Galaxy: 52-48 to Labor

The second in what looks like it might be a regular monthly series of Galaxy polls finds Labor opening a lead after a dead heat in last month’s poll.

The Sunday News Limited tabloids have a Galaxy poll of federal voting intention, conducted on Wednesday and Thursday from a sample of 1391 – quite a bit bigger than Galaxy polls have traditionally been in the past – which shows Labor leading 52-48 on two-party preferred, compared with 50-50 at the last such poll a month ago. On the primary vote, the Coalition is down four points to 39%, Labor is steady on 37%, the Greens are up one to 11% and Palmer United is up two to 6%. The poll also finds 65% opposed to the paid parental leave scheme proceeding “in the current budgetary environment”, compared with 23% in support. Seventy-two per cent say they would rate the proposed deficit levy a broken promise, after being prompted that “Tony Abbott announced before the election that there would be no new taxes”, compared with 21% who thought otherwise.

UPDATE: Possum, who reads more carefully than some of us, observes that the higher sample size is due to a change in methodology, with the live interviewing (which I believe in Galaxy’s case includes a subset of mobile phone polling) supplemented by an online panel.

UPDATE 2 (ReachTEL): The monthly ReachTEL poll for the Seven Network has Labor’s lead up from 52-48 to 54-46, from primary votes of 40% for Labor and 39% for the Coalition. More to follow.

UPDATE 3: Full ReachTEL results here, showing primary votes of 38.9% for the Coalition (down 1.1% on a poll conducted in fortnight ago), 39.6% for Labor (up 2.2%), 11.2% for the Greens (down 0.3%) and 6.0% for Palmer United (up 0.4%). Also featured are leadership ratings on a five-point scale, in which Tony Abbott has a very good or good rating from 26.5% (down 4.3%) and poor or very poor from 56.8% (up 5.0%), while Bill Shorten’s respective numbers are 20.8% (up 1.8%) and 42.2% (down 0.4%). A 1% deficit levy has a net unfavourable if applied at $80,000 per annum (34.2% to 40.7%), becoming strongly favourable at $180,000 (59.3% to 23.4%), but 60.2% believe such a levy would break an election promise against 23.5% who think otherwise. Co-payments for doctor visits have 33.5% support and 56.5% opposition, with 59.0% thinking it a broken promise against 28.4% not; and 47.2% would support reducing the size of the public service to bring the budget to surplus versus 34.3% opposed.

UPDATE 4 (Morgan): Morgan now offers its fortnightly result as well, part of a glut of polling as everyone returns to the party following consecutive long weekends (Newspoll to follow this evening). It adds to the general picture of a blowout in having Labor’s lead at 55-45 (up from 52-48) on respondent-allocated preferences and 53.5-46.5 (up from 52-48) on previous election preferences, the primary votes being 37% for Labor (up three), 37.5% for the Coalition (down one), 12% for the Greens (down one) and 5.5% for Palmer United (up half).

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.

1,880 comments on “Galaxy: 52-48 to Labor”

Comments Page 34 of 38
1 … 33 34 35 … 38

  1. “@greencate: #4corners shows why we need a great deal more financial regulation… not less @JoeHockey #fofa Shame on you @CommBank”

  3. [@OECD_Edu: #Inequality undermines economic growth & well-being: New OECD report just out at #OECDwk http://t.co/Bqd4Ox5zK6%5D

    Have they released a second report or is this the one i read months ago? Grog referred to it at the time.

  4. [Donations – I feel dirty saying it but I agree with Jackie Kelly – every donation, I’d set the bar at $50 bucks]

    I have mixed feelings about this. I myself have spent many years donating to the ALP. I’ve donated thousands, but always under the threshold of disclosure because it could (most likely would in numpty WA) compromise my professional standing if I were able to be publicly identified as a Labor donor, much less supporter.

    You reduce this amount to $50 and you cut off many many more people like me, people who work in a profession which puts their reputation at risk if they are able to be seen to be favouring one political party over another.

    I think the $1,000 disclosure limit is as spot on as the party could achieve.

  5. @ psyclaw 1638

    Shorten’s had about six months now to impress. He hasn’t.
    Instead, he’s focused on navel-gazing, dithering on opposition to the Coalition’s policy (not surprising, considering the Labor Right shares much of its policy with the Coalition) and not taking the fight directly to the Coalition by offering a credible alternative.

    If Shorten were elected PM tomorrow, based on what he’s said so far, nothing would actually change.

  7. [Prime Minister Tony Abbott has defended his Treasurer’s fund-raising techniques, arguing that raising money through granting access to senior party members is preferable to taxpayers footing the bill for party funding.]

    Which is complete rubbish considering funding to parties isn’t dependent on how much they can raise independently of the taxpayers.

  9. @ confessions 1654

    And yet, your ability to donate $1,000 to the ALP means that your vote now has more power than that of people who cannot donate this much (or any at all).

    The ability for money to increase the weight of one person’s vote over another is not a feature of a healthy democracy.

  10. The Australian’s TV ad features wind farm turbines prominently, and then PvO with a stern-faced Hockey. Presumably feeling overtly offended.

  11. [You reduce this amount to $50 and you cut off many many more people like me, people who work in a profession which puts their reputation at risk if they are able to be seen to be favouring one political party over another.

    I think the $1,000 disclosure limit is as spot on as the party could achieve.]

    I understand what you mean but why should any Australian be embarrassed to donate to a political party? It is wrong. There is a fool liberal at work who suggests that there should never be a political post on facebook. I find that essentially many at work don’t dislike politics they just find it uncomfortable when someone backs labor and they are asked to think.

    Have one numpty tonight telling me we should raise the GST. I asked him why. Why was this the best or fairest way to raise revenue. He had no idea, just echoing crap he’d heard.

    $1000 is way to high, but I’d be stunned if we did better.

  13. [And yet, your ability to donate $1,000 to the ALP means that your vote now has more power than that of people who cannot donate this much (or any at all).]

    Actually I’d argue that my membership of the party has delivered much more. Previously all I could get for my donations was a tax deduction. Now I can get a direct vote on the party’s leadership.

  14. Mr Shorten should come straight out and announce that the ALP in government will set up a federal ICAC. And he should invite Mr Abbott, if he wishes, to do so beforehand, with ALP support. It will put some real pressure on the government. And if there are skeletons in the ALP closet, it will be better to get them out: does anyone really doubt that the ALP in the long run is better off with Messrs Obeid and McDonald, regardless of the short-term pain?

  15. No problem with raising money through donations

    it’s what those donations buy that ends up costing the taxpayers and is the worry

  16. Shorten needs a bit more time before I pass judgment, this time next year will tell more. Abbott’s doing a stellar job of shafting himself anyhow.

  17. “@JakeSturmer: Wonder how many @CommBank customers will be looking their accounts tomorrow? I know a few already. Fantastic work @adele_ferguson #4corners”

  18. [but why should any Australian be embarrassed to donate to a political party?]

    It’s not about being embarrassed but about being boxed and labelled. Some people are comfortable with this, but others not so much.

  19. Confessions,

    [Actually I’d argue that my membership of the party has delivered much more. Previously all I could get for my donations was a tax deduction. Now I can get a direct vote on the party’s leadership.]

    I’d agree with that, even though my donations have consisted of a $30 donation around June last year, my $5 membership fee and another $30 donation.

  20. [ I thought everyone including his own lot know Tony is an economic illiterate. ]

    I disagree – Tony is a true “Rennassance” Liberal – he’s equally illiterate on every subject.

  22. fess

    I understand that – I’ve got party members on my books who won’t declare themselves publically, not because they’re ashamed of belonging but because they would be punished professionally if their membership were known.

  23. [It’s not about being embarrassed but about being boxed and labelled. Some people are comfortable with this, but others not so much.]

    I understand and I’d move to $200 as the limit as a concession for donations to a specific campaign fund established for an individual.

  24. The Guardian Goes to the National Rifle Assoc convention in a vast area of Indianapolis…9 acres of guns..and sees the NRA declare war on it’s opponents and saya people have to defend themselves against the Govt…Guns for all
    ..

  26. [I understand that – I’ve got party members on my books who won’t declare themselves publically, not because they’re ashamed of belonging but because they would be punished professionally if their membership were known.]

    Isn’t that a crime to punish someone for association? That is dreadful.

  27. Mikehilliard,

    [Shorten needs a bit more time before I pass judgment, this time next year will tell more. Abbott’s doing a stellar job of shafting himself anyhow.]

    He doesn’t come across as very spontaneous in front of the media and prefers to think of his answers, or reassess his answers while he’s in the middle of them. Makes his media appearances stilted, even though he does quite well while directly engaging with people on shows such as Q&A or out on the streets.

    However, I think he has the advantage over more charismatic leaders in that he is constantly developing a long term plan to win Government and indeed govern beyond that. We’re seeing first hand what happens when an Opposition wins Government on media dominance and shallow spin.

  28. “@QandA: In the #QandA audience tonight: COALITION 47%, ALP 38%, GREENS 9%.”

    I will forgive them the primary numbers as the Morgan only came out today

  29. Arrnea Stormbringer@1655

    @ psyclaw 1638

    Shorten’s had about six months now to impress. He hasn’t.
    Instead, he’s focused on navel-gazing, dithering on opposition to the Coalition’s policy (not surprising, considering the Labor Right shares much of its policy with the Coalition) and not taking the fight directly to the Coalition by offering a credible alternative.

    If Shorten were elected PM tomorrow, based on what he’s said so far, nothing would actually change.

    Sadly, Shorten has not been impressive. I can’t imagine PJK sitting there and not doing much the way Shorten has. He comes across as a stereotyped chartered accountant. Dull as ditchwater.

    I don’t know what motivates him, but moving and shaking and making things happen ain’t it.

  31. Regarding the stories which have come out of ICAC about the making of false complaints to that body about the head of Sydney Water: has there been any mention so far of the possibility of prosecuting the perpetrators for criminal defamation? (NSW Crimes Act 1900, s. 529; Maximum penalty: 3 years imprisonment)

  33. “@zdaniel: Lots of tweets from Bangkok, Yangon, Chiang Mai regarding what seems to be an earthquake. Stand by.”

  34. I remind people that the Labor party is a party of collegiate decision making. If Albanese were leader instead of Shorten, there’d be no difference at the moment when it came to policy stances.

    It’s foolish to commit to policies too far out from an election – you can end up like Beazley and rollback, where the government adopted so many of his changes to the GST that his policy ended up looking ridiculous, or like Abbott, locked into positions which are no longer relevant.

  35. GG

    Plenty of things are corrupt. Some are legal, some aren’t.

    As has already been said, when you get to make the laws it’s pretty easy to make something legal.

    briefly

    Why do you think people make huge donations to meet Shorten or Abbott? They do it so they get access and special treatment.

  36. Don

    [I can’t imagine PJK sitting there and not doing much the way Shorten has. ]

    Just as well, really. We may all have loved PJK but the public didn’t.

  37. [I don’t know what motivates him, but moving and shaking and making things happen ain’t it.]
    Well frankly the government hasn’t done much since they were elected (other than increasing the deficit / debt).

    There’s no reason for Shorten to go around carrying on like a pork chop. But of course that all changes after the release of the budget next week. Then he has to start coming up with an argument, themes and ideas that he will take to the election.

  38. [Why do you think people make huge donations to meet Shorten or Abbott? They do it so they get access and special treatment.]

    They clearly do it for access, you can’t make a general case for ‘special treatment’ it is merely your suspicion.

  39. WWP

    [Isn’t that a crime to punish someone for association? That is dreadful.]

    Difficult to prove that the reason you didn’t get that job or that promotion was because it’s known that you’re a member of a certain party.

    Hard enough proving that it’s because you’re the wrong sex!

  40. I wish everyone could get used to the idea that as much as we might like it Keating ain’t coming back.

    I agree with a lot of comments here on Shorten, the good & the bad.

    Bugler makes a very good point @1677.

    [We’re seeing first hand what happens when an Opposition wins Government on media dominance and shallow spin.]

    This might have some bearing on Shorten’s media performance. Us & many others might be expecting him to go the rabid dog but perhaps by reining it in he’s doing us all a favor, short & long term.

  41. ESJ,

    I can assure you that, personally, none of my money was used in such a way due to the time period mentioned. I’m also in the wrong branch to have paid it.

    I’m not across all the details, and I’m not sure it’s fair for a party to simply abandon one of their MPs on a rumour. However, I don’t think it was justified or appropriate for them to have supported his defamation case, which is what I believe you’re referring to. I’ve also said before that even if he wasn’t the over-entitled dick he is he shouldn’t have been preselected as he’s also a complete idiot and waste of space.

  42. zoomster@1686

    Don

    I can’t imagine PJK sitting there and not doing much the way Shorten has.


    Just as well, really. We may all have loved PJK but the public didn’t.

    Popularity is not often a guide to what is actually needed.

    As Henry Ford said, ‘if I had asked my customers what they wanted, they’d have said faster horses’.

  44. [Difficult to prove that the reason you didn’t get that job or that promotion was because it’s known that you’re a member of a certain party.

    Hard enough proving that it’s because you’re the wrong sex!]

    Good point, I hope the fear is unfounded, it is disturbing. Still probably better than sexism if one of the flaws must be present.

  45. I’d like to pay for deblonay to meet bill shorten so he could give him some free foreign policy advice.

    Come to think of it there is probably a dozen people on here who are just aching to help bill on all sorts of policy areas. 3300 a pop would be cheap to set a refreshing new policy agenda.

    Deblonay manducat canis cibum

  46. One thing that can be said about Mr Shorten is that he is coming across differently from Mr Abbott (in both of the latter’s incarnations, as Leader of the Opposition and PM). And that is probably a very good thing, as if people turn against Mr Abbott, they won’t want to replace him with someone similar. I don’t particularly like Mr Shorten, but to come across as low key but serious isn’t a bad thing when you want to emphasise that your opponent is a flake.

  47. mikehilliard@1690

    I wish everyone could get used to the idea that as much as we might like it Keating ain’t coming back.

    Keating was one of a kind, but I’d be happy with a leader who knew what he wanted, told you what he wanted, and set out to do it.

    I don’t see Shorten as that sort of leader. I have no idea what he is really like. I see that as his fault.

    I am certainly not suggesting that he be replaced. But I can’t help feeling disappointed.

  48. don

    [Popularity is not often a guide to what is actually needed. ]

    Indeed not – but because PJK was unpopular, almost every good decision he made as Prime Minister was wiped out within a few years.

  49. edwina I’d be happier for my donation to labor to be used for some union hack to visit a prostitute than I’d be to have donated to Turnbull who is vandalising the economy with his disastrously stupid and deliberately so fraudband, now that is real damage to Australia.

  50. Shorten is doing pretty well, IMHO, because at this stage of the cycle the main thing he needs to do is to ensure that people are talking about Abbott and the Government.

    The biggest issue for Shorten is that Labor needs to be reformed.

    It is not something he can do on his own. If the Labor tribe does not work actively together, Shorten is irrelevant.

Comments Page 34 of 38
1 … 33 34 35 … 38

Leave a Reply

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