UPWARDS pressure on the COL.

    He should forget about the boats… let SHY be the Aunt Sally for that lot of issues.

    Shorten should have a mantra a week: COL upwards pressure in schools because of the bonus being snatched away.
    COL upwards pressure because of petrol prices being jacked up.
    COL upwards pressure on fruit and vegies because of the climate change that Abbott does not believe in and will not fix.
    COL upwards pressure on health costs because etc, etc, etc.

    They should be one liners. And they should use short words. And they should be accompanied by the stunt/visuals that the networks are desperate for so that they can reduce their costs.

  16. victoria
    All Abbott’s old stuff from his former website – interview transcripts, speeches, whatever – is safely stored in the Pandora Archive and is easily accessible. All you need is a date or a rough idea of a date. The archived date means anything up to that date – and after the one below it in the list.
    http://pandora.nla.gov.au/tep/22487

  17. Rex

    I am not a disaffected ALP voter but I am with you.

    Shorten does not have popular appeal for mine and he carries an awful lot of baggage from past actions.

  18. bar bar,

    [“Running away from Democracy”- using the term “democracy” in this context sounds far to high falutin and chardonnay left for Abbott. I’d be very surprised.]

    I agree. He much prefers GUIDED Democracy.

  19. It’s the dog that doesn’t bark.
    News Corp (Daily Telegraph) is pounding O’Farrell right now.
    Why? It’s obvious. O’Farrell has nothing to do with the implementation of the NBN and the Tele has to throw its readers at least some red meat (to make up for its fawning coverage of the Abbott wrecking crew which is busily destroying the NBN). So Barry gets to be the bunny.
    Bad luck, Bazza.

  20. I’m glad Shorten is not turning into Abbott.

    Abbott’s tactics were successful (combined with ALP self-destruction and a compliant media), but Abbott made a lot of rods for his own back in the process.

    The ALP will hopefully avoid creating too many problems for themselves this time around, and campaigning on petrol prices is a sure way to create problems for themselves down the track given the government can do sweet FA about petrol prices (Fuelwatch anyone?).

    As far as it goes the ALP will benefit in the short term from discontent over high and rising petrol prices, but it’s not something they can promise to do anything about, unless there’s a grand vision lurking somewhere in there to convert Australia to an electric vehicle fleet based off excess renewable energy generation or something.

    (Oh and I was musing at what point the LNP get so desperate that they propose reducing or scrapping petrol taxes and to hell with the budget or the future…)

  21. MTBW – The electorate doesn’t want “äppeal” They want competence. Further, nobody cares about Shorten’s baggage. I thought his axing of Rudd was nuts and reprehensible, but I think he’s the best man to win the next election. The past is a foreign country (particularly in politics)

  22. [ AshGhebranious ‏@AshGhebranious 27s It appears SBS will soon be only seen on the FOX network #auspol]

    Tony Shepherd is letting things slip at the Senate hearing…

  23. dwh

    BTW the commission has stated GST not ruled out. No Asset ruled out for privatisation.

    All to stay a secret until after the decision is made when revealed at the budget.

  24. Ah, it was only yesterday that I said that if The Australian ran negative articles attacking Shorten they’d find so-called Labor supporters here backing them all the way…

  25. [News Corp (Daily Telegraph) is pounding O’Farrell right now.]

    Murdoch has been pounding O’Farrell on and off for quite some time now. It’s probably because O’Farrell is too moderate and Murdoch wants a hard liner as Premier.

    Abbott is probably on promotion in Murdoch’s books and could suffer the same fate if he fails to measure up to Murdoch’s requirements.

  26. GST & asset sell-off – standard conservative policy.

    Let’s see if Thunderbird Bill can mount a counter argument over the next 2 years that connects with floating voters…

  27. Boerwar 1216
    [Since Newman, Switzer and yourself avoid these issues like the plague, they (you) have no credibility.]

    What the hell are you talking about? How was I avoiding it?

    To say we can adapt is a positive outlook on the subject as opposed to the negative which would be someting along the lines of we can not adapt we are all going to die.
    If it turns out that it is 100X worse than anyone could imagine we would still need to adapt or we will die.
    Going into it saying we can adapt is positive as opposed to being negative.

  28. zoomster@1238

    Ah, it was only yesterday that I said that if The Australian ran negative articles attacking Shorten they’d find so-called Labor supporters here backing them all the way…

    So some people hold different opinions on Shorten’s performance so far. So what?

    I didn’t vote for him but I have been pleasantly surprised so far. Maybe I am just less critical.

    What point are you trying to make? Some kind of superiority over other posters?

  29. …the trouble with buying into populist issues like petrol price rises and cost of living is that they create the impression you’ve promised something and you then get beaten up for not delivering.

    It’s got a lot of (mostly Liberal) new governments in trouble – Ballieu’s ‘we’ll make Victorian teachers the best paid in Australia’ statement, for example, was in a very specific context and a specific time. By the time he got elected, both had been forgotten — but the perception he’d made a promise remained.

    Similarly, a lot of the policy positions that are currently foulling up the federal Liberal government were originally made on the run, and (at least to begin with) weren’t expected to be written in stone (Hunt’s climate change policy was meant to be a bandaid solution, Abbott’s PPL was in the context of Labor’s proposal – in both cases, these would have normally been either dropped or refined after the 2010 election, but were kept because they nearly won it and thus were scared to fiddle with anything).

    Better to stay out of the limelight for a while and then come to the table with policies which don’t rely on the particular context of the time and can be implemented with some degree of success.

    You mightn’t win the election with as thumping a majority as you would if you responded instantly to every issue with a thought bubble, but once in government, you’re far more likely to stay there.

  30. Geoff, they’re being positive as a way of sticking their head in the sand. If you’re driving and someone tells you there is a cliff ahead and you say “we’ll adapt, like grow wings or something” sure that’s positive. So what? That doesn’t make it a virtue.

Leave a Reply

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