GhostWhoVotes relates that the latest Newspoll has Labor leading 52-48, up from 51-49 last fortnight. Labor is up a point on the primary vote to 36%, and the Coalition down one to 40%. More to follow. UPDATE: The Australian report relates that Bill Shorten’s approval rating is up three points to 36%, which is the first time a poll has moved in his favour in quite a while. UPDATE 2: Full tables here; to fill in the blanks, Shorten’s disapproval is steady at 43%, Tony Abbott is up two on approval to 40% and steady on disapproval at 50%, and Abbott’s lead as preferred prime minister nudges from 42-36 to 43-36.
Today’s Morgan result, combining its regular face-to-face and SMS polling from the last two weekends, was the Coalition’s worst since the election, recording a 1.5% shift on the primary vote from the Coalition (to 38%) to Labor (38.5%), with the Greens down a point to 11% and Palmer United up half a point to 4.5%. On 2013 election preferences, this gives Labor a 53.5-46.5 lead, up from 52.5-47.5 a fortnight ago, while on respondent-allocated preferences the shift is from 53.5-46.5 to 54.5-45.5. Morgan has also been in the business lately of providing selective state-level two-party results, which are presumably based on respondent-allocated preferences. From this poll we are told Labor had unlikely leads of 56.5-43.5 in Queensland and 52-48 in Western Australia, together with leads of 54.5-45.5 in New South Wales and 55-45 in Victoria, and an unspecified “narrow” lead in South Australia.
UPDATE (Essential Research): Essential Research has Labor back up a point on the primary vote after it fell two last week, now at 37%, with the Coalition up one for a second week. The Greens and Palmer United are at 9% and 4%, with others down a point and the other loose point coming off rounding. Respondents were quizzed about the attributes of the major parties, which provides good news for Labor in that “divided” is down 14% to 58%, and “clear about what they stand for” is up 8% to 42%. Those are also the biggest movers for the Liberals, respectively down 6% and up 7%, although they are still performing better than Labor on each at 50% and 32%. The worst differential for Labor is still “divided”, at 26% in favour of the Liberals, while for the Liberals it’s “too close to the big corporate and financial interests”, which is at 62% for Liberal and 34% for Labor.
A question reading “as far as you know, do you think taxes in Australia are higher or lower than in other developed countries” turns up the fascinating finding that 64% of respondents believed they were higher versus only 8% for lower, while 65% believed taxes to have increased over the last five years versus 9% for decreased. Forty-seven per cent believe the current level of taxation is enough versus 33% who believe they will need to increase. The poll also finds 50% opposed to following New Zealand’s example in holding a referendum on changing the flag versus only 31% supportive.
zoidlord:
I am not sure why I bother as you seem to struggle to understand these finer points, but to talk about others forcing reality to fit their bias is not an insult, it is a contention.
To call someone a mental midget is an insult. (not to mention a whole series of other insults flung at me tonight! That being just the last one, not the worst one )
If you cannot see the difference then there aint a simpler way to put it so that you might be able to understand…..
Diogs,
It’s a wonder he didn’t put on the black cap and sentence him to the gallows with all that rhetoric.
A little bit overblown imho.
Hey, but we’ll see in November.
@marcialangton: #lateline Brandis lied – S4 of his amendment to repeal S18 of #RDA the ‘same’ as in the Act. Not true: ‘reasonable’ and ‘good faith’ removed
Everything @1182
You quite clearly don’t understand basic macroeconomics.
Taxpayer’s don’t pay for anything, that’s not how the economy works.
Yes, I thought accusing you of being a dole bludger to try to discredit an argument was particularly low.
Oh wait, that was the other way around.
Everything @ 1190: Alabama in the 1950s was full of sheriffs who claimed to be defending principles.
@Mod Lib/1190
Is this the same AG, that is secret over the TPP negotiations, hiding the high risk?
You call this Decent?
[I am not sure why I bother as you seem to struggle to understand these finer points, but to talk about others forcing reality to fit their bias is not an insult, it is a contention.]
If that’s not a put down I don’t know what is.
Dame Everything, I do have a reservation with S18C, but Soapy’s legal arguments don’t cut the mustard. It is a complex argument but he lost it with me by basing it on the Bolt case. Far too partisan and pandering to Bolt’s acolytes. The lack of respect for ethnic minorities shown in Brandis’s rhetoric about 18C breaks a bipartisan approach that has served Oz well for the last 30 years.
@Mod Lib/1201
I’m not going into what bemused said because, quiet frankly, I rather stay out of it.
But as I said, you are no different by the way of insults etc.
GG
I support SSM for one reason, it will make it easier to support marrying stainless steal people, [SSP] when that becomes an issue. No doubt there will be people like you that will find passages in a book that reads like a porn novel to oppose SSPM.
diogs
[She wasn’t a progressive champion. She was a conservative.]
I don’t agree. She was never a champion of marriage. Full stop.
You can’t, in all honesty, call an aversion to the institution of marriage as being conservative.
Even though you want to tie her anti-marriage opinion to SSM.
Greensborough Growler
[Guytaur,
How many cases have the Homosexual Lobby actually won on this issue?]
What an offensive right-wing expression.
To GG Gay people are not people they are a “Lobby” just rent-seeking, like the mining industry.
Do you equate human claims for equality to Walt Disney’s seeking another 30 years “intellectual property” to make another $billion?
Everything
The LNP cannot answer the Dreyfuss question on Holocaust denial that was asked in parliament. Until that question is answered the repeals are doomed to fail.
frednk,
Your perversions are all your own, comrade.
[Yes, I thought accusing you of being a dole bludger to try to discredit an argument was particularly low.
Oh wait, that was the other way around.]
Mod Lib accused someone of being a dole bludger in order to score a cheap point over them?
For shame, ML. You are becoming more Abbottist by the day with your hysteria and cheersquading for him.
Jackol@1145
Just another idiotic and offensive statement from Australia’s first bogan PM.
The reason 18C is hailed is precisely BECAUSE it nabbed Bolt.
Had 18C nabbed a liberal or Green or any generic lefty, there would be riots on this blog about the government mind police trying to tell us what we are allowed to say.
The point is not that Bolt is good, or right, or that what he was saying about “white Aborigines” is correct (it most definitely is NOT correct).
The point is that he should be criticised for the comment and it should be refuted in open debate. It shouldn’t be prohibited by a judge.
I have no problem with Paulin Hanson saying that we are being overrun by Muslims. I will just number all the boxes below the line to put her last.
The way 18C is written a politician couldn’t argue against Shariah law in a TownHall if one of the candidates was spruiking it.
swamprat,
I’m precise in my descriptors.
You should try it some time.
[Greensborough Growler
Posted Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 11:21 pm | Permalink
frednk,
Your perversions are all your own, comrade.
]
If you can extend that view to a couple of blokes and a poodle; your home.
A writer in the American Conservative(a great journal surprisingly)looks at how the neo-cons plans for a coup against Putin have all gone astray
________________________
As in Iraq and elsewhere the neo-cons in Washington and the Pentagon have once again made a huge mistake and created a major problem for the USA..now having to bolster and fund indefinately… a bankrupt Ukraine…how could they be so stup
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/a-coup-in-crimea-or-in-russia/
fess
May I ask you a question?
Given the realm of Lord Haw Haw of Hutt River Province, do West Australians accept this eccentricity, and therefore claim him as their own eccentric, and the royalty that he commands, or do you think that Abbott, Sir T Firebull, is actually hitting a nerve out there in WA-Land?
You know, that some of you Westralians are more deserving than others, and that that’s an aspiration more WAers should strive for?
bemused@1217
I agree with your post. However unintentional good could come of it given Chinese anger at Malaysia
And … what about 18D?
Growler
Have you ever asked yourself why you fear gay people so much?
It is commonly a sign of repressed homosexuality.
@billshortenmp: The Abbott Govt said people had a right to be bigots, SHARE this if you think Australians should be free from racism http://t.co/mjf01Pvbah
frednk,
That may be your home.
It sure ain’t mine.
[1218
Everything…..
The way 18C is written a politician couldn’t argue against Shariah law in a TownHall if one of the candidates was spruiking it.]
This is false. There is nothing in the law as it now stands that would prevent such a discussion.
swamprat,
Is that all you’ve got?
Everything
Abbott could not name one ethnic group supporting his changes. A bit of a worry for him that. Not even one token group came to him
kezza
[That you didn’t see it, is possibly because of your bias.]
What bias?
I’m not at all religious, and I don’t give a fig about people’s marital status, or who marries who.
As for the Summers interview, people heard what they wanted to hear (and – if I haven’t spelt it out clearly enough for you already – I would have been delighted if Gillard had outright said she was either for ssm or against marriage outright).
The transcript (which I have read) is as follows —
[“We weren’t talking about gay marriage as women, as feminists.”
“We were critiquing marriage, and if someone had said to me as a 20-year-old, ‘What about you get into a white dress to symbolise virginity and you get your father to walk you down an aisle and give you away to a man who is waiting at the end of the aisle,’ I would have looked with puzzlement like, ‘What on earth would I do that for?’]
So she, as a feminist, is implying here – not stating – that she found the idea of marriage irrelevant.
[..“I think that marriage in our society could play its traditional role and we could come up with other institutions which value partnerships, value love, value lifetime commitment.
“I have a valuable lifetime commitment and haven’t felt the need at any point to make that into a marriage.
“So I know that’s a really different reasoning than most people come at these issues, but that’s my reasoning.”]
So she starts with a clear statement about ‘traditional marriage’ – that that should be maintained, and that other, non traditional partnerships (such as ssm) should be recognised in different ways.
Again, SHE doesn’t see the point of marriage.
And (it is inferred) she can’t understand why other people are so hung up on the idea of marriage, either.
http://ausopinion.com/2013/10/01/the-logic-behind-julia-gillards-same-sex-marriage-opposition/
If you can source quotes from Gillard which show something different, you’re welcome to provide them.
Presumably repeal of 18C will pass in the Reps but get blocked in the Senate. Along with pretty much all of the Gov’s legislative agenda.
Kinda all style and fireworks but zero substance. Reminds me a lot of the colour and movement of student politics. Sooner or later Jo Public will twig. In fact they seem to have already, given the recent polls.
[1218
Everything
The reason 18C is hailed is precisely BECAUSE it nabbed Bolt.]
This is also false. The converse actually applies. It is precisely because Bolt fell foul of the law that the militants are determined to seek its repeal.
Mad Lib@1155
No Mad Lib, you rant and rave about the cost of the basic infrastructure that underlies the service that users will be able to purchase from their ISP of choice.
Do you similarly rant and rave about the electricity distribution system as costing too much because it has the capacity to allow consumers to buy and use as much electricity as they wish?
What about water and sewerage?
You either don’t get it in which case you are a moron, or you are faking your ignorance.
Abbott is a conviction politician.
He was against SSM before the election and is against SSM after the election.
He against the Carbon Tax before the election and is against the Carbon Tax after the election.
He was for stopping the boats before the election and is for stopping the election after the election.
Meanwhile you have the Labor Party whose policy changes based on which direction the wind is blowing that day.
kezza:
No idea. For all I know WA voters regard Lord Haw Haw from Hutt River with more affection than Try Hard Tone from Sydney’s North Shore.
[Greensborough Growler
Posted Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 11:27 pm | Permalink
frednk,
That may be your home.
It sure ain’t mine.
]
Home to a better and more tolerant location, the second testament, not the first. My mother who was quite religious reckons St Paul’s problem with women came about because he was a raving homosexual.
Have you read enough of the bible yet to realise it is a very confliced book.
[I support roads, they are good for business. I wouldn’t support paying for golden roads]
Mod Lib,
Would you rather spend $43M on a new highway, that has more curves, occasional overtaking lanes, and wooden bridges designed for a 10 year life, or would you rather spend $56M on a modern dual carriageway freeway with reinforced concrete bridges designed to last 100 years.
Its part of your intellectual dishonesty to continue with the same lame analogies that the Liberals are so famous for.
I think this is a joke.
@LukeBazMort: BREAKING: PM officially contacts David Cameron seeking repeal of the Commonwealth of Australia Act 1900 in UK Parliament. #RepealDay #auspol
[Jackol
Posted Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 11:25 pm | PERMALINK
The way 18C is written a politician couldn’t argue against Shariah law in a TownHall if one of the candidates was spruiking it.
And … what about 18D?]
It depends on how it is interpreted. I don’t think it is a good idea to be at the mercy of such interpretations.
@Frodo/1235
He also had policies before the election, after election, he has cuts.
[Abbott is a conviction politician.]
No he isn’t. He proves time and time again that he is willing to shed any of his ‘convictions’ in the interests of political expediency.
[ Everything
Posted Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 11:32 pm | Permalink
…
It depends on how it is interpreted. I don’t think it is a good idea to be at the mercy of such interpretations.
]
Seems to have worked well for the last 18 years, even managed to catch that nasty piece of goods that can’t stick to facts; Bolt.
If we’re to apply Occam’s razor to Gillard’s position on ssm, I think the simplest explanation is – like many in society – she doesn’t feel comfortable with the idea of ssm but can’t actually explain why she doesn’t.
Nearly all of us have subjects where we know what we’re ‘meant’ to think/feel about them but we don’t, we can’t make ourselves and we can’t explain why, either.
One of the perils of public life — “I don’t like the idea of it” isn’t an acceptable position.
Tories ripping Pensioners off with a trap:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/10720348/David-Cameron-cash-in-your-pension-pot-and-you-may-be-liable-for-care.html
“People who cash in their pensions under the government reforms may end up paying more for their care, David Cameron has admitted.”
Guytaur #1239 you only think? 🙂
[I support the NBN, as long as someone else pays for it. If you want me to pay for it {irrelevant ALP bashing redacted}]
Mod Lib, you’re either paying for Turnbull’s $43B short lived network or you’re not, right? I mean this is the real universe right? In this real universe Turnbull is trying to borrow $43B and waste it on something that will have to be replaced.
Why do you support doing this? Its your money, right? I certainly don’t want my money wasted on FTTN.
As I said before, if you were being remotely logical, you’d be ashamed of what Turnbull is doing and advocate that he drops his plans entirely and we all wait until we “can afford fibre”. Of course, you never did answer why we can afford to borrow tens of billions of dollars to “invest” it in a short lived network, but we’re physically incapable of borrowing a fraction more and building something that will last.
Frodo
Yes a real conviction politician. So convincing Senator Bernadi had given up on the honours change that came in today.
Just one example
LMAO. So you talk about 18C without talking about the good faith defence explicitly provided by 18D which would certainly cover any town hall discussion that was done in good faith.
So in fact your example is completely bogus but because there is some interpretation possible by the courts that makes the whole process bad in some way that you aren’t going to lay out for us.
Frodo,
Abbott famously said he was a weather vane regarding Climate Change.
It’s easy to be a conviction politician from Opposition when there are no consequences. However, once in Government there are people affected by decisions who do not like them. A good example is the orphans of the fallen soldiers.
Abbott keeps repeating he is delivering on policy. However, he’s leaking votes because people are seeing him as a heartless ideologue.
Being pure will make his Government impotent.