GhostWhoVotes relates that Newspoll has come in at 52-48 in favour of Labor, up from 51-49 last time. Primary votes are 39% for the Coalition (down one), 35% for Labor (up one) and 14% for the Greens (up an improbable three). Bill Shorten’s personal ratings are back down again after an improvement last week, to 36% approval (down three) and 43% disapproval (up three), while Tony Abbott goes sideways to 35% approval and 54% disapproval (both down one). Abbott and Shorten are tied 37-all on preferred prime minister with a five-point increase for uncommitted, Shorten having led 40-39 last time. A further question finds 62% supporting the action taken by the government so far on Iraq, with 25% opposed. UPDATE: Full tables from The Australian.
Also out today was the regular fortnightly face-to-face plus SMS poll from Roy Morgan, this one encompassing 3089 respondents over the past two weekends. Coming off a particularly strong result for Labor last time, it has them down 1.5% to 37%, the Coalition up half a point to 38%, and the Greens and Palmer United steady on 10.5% and 4.5%. On the respondent-allocated two-party preferred measure, Labor’s lead is down from 55.5-44.5 to 54-46, while on the preference flows of the previous election (the method used by Newspoll) it’s down from 54-46 to 53-47. Follow the link above for breakdowns by age, gender and state.
UPDATE (Essential Research): This week’s fortnightly rolling average from Essential Research records an incremental move away from the Coalition, who are down a point on the primary vote to 39% with Labor steady on 38%, the Greens up one to 10% and Palmer United down one to 4%, but it’s not enough to shift two-party preferred, on which Labor’s lead remains at 52-48. Monthly personal ratings have Tony Abbott down two points on both approval and disapproval, to 35% and 52% respectively, while Bill Shorten records his best net rating since his honeymoon period with approval up one to 35% and disapproval down four to 36%. Shorten also nudges back into the lead as preferred prime minister, now leading 36-35 after trailing 37-36 last time.
Further questions find an even balance of support for Australian action in Iraq, with 38% approving and 39% disapproving of supplying arms to Kurdish forces, and 38% approving and 42% disapproving of sending military planes. Only 27% said they would approve of sending troops, with 54% disapproving, which becomes 45% and 36% if requested by the United Nations. For all that’s been said lately about the causes of the Coalition’s improvement in the polls, 55% said they had little or no trust in the government’s handling of international relations, compared with 36% for a lot or some.
Finally, 44% said they approved of the dumping of the mining tax, with 31% disapproving. This is in interesting contrast to more general questions that have been asked about tax, which have found support for mining companies paying more.
UPDATE 2: The Guardian reports on a McNair Ingenuity poll of 1004 respondents concerning performance and name recognition of cabinet ministers, which finds Julie Bishop taking the lead from Malcolm Turnbull as the most highly rated minister since the last such poll was conducted in December, at which time she ranked eighth out of 19. The other big movers are Scott Morrison (upwards, from eighteenth to sixth) and Joe Hockey (downwards, from third place to last). Tony Abbott is only ranked sixth among Coalition supporters and fourteenth among Labor voters, with Bishop topping the table for both.
Pyne wants to move on from the 2.5 year old story of the Slipper affair.
And how many years back were delved into Gillard’s supposed slush fund?
HYPOCRITES in the very full meaning of the word.
Liberals – hypocrisy is thy name, isn’t it Erica Betz?
Re J341983 @44: I got the numbers out of Wikipedia: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Labor_Party#House_of_Representatives
As for the Murray Darling Basin, that would require a bit of research, but given that apart from Canberra, electorates there are regional or rural in character, unlikely.
@52 – Steve… I know – It was an homage to ESJ’s ramblings 😛
Goodnight 🙂
LOL Greens 14%?
Newspoll have experienced an unlucky sequence of randomness there 😆
This in comments section of the Guardian
[I think Ashby is warning the Liberals with this little snippet and that is why they are saying he is a nice man and not calling him a pathological liar. I think there will be more to come. We just need one person to break rank. And it will happen.
I suspect Palmer knows more but he is making sure he is using it for his ‘negotiations.’]
Night all
[Still, Abbott is the rightful favourite to win the usual second term.]
I wouldn’t call it a clear favourite but he definitely has the edge. 90 seats is a decent amount to enter an election with and the next election will be a war of attrition with the Coalition hoping to slow the tide enough to hang on.
Then, if successful, they’ll claim that everything they did or try to do during this term has been put to the Australian people and they’ve approved, thus giving them a “mandate” to continue.
FTR – I don’t buy that the Greens are on 14% nor the ALP on 35%. They’ve been the odd-ones out when it comes to the ALP primary.
52
That is if Adelaide is excluded from the Murray Darling Basin. If Adelaide is included, the task is slightly easier for the ALP.
ESJ – Labor won in 1990 (39.44%) and 2010 (37.99). See above link. The rise of the Greens has changed the rules. As long as Labor plus Green is close to 50% (like this Newspoll) they should be OK. Maybe you should worry about Palmer eating the Liberal vote.
If the Greens did bump up that high, it might be the movement of people who oppose military action in Iraq, wanting to vent away from the two majors who are supporting efforts to stop IS. In other words, it could be a protest bump.
(And I am not trying to be anti-Green there, just giving a possible explanation for the jump in Green support)
Adelaide is not in the Murray Darling Basin, although they drink and wash in Murray water:
Steve777 if you dont understand I cant help you!
Carey M @ 61
Yep no doubt. If the Greens are even anything over 9% it’s from Labor by those opposing any possibility of military action.
*night
Carey
I think the rise in Greens support might be, at least partially, because they’re the only ones supporting a federal version of ICAC.
That one issue is a sure fire vote winner.
lol EDJ, going back to 40% primary rubbish.
Newspoll has a consistent tendency to overstate Labor and understate the Greens. The issue it and other pollsters face with minor parties is whether to include them in the initial list of options, or as a follow up to those who choose “other”. In 2007, Newspoll promoted the Greens from the secondary list to the primary list, at which time it went from understating them to overstating them.
[If the Greens did bump up that high, it might be the movement of people who oppose military action in Iraq, wanting to vent away from the two majors who are supporting efforts to stop IS.]
Yes, there may well be something in that.
I’m not sure the current polling tells us anything other than the government is poor and the voters haven’t forgiven Labor yet. It’s sort of like if GWS were playing the Lions in the final. Neither side deserves to be there and it’s impossible to pick a winner on form.
We need two more seasons for either side to start performing. Gawd it’s going to be a very long two seasons.
[Newspoll has a consistent tendency to overstate Labor and understate the Greens.]
Sorry, that should be the other way round.
Poor result for the LNP after international headlines have dominated the cycle.
And thats against Shorten, who lets face it, is doing better than expected but aint setting the world on fire.
No escaping it: Abbott’s a stinker, the budget is a dog.
Tories could use their own ICAC as well!
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-29111023?ocid=socialflow_twitter#sa-ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=PublicRSS20-sa
“Despite protests in London, the British authorities have provided lesser opposition, deciding not to pursue a case against Uber in June.”
Long term study, pollution in six United States states:
http://thestorymap.harvard.edu/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=hu-twitter-harvard-campaign#/interest-sixcitiesstudy
“Actually, in the 1970s, Steubenville was one of the most polluted cities in the United States. It was also the dirtiest of the six cities in an investigation of air pollution health effects by a team from Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH). Beginning in the 1970s, the landmark study—one of the single most influential public health studies ever conducted—examined, over 14 to 16 years, the health effects of air pollution on more than 8,000 adults and 14,000 children in six U.S. cities.”
Night all.
I have said: people using past election results to make a rule about usual behaviour at first possible reeelections are making a mistake.
There have been 8 ‘government gets reelected’ elections since Scullin.
3 were over 60 years ago.
2 were in the Whitlam and post-Whitlam 70s.
Hawke saw a swing against in 84
The last 2 first-termers nearly lost.
It seems clear to me that the trend is away from stable voting; increased volatility int the electorate is making it more likely that there will be a one-term government. One of the next three or four will be one.
But each new narrow win by government makes people accord more strength to the pattern when the trend is the other way.
Well, whichver way it goes, the Scots are seriously looking at leaving the Union.
That’ll shakes things up a bit.
It looks like Murdoch is happy to give the UK elite a black eye after his own travails, so its not even clear the tabloids will go hard for No.
No, seriously guys, I think the RET stuff might be involved in any Green bump. I’ve been hearing quite a bit of that lately since the Solar Council campaign kicked off.
[ I think the RET stuff might be involved in any Green bump]
Possibly, though as time goes buy, its only a thin layer of senior LNP members (in tow classes a. Throwback loons, and b. those compromised by fossil fuel donations) who oppose an RET.
I know several Labor voters in my wider circle who are angry at Shorten’s weakness … re the support for the Libs on the commitment to a role in Iraq..and Shorten’s failure to demand a parliamentary vote on the war issue
The Greens are seen by some as much more reliable on the whole …over the war issue,….Ukraine/Iraq and Abbott’s war policies are deeply unpopular and the Greens have been far more reliable on this issue…I believe that’s what the poll shows too
Martin B@74
That depends on what probability they assign to “usual”.
After all by predicting that one of the next three or four first-term governments will lose you seem to be confirming the view that first-term governments will usually win, just questioning that their chance of doing so is sky-high.
If someone is saying that all else being equal a first-term government today should be given a 90% chance of winning, I’d say that’s too high.
If they say that all else being equal it should be a 75% chance then that might be right. Maybe even 80% could be correct.
What we do know is that governments coming off big seat gains are more likely in theory to get away with losing the 2PP if that happens.
It’d be nice to compare with more governments
It seems very unusual for an incumbent to go behind in 2pp in their first year and go on to win
The only example in modern history was howard who was saved by 9/11
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/majority-back-increased-role-in-iraq-newspoll/story-fn59niix-1227052043520
[Majority back increased role in Iraq: Newspoll
THE AUSTRALIAN SEPTEMBER 09, 2014 12:00AM
Phillip Hudson
Bureau Chief
Canberra
THREE out of five Australians are in favour of the federal government providing humanitarian aid and weapons to forces opposing Islamic State militants, as Tony Abbott holds open the option of going further with increased military support.
The Prime Minister said no specific request had been made but Australia was talking to its partners and allies about helping to provide “military advisers” and “air capability”.]
Newspoll Table
http://resources.news.com.au/files/2014/09/08/1227051/997866-newspoll-pdf.pdf
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/greens-benefit-as-voters-turn-away-from-leaders/story-fn59niix-1227051929678
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/tony-abbotts-oneyear-report-card-needs-to-improve/story-fnmnl1y0-1227051930721#
[ NewsPoll has Judith Sloan doing the numbers ]
sprocket, thats just mean. 🙁
Limited news only uses her as an entertainment writer, not to handle actual number thingys….
[ then it will be a 1 in 20 event of Labor ever achieving majority government again. ]
Unfortunately for you ESJ the ALP has actually proven that they can govern and pass legislation in a minority situation. While the Libs spend their time lying, whining, complaining, and enthusiastically bending over for anyone who might give them any Senate votes.
graham white@80
9/11 “saved” Howard’s second term, though he was already in front by the time it happened and in my view would have won anyway. I think he would have won without Tampa too.
Also Howard was never behind on 2PP in his first year anyway.
Whitlam was behind on 2PP for the last two months of his first year but won re-election less than six months later when he went early to get stuff through the Senate.
It’s really hard to say what kind of first-year polling should tell us that a first-term government is going to lose because none have done so federally in polling history.
[ No escaping it: Abbott’s a stinker, the budget is a dog. ]
They dont really seem to be able to capitalize on the international stuff do they?? Still, that probably doesn’t concern them much at the moment. Election is still far enough away that their main concern will keeping their donors happy and delivering on the central commitments….. to their donors.
according to the graph to the right howard was behind the whole time until the start of september where in a blip of a moment he gets a 6 point jump
Howard never went behind in his first year which is precisely my point
it seems very unusual for an incumbent government to go behind in the first or even second year and then win
Nett_NEWS++™ by @Otiose94 http://bit.ly/1nAtjp1 #PM_Peta, #Donations, #abbott #Icac Show by David Rowe © http://bit.ly/1tmvNYH
[according to the graph to the right howard was behind the whole time until the start of september where in a blip of a moment he gets a 6 point jump]
True as far as it goes, but you’d have to say the trend to Howard in the six months up to that point is impressive in its solidity. Had that trend progressed through to election day undisturbed by external shocks, he would have ended up exactly where he did end up.
aye but this seems to be a pattern of the election year
The challenger (particularly labour) gets a massive boost about 12 months out
The incumbent recovers gradually up to a point. Whether that point is an election winning point or not doesn’t seem to be very predictable from any of the wild stuff that happens in the last 12 months. Perhaps what happens is people believe the challengers critique of the government then are swayed by the governments reply and eventually settle where they were when it seemed no one was trying to convince them (the worst point of their first two years plus or minus a couple of points)
it seems the best predictor is the worst point of first 2 years or so. Admittedly this is based on limited data.
2001 seems to be the only election on your side window where an incumbent has gone behind in the first two years and then won and this had a dramatic shift in party support after september 11. So 2001 can be argued to be an outlier
[True as far as it goes, but you’d have to say the trend to Howard in the six months up to that point is impressive in its solidity.]
People say Tampa; I’ve always thought it was the fuel excise indexation backflip that saved Howard in 01.
Japanese submarines for Australia?
If any words could accurately describe Japanese military behaviour in World War 2, it would be a Death Cult.
If Abbott paid attention to anything other than his own ego, he might be reminded that, apart from private apologies to small groups of ex POWs, there has never been a substantive official apology from the Japanese for the Australian beheadings and other atrocities committed by their Death Cult in the name of the Emperor and the Rising Sun. Instead, Tony Abbott, now basing his political fortunes on an attack on the modern day IS death cult, while commending the actions of another death cult from 70 years ago, is saying Japanese are now ‘our very best Friends’ and that their troops ‘fought with honor’.
I am not a racist, but although the Japanese may now be our friends, and are a gentle and gracious people, they certainly did not fight with honour in World War 2. Their leadership could also have done a lot more over the years to internally acknowledge and externally apologise for the beheadings and other atrocities committed against Australian troops and nurses in World War 2.
And now the lying bastards in the Coalition are preparing the Australian public in general, and the South Australian public in particular, for the ditching of their pre-election promise that the new submarines would be built in SA, and going for Japanese subs instead.
This is put forward as being in the interests of “cost effectiveness” and “efficient delivery”, but I think it has got a lot more to do with Abbott trying to big note himself with the Japanese and his recent fawning to Shinzo Abe.
Abbott, having failed on the economic front, is now the International Statesman, treading the world stage as Captain Australia – and doling out billion dollar submarine contracts.
So, instead of keeping advanced manufacturing skills in Australia, we are told by the likes of Pyne, Abbott and Johnston that the sub contract should be awarded purely on the basis of ‘performance’ and that the issue should not be conflated with industry or other policies.
Well, as a taxpayer, I would actually prefer to have a massive project like the submarine contract developed by Australians, even if it costs a bit more, because if you happen to work from a basis of economics and not just pure ideology, there are major industrial, social and security benefits to Australia from doing just that.
The nonentity Pyne of course, even though supposedly an advocate for his South Australian electorate, in reality just a pure political operator who has never had a job outside of politics in his life, and who spends his days conniving with other nonentities who are into school yard bullying tricks like stealing the other kids diary, so ‘we can get something on him’, can see no value to South Australian industry in retaining the submarine contract.
Those reading this may ask why the hell I think it is productive to conflate the issue of Japanese behaviour in WW2 with an industrial contract. Well normally it wouldn’t make sense at all but for Tony ‘Captain Australia’ Abbott. Yes, the Japanese ‘who fought with honour’ are now our ‘very best friends’, and by the way, Shinzo, how would you like a billion dollar submarine contract? I am sure the Australian people won’t mind the sacrifice, just like some of our troops didn’t mind being beheaded in WW2.
Some of Bob Ellis’s milder commentary on the Abbott approach yesterday…
[Abbott said some submarines would not be built, any more, in Adelaide by Australians but in Japan by Japanese, of whom he lately said, ‘I admire the skill and honour with which you sank the Manly ferry some years back’, which made them, he said, ‘more deserving of Australian money than mere Australians, who can go fuck themselves, and go broke, in that order, for daring to put back a Labor Premier, and an ex-Liberal Leader as his consort. ‘It is important,’ he is said to have said, ‘we eliminate all Australian industry from the world economy. We must urgently embrace our manifest destiny, of urgently becoming, the Mexico of Asia — supplying nannies to Indonesia, aerobics instructors to Hong Kong, and serving bonzer cuisine in our takeaway Thai and Indian restaurants in suburban Sydney. We have gone in three generations from a nation of peasants to a nation of waiters,’ he exhulted, licking dry lips, ‘and this is our future; and you, you ex-working men, you ex-car builders and submarine designers, can now retrain as shelf packers, toilet cleaners and curry deliverers, after six months of total poverty. So let it be written, so let it be done.’]
http://www.ellistabletalk.com/2014/09/08/the-three-worst-things-the-liberals-did-yesterday-53/
In advance of BK, here is the front page of the dead tree version of the SMH. Quite a shock.
http://t.co/FFhpWoaY4i
TS @91
A very good analysis re the submarine contract. Abbott & Pyne couldn’t care less about the SA economy.
As for @92 there is no doubt Abbott is clearly determined to wreck the whole Aussie economy and punish the workers for the three years of JG for which he has never forgiven them. He is, indeed, one very vindictive and mean-spirited person.
Morning all. The engineer who developed the Citylink concept in Melbourne has come out against the EW tunnel link, saying it was the wrong priority and will not relieve congestion. We already know the Victorian Libs are bent. But who is getting paid off in Victorian Labor not to oppose this dog of a project? Billions wasted, votes lost, yet only lies made up about why governments have suddenly lost their unlosable right to tear up contracts.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/citylink-founder-warns-wrong-way-go-back-on-east-west-link-20140908-10dxcb.html
There should be an RC about this project – who developed it? Who ignored any official advice against it? who lobbied for it? who gets the fees for it? and who gets a cushy job out of it?
Good morning Dawn Patrollers.
Oh dear! It looks like O’Farrell’s appearance at ICAC will ve very interesting indeed! Brickworks well and truly to the fore again.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/barry-ofarrell-wooed-developer-while-it-funded-his-researcher-20140908-10dsld.html
Jaqui Lambie’s Australian Story appearance.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/jacqui-lambie-clive-palmer-should-stop-clowning-around-20140908-10e34b.html
Simply disgusting. Is it a form of child abuse?
http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/home-schoolers-teaching-creationism-and-evolution-as-equal-theories-20140908-10dze3.html
A hollow resignation if ever there was one!
http://www.smh.com.au/world/pope-accepts-resignation-of-head-of-scandalplagued-irish-church-20140909-10e64b.html
“Cash for Questions” as ICAC releases Credlin emails.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/peta-credlin-emails-to-liberal-party-donor-reveals-cash-for-questions-link-20140908-10e53p.html
SMH editorial – Abbott must act on Credlin emails. And it says that now more than ever the case for a federal ICAC is compelling.
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-editorial/abbott-must-act-on-credlin-emails-20140908-10ds68.html
And Arfur is set to appear at ICAC again. Is incompetence his only remaining viable defence?
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/arthur-sinodinos-to-front-icac-again-20140908-3f3mj.html
The fight against IS will take years, and Abbott should be very careful.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/defeating-islamic-state-could-take-years-20140908-10e3d3.html
Richard Ackland on the grubbiness of the Ashby/Slipper thing. It was always about politics.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/08/james-ashby-v-peter-slipper-the-shameless-game-was-always-about-politics
The New Matilda – we banned political donations from developers so why not from coal miners?
https://newmatilda.com/2014/09/08/we-banned-political-donations-developers-what-about-coal-miners
guytaur
[Wow an anti Abbott panel on QandA next week.
All scientists]
I haven’t looked at the panel, but I suspect at least one of the “scientists” is a geologist or mineralogist who just happen to be a climate change sceptic and doubt the science on climate change.
Section 2 . . .
Poor widdle Prissy was “misinterpreted”. Sure!
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/christopher-pyne-says-james-ashby-may-have-misinterpreted-discussions-over-peter-slipper-20140908-10dt3t.html
Here’s The New Matilda’s take on Pyne.
https://newmatilda.com/2014/09/07/christopher-pyne-faces-explosive-allegations-he-lied-over-peter-slipper-affair
Michael Danby refers Ashby to the federal DPP.
http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/michael-danby-refers-james-ashby-to-federal-dpp,6876
The three worst things the Liberals did yesterday.
http://www.ellistabletalk.com/2014/09/08/the-three-worst-things-the-liberals-did-yesterday-53/
Michelle Grattan – ICAC set to send more rumbles through the conservative side of politics.
https://theconversation.com/icac-set-to-send-more-rumbles-through-the-conservative-side-of-politics-31440
More “misinterpretation”. This time on FTTH.
http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/government-it/nbn-fibre-trial-document-misguided-nbn-co-20140908-10e404.html
The charities sector lambasts Abbott’s dismantling of the charities watchdog.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/charity-sector-says-the-government-has-it-wrong-on-charities-watchdog-20140908-10dycq.html
Paul Bongiorno –Is Abbott beating the drums for war.
http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2014/09/08/analysis-pm-beating-drum-war/
Adele Ferguson – Superannuation governance is due for an overhaul.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/super-fund-governance-overdue-for-overhaul-20140908-10dw0r.html
Peter Martin says house prices are inflated and will fall. “The coyote has left the cliff”, he says.
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/house-prices-are-inflated-and-a-fall-seems-certain–the-only-question-is-when-20140908-10drmx.html
sprocket
Thank you that smh front page has made my morning
A bit odd that both ALP and GRN has gained a total of 4% primary votes but this only translate to a 1% gain in TPP.