The latest batch of polling from Newspoll, Morgan and Essential has had the effect of confirming the shift recorded in last week’s BludgerTrack result, in which a Morgan phone poll drove a slight weakening in Labor’s post-budget lead. Consequently, there are only very slight shifts in this week’s primary vote and two-party preferred totals, with the latter moving to the Coalition by 0.3%. On the seat projection, the Coalition gains one seat each in Queensland (which has swung implausibly heavily over recent weeks) and Western Australia, but drops one in Tasmania off a particularly bad showing in this week’s Morgan breakdowns. Newspoll has furnished the leadership ratings with a new set of data, resulting in both leaders copping substantial hits on net approval. Bill Shorten is back to where he was prior to a post-budget bounce, and there is also a substantial move in Tony Abbott’s favour on preferred prime minister, although this largely represents a correction after the post-budget results caused the trend line to overshoot the individual data points.
The biggest of last week’s shifts to have been confirmed by the latest result is a two-point drop for Palmer United, which had risen from a base of around 4% before the Western Australian Senate election to over 7% in the upheaval following the budget. It would have dropped still further if I had included the 3% rating the party recorded in this week’s Newspoll, according to The Australian’s report. However, Palmer United results are not featured in Newspoll’s reporting, and taking advantage of sporadic information that appears in newspaper reports runs the risk of introducing a bias, in that the numbers are more likely to be provided in some circumstances than others. I have thus maintained my usual practice of deriving a Palmer United result from Newspoll by calculating a trend result of the party’s share of the total “others” vote from all other pollsters, and applying that share to Newspoll’s “others” result. So far as this week’s Newspoll result is concerned, this has the unfortunate effect of giving Palmer United a vote share over double that reported by The Australian.
There are other reasons why Palmer United’s recent form is of interest, so I provide below a close-up of the party’s polling trend with the most recent Newspoll excluded. While the trend line commences its descent in the middle of May, observation of the individual data points clearly indicates that the party was still at its record peak until the very end of June, but that it slipped substantially thereafter. Mike Willesee’s report on the party for the Seven Network’s Sunday Night, which aired on June 8, may have had something to do with this.
[This is as true of the Greens as it is of the ALP.]
*Sigh* This is illustrating my point perfectly.
Well yeah, of course it is. But while I’m happy to concede that the ALP is prepared to play politics in order to seek electoral advantage, you’ll find almost zero Greens fans who can do similarly.
fredex
given that most of Labor’s policies consistently polled well – and continue to do so – I’m not sure that policies were the problem.
bemused
You’re a bloke who won’t even recognise the historical rampant sexism within the education department because you happen to have a couple of grand-daughters you think the world of, and couldn’t imagine anyone thinking differently.
And you have your own input to make sure they’re on ‘equal’ footing.
Yet you couldn’t even give Gillard support because she espoused Labor Party policy you didn’t agree with – although you assigned the failures to her, not the party.
When else have you ever done that? To a male leader? Never.
What about Rudd’s brainfarts in the lead up to the 2013 election. You know, tax breaks for the North, moving the military to Brissy, all those things.
What about those? Did you apply your same reasoning to Rudd. That he was a dickhead. Or were those just silly Labor policies.
Wake the fuck up to yourself.
fess
Yeah, it is ok for male parliamentarians to go to strip clubs to stare at bare tits but God forbid a baby should suckle on the breast in the Chamber.
Freakin hypocrites.
Faaark ! Richos in no time at all up 40-12 v Swannies early Q2
Julia Gillard pulled off a miracle in 2010 to form a minority Govt considering the humiliating failings of Rudd which resulted in his sacking and the treasonous whiteanting that followed.
Rudd should have been expelled then and there.
It is incomprehensible how an individual such as Fitzgibbon is still warming Labors front bench.
[by certain people here to cover up the appalling actions of that pig Gillard,..]
You know, the one that help plot and stab a PM in the back for no reason apart from internal power play. Funny how your history only starts with your idol post her betrayal…
[Yeah, and then you’ve got the furore which was launched at women who breastfed their child in the chamber.]
OMGod there is a reason for those things! Fark I hate men who can’t stand the sight of a tit doing it’s intended job. Indicates a very destabilised libido.
bemused – whilst I’m having a rant all those policies you listed @1092 were at least positive in their intent.
Puffy:
Or turn up to Estimates committee’s pissed as newts.
Barnaby’s Button, anyone?
[Rudd should have been expelled then and there.]
Err Gillard should have been expelled, along with those that plotted the insanity of back stabbing a first term PM for no reason..apart from their own power…because they thought the public wouldn’t notice… eerr..well that stink stuck to gillard all the way through….then she hung on so long to make sure Labor was truly ruined….you know how bad would it look if Rudd came back earlier and saved Labor’s arse….so better stay to the 11th hour.
So yeh…Gillard should have been expelled
poroti:
Aaaaaarrrrrggggghhhhh!!!!
[Julia Gillard pulled off a miracle in 2010 to form a minority Govt considering the humiliating failings of Rudd which resulted in his sacking and the treasonous whiteanting that followed.]
Oh god, must be a full moon. Rudd Labor would have alomst certainly been returned….but the brilliant Gillard and her gang…almost pulled off a miraculous loss from the jaws of victory. ANother few weeks and Labor would have been history, so quickly she was sinking.
[What about Rudd’s brainfarts in the lead up to the 2013 election. You know, tax breaks for the North, moving the military to Brissy, all those things.]
you forget the incompetence of Gillard who made every Labor positive into an equal Liberal positive, she continually fumbled the national politics….and of course her stupid brainfart embarrassment of the Timor solution…..first up she showed rookie dumbness
And I do not need to revise anything, what happened is what happened. I have not revised my assessment of those events. Rudd was dud who got turfed.
There is some debate over whether he was turfed because he was failing the big challenges or because he was a crusading factionless orphan who was trying to reform the Party.
My question is, if the second is real, what the flying fig was Rudd doing trying to reform the party when he was supposed to be an ALP Prime Minister setting out to prosecute the hardest and most important agenda of all time, addressing global warming?
His first PMship, the ALP’s first term in 11 years and he starts tinkering with the party? What a complete dunce.
mikeh:
A couple of weeks ago I had a work meeting at a local cafe and there was a woman having lunch with her friends and breastfeeding her infant afterwards. Nobody paid her any attention (she had a pashmina thing wrapped around bub), but some idiot old fart decided to complain about it, saying (loudly) he didn’t go to “eating establishments” (yeah, really) in order to see “some chick flash her titties”.
OMG.
Douchebags so totally exist out there.
I did not start this, Bemused did.
[Well yeah, of course it is. But while I’m happy to concede that the ALP is prepared to play politics in order to seek electoral advantage, you’ll find almost zero Greens fans who can do similarly.]
For fairly obvious reasons it is in the Greens interest to talk up their principles and conversely the ALP become interested in painting them as cynical pragmatists. But that is all rhetoric and while I expect to see plenty of that here it doesn’t count for much as analysis.
Every single serious Greens member I know, and that’s a few, would say similar things. In fact I know some who point out that because of consensus processes Greens are in fact habituated to compromising.
OMG.
Douchebags so totally exist out there.
Weird, hey! And they’re in Government too…..
Oh dear! Still some on here living in a fantasy world. The fantasy world that suggests that all Gillard had to do was call the election, and bang, those 57-43 polls and those 62 percent disapproval ratings would have disappeared in to thin air, the punters would have come to the realisation that they loved her and the Government she led all along, and that the ALP would have swept to a glorious victory. Sounds good, but of course it’s pure fantasy! Thankfully wiser heads prevailed, or not only would we be facing an Abbott Government with an enormous lower house majority, but a very good chance of Senate control as well. Think this budget is a shocker? Pretty sure it is nothing compared to what we would have seen if Abbott had both houses!
Then, of course, there’s the fantasy that says that Rudd was to blame for Gillard’s unpopularity. This of course ignores the reality that often Gillard was her own worst enemy. I will not dredge up all the infamous errors of judgement again, we all know what they were and bemused has already mentioned a couple. But one of the biggest mistakes was stating that you could call the carbon price a tax. This made it impossible for the Government to argue that it had not broken a very clear election promis; how could they? You had Gillard saying there would be no carbon tax, and Gillard saying you could call the very policy the Government was implementing a tax. Gillard’s credibility had already taken some significant hits from the utterly shambolic 2010 campaign, and that 7:30 interview was the final straw for the majority of the electorate. The polls crashed immediately and never seriously recovered.
It is not my fault the Hero Rudd couldn’t stop himself getting rolled by a woman, in a parliament which despises women leaders. He really must have been a moron.
[Puff, the Magic Dragon.
Posted Friday, June 20, 2014 at 8:50 pm | PERMALINK
fess
Yeah, it is ok for male parliamentarians to go to strip clubs to stare at bare tits but God forbid a baby should suckle on the breast in the Chamber.
Freakin hypocrites.]
Yeah, Kirsti Marshall being kicked out of parliament for feeding her 11-day-old baby in 2003.
Oh, sorry, forgot to mention her milk-swollen breasts, which were the most offensive thing to men.
Was it a workplace entitlement? Was it?
Only if breasts in the workplace were for the sexual gratification of men, not to nourish babies.
Vaginas in the workplace are no different. Just there for the gratification of men, not for their owners to claim stewardship over the nation. Oh, no.
Grow up Australian men, FCS.
Anyway, I will leave the misogynists and fools to their own revisions. Catch you all later.
Puff, the Magic Dragon.@1100
You are perfectly free to harbour whatever delusions you like.
I hope you return to reality one day.
[Julia Gillard pulled off a miracle in 2010 to form a minority Govt ]
The whole purpose of replacing Gillard was to win in 2010, it was a disaster not to win outright and it was the problem that plagued her to her removal. Rudd was neither helpful nor loyal (but then again neither had she been) but he wasn’t the problem.
In terms of getting a message cutting through Gillard couldn’t pass a red hot razor sharp knife through sof room temp butter and Rudd wasn’t all that much better.
Sorry of course I mean replacing Rudd with Gillard …
kezza
plus one.
Thomas 1112
No no, not a few weeks, one would have done it. That campaign had degenerated in to a farce. Those who want to blame the leaks forget utter rubbish like the citizens assembly! Oh yes, we take climate change so seriously that we’ll drag a whole lot of people off the street to have a chat about what we might do about it. Laughable!
Abbott is in Government now because of the events of June 2010, not the events of June 2013. By June 2013, the Government was gone. Rudd saved some furniture and far more importantly, helped keep the Senate out of Abbott’s control.
confessions
Maaaate, I picked Swannies to win by 23 points !!
[For fairly obvious reasons it is in the Greens interest to talk up their principles]
Well yes, file this under statement of the bloody obvious. And yet whenever this simple fact is mentioned by people who are Labor aligned, pointing out the Greens strategy, out spring a cacophony of Greens fans to insist this isn’t some well thought out electoral strategy, but comes from a down-home place of warm, fuzzy, feel good (therefore it MUST be good) goodness.
zoomster@1102
To be honest, I can hardly remember an election where ALP policies were a problem. Possibly 1966 when voters bought the Vietnam War crock and 2001 when they fell for Tampa. But they were really just distractions from policy.
poroti:
Me tipped Swannies by 25!
Let’s try a bit of a thought experiment.
Suppose we had a Greens Government and there was also a minority Trade Union Party called Labor which got 10-15% of the vote.
Now Labor was after major changes in the system of employment which would virtually result in workplaces coming under the control of unions.
Because the Greens wouldn’t agree to this in full (they had to keep the doctors’ wives who voted for them happy after all) Labor kept sniping at the Greens and doing all sorts of dodgy deals with the other party called the Capitalists, at the same time accusing the Greens of being no more than Capitalist lackeys.
As a result, the Greens support declined and they lost the election. The Capitalists immediately banned unions outright.
Would Labor have been guilty of grave political misjudgement? You betcha.
[Yeah, Kirsti Marshall being kicked out of parliament for feeding her 11-day-old baby in 2003.
Oh, sorry, forgot to mention her milk-swollen breasts, which were the most offensive thing to men.]
Maybe, but the Speaker who ordered Marshall from the chamber, on the grounds that her infant was not a member of parliament and hence not allowed to be on the floor, was Judy Maddigan.
Slow news day? So its back to the Labor vs Greens, Rudd vs Gillard wars again.
[Well yes, file this under statement of the bloody obvious. And yet whenever this simple fact is mentioned by people who are Labor aligned, pointing out the Greens strategy, out spring a cacophony of Greens fans to insist this isn’t some well thought out electoral strategy, but comes from a down-home place of warm, fuzzy, feel good (therefore it MUST be good) goodness.]
I don’t see that myself. I think you are trading in stereotypes that ALP supporters want to believe about Greens.
[Would Labor have been guilty of grave political misjudgement? You betcha.]
Yeah and like the real greens the hypothetical labor would blame the other party 100% refusing to accept even a tiny suggestion they should have backed the policy with all sorts of ‘reasons’ and only the truly deluded would actually believe it.
kezza2@1103
For the record:
1. I acknowledge there are misogynists in politics and elsewhere, just like there are misandrysts like you, Puff and confessions on PB.
2. I campaigned hard for Gillard in 2010 just as I do for any Labor leader.
3. I acknowledge Rudd had brainfarts in 2013 as you describe.
So what’s your point?
Speaking of Rudd….
Retweeted by Kevin Rudd
Chatham House @ChathamHouse 9m
Chatham House is pleased to announce appointment of @MrKRudd, former Australia PM, as Distinguished Visiting Fellow: http://www.chathamhouse.org/news/2014-06-20-kevin-rudd-joins-chatham-house-distinguished-visiting-fellow …
Puff, the Magic Dragon.@1104
If I had been the Speaker in Parliament on that occasion, I would have chucked out those who complained.
Rex Douglas@1106
The ‘miracle’ she pulled in 2010 was to almost lose the election after Labor was comfortably ahead.
William
I think you’ll find it was the Sergeant-At-Arms, a male, who brought it to the Speaker’s attention.
Whatever.
[Because the Greens wouldn’t agree to this in full (they had to keep the doctors’ wives who voted for them happy after all) Labor kept sniping at the Greens and doing all sorts of dodgy deals with the other party called the Capitalists, at the same time accusing the Greens of being no more than Capitalist lackeys.
As a result, the Greens support declined and they lost the election. The Capitalists immediately banned unions outright.]
Interesting thought experiment but I’m not sure of the relevance.
You seem to forget that the Greens voted down precisely zero (0) government bills in the last parliament. So much for a party constantly attacking the (then) government and doing dodgy deals.
Suggestions that the decline in the ALP vote was because of the Greens is as above self-serving nonsense and an attempt to avoid taking responsibility.
bemused
[The ‘miracle’ she pulled in 2010 was to almost lose the election after Labor was comfortably ahead.]
You will not get away with your constant revisionism.
After Rudd was deposed, Gillard’s and Labor’s fortunes rose.
It wasn’t until the dirty little shit undermined her, via Oakes, that Labor’s fortunes stalled and Gillard used her considerable talents to rescue a minority government from the ashes of Rudd’s first/second attempts to kill her off.
Bugger off with your bullshit.
I got busy yesterday, but was it ever resolved what happened with the Green Army bills in the Senate yesterday?
There was much hyperventilating both here and on twitter about Labor voting for the bills, but then it was suggested the Greens voted in support of the same bills despite their amendments being defeated, and the hyperventilation ceased.
Puff, the Magic Dragon.@1116
Nope.
[I think you are trading in stereotypes that ALP supporters want to believe about Greens.]
Really?
Next time there is a wave of Greens outrage I’ll hold you to your thought.
Gotta go
The kids have arrived, with many friends.
See you later.
Wow! Now we are back to the old favourite of attacking the Greens for not supporting a deal with the Liberals so full of exemptions for big polluters that it would have locked in complete inaction! Had the Greens gone along with that deal, we would have gone the way of the Democrats, and deservedly so.
What should have happened is that instead of Labor playing political games to wedge Turnbull and the Liberals, a genuine ETS without the exemptions should have been put to Parliament. So, the Liberals would have blocked it. Rudd had more than enough political capital to have beaten Turnbull in a double dissolution, particularly in the state the Liberals were in at the time. Of course, short term political considerations came before dealing with climate change.
confessions
Richos gone home, Swannies suddenly up 41-40
[Suggestions that the decline in the ALP vote was because of the Greens is as above self-serving nonsense and an attempt to avoid taking responsibility.]
Except as you yourself have pointed out, the Greens pick and choose their electoral fights off of the two major parties.
The Greens may well have ushered through the Senate a majority of the then Labor govt’s platform but this doesn’t mean the party didn’t pick and choose its fights in order to leverage a perception of being the ‘good guy’ off of the squabbling between Labor and coalition.
I keep reminding people here that the Greens are a political party, therefore their operations are within this context. I keep however, butting up against Greens fans who continue to insist this is not how the party operates, when all evidence is to the contrary.