The Australian has published its regular quarterly Newspoll breakdowns by (mainland) state, gender and age group, from its combined polling over the period of July to September. With this big infusion of state-level data, later this week I will publish the BludgerTrack quarterly breakdown, featuring state-level primary vote numbers and polling trend charts (you can see the previous effort from the end of June here). Also later today should be the regularly weekly Essential Research poll.
In case you missed it, yesterday’s Roy Morgan gave the Coalition its best result since February, its primary vote up 1.5% to 40% with Labor down 2.5% to 35%. On two-party preferred, Labor’s lead was down from 54.5-45.5 to 53-47 on respondent-allocated preferences, and from 53.5-46.5 to 51.5-48.5 on preference flows from the 2013 election. The Greens were steady at 12%, and Palmer United down half a point to 3.5%, their weakest result since January. The poll was conducted over the last two weekends by face-to-face and SMS, from a sample of 3151.
UPDATE (Essential Research): No change whatsoever in Essential Research – Coalition 40%, Labor 39%, Greens 10%, Palmer United 4%, two-party 52-48 to Labor. A suite of questions on major government decisions over the past year turn in predictable responses, with turning back the boats, freezing foreign aid and dumping the carbon tax strongly approved of, and pretty much anything involving the budget disapproved of. The only neutral responses were for military aid to Iraq and dumping the mining tax. Thirty-nine per cent of respondents rated the economy well managed, against 28% for poorly. Respondents were most concerned about cost of living issues, and least concerned about national debt and the budget deficit. Other questions find an even balance between those who think income tax too high (42%) and about right (40%); more favouring less services and lower taxes (28%) than the opposite (19%), but with 35% preferring the current balance; and 59% thinking it would be good for the economy if corporations paid more tax, versus 17% for bad.
lizzie@99
He does speak too fast.
[
Take Julia Gillard’s speech on climate change leading up to the 2010 election. Googling it is a very interesting experience. There are articles which make it clear she’s about to give a speech on climate change. There are (as far as I can find) no articles about the speech itself, let alone a transcript of it.
]
If that is the Citizens Assembly speech then I would suggest it received plenty of coverage at the time.
Here are a couple of articles I found
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-07-23/gillard-heckled-at-climate-policy-launch/916910
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/citizens-assembly-on-climate-may-turn-the-heat-on-gillard-20100725-10qej.html
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/protests-as-australian-pm-delays-climate-action-20100723-10okv.html
lizzie:
Sure, I’ll grant you that applies to risk taking behaviour. But I’d argue (because I’ve seen it), that there are young people who do think carefully about their vote, take it seriously, and in a way where they do actually consider the consequences of their actions.
[That often happened with Julia Gillard. Remember all the column space dedicated to her glasses, her tripping, her clothes, her hair etc rather than whatever it was she had said or was announcing?]
I distinctly remember Mark Kenny praising Gillard’s efforts in India, then lamenting that it would all be ignored and forgotten in deference to her malfunction while there, and by Kevin Rudd appearing on Q&A while she was away.
Kenny was right. He never mentioed her successful efforts in India again. How’s *that* for prescient analytical ability? No wonder Kenny’s up there and we’re down here.
confessions
We’re both generalising here, I think.
And we’ve all seen the other end of the spectrum: those blue rinsers who continually vote Liberal, even against their own interests because that’s what they’ve always done. Clearly not considering the consequences of their actions.
Re changing the conversation. So maybe something along the following lines addressed to a typical West-Sydneyite (as an example of the ‘battleground’ demographic in last year’s Federal election)
Do you feel more secure? Safe from the ‘threat’ posed by Boat People, Mad Beheaders and burqas.
However, what if you or members of your immediate family are:
– unemployed or at risk of becoming so
– sick or at risk of becoming so
– disabled, chronically ill or at risk of becoming so
– in tertiary education or aspire to it
– in primary or secondary education
– work for the public service or a publically owned instrumentality and are not a government adviser
– depend on wages and salary
– are aged or eventually will be and not independently wealthy
– don’t own lots of shares in the fossil fuel industry
– are among those concerned that climate change may blight your future and/or those of your children and grandchildren
Well, maybe you’re not as secure as you thought you were. Think carefully before casting your vote…
Anyway, Labor/Greens need to move the conversation along those lines. The first line needs work so as not to be ‘talking down’ or mocking voters, but I think the rest is pretty sound.
lizzie:
Probably. But I’m with you in wanting more people to consider the consequences of their vote.
confessions
Yup. Ignorance and pigheadedness.
BB:
LOL. Perfect 20/20 foresight!
gg
life for him was always on the edge.
So not too bad in the end.
[ I am usually the victim of bullying behaviour. ]
Little did they know, they were about to enter, the Bemused Zone…..
The conversation with voters also needs to include something along the lines of “don’t be fooled. You know you can’t believe this Prime Minister or this Government says. Their promises mean nothing”. Then list a few broken promises – there are plenty to choose from. Include whatever nasty surprises didn’t get through the Senate. Include points of the IPA wishlist that haven’t been done yet.
@ABCNews24: The #RoyalCommission into Child Sexual Abuse is examining the Hillsong Church. Watch live: http://t.co/FlRWJAIwAW
imacca
😆
Trog @ 95
You’re absolutely right, here.
We only have to compare Australia with Norway to see how Australians have been let down by uncaring (give to the greedy) LieNP politicians.
Little spats going on. Sam Maiden seems to be in several, defending her employer.
[Paula Matthewson @Drag0nista 2h1 hour ago
Disagree with a News Ltd journo one day, next day receive an email from ‘researcher’ asking for my ‘credentials’ as Howard’s media adviser.
Greg Jericho retweeted
Samantha Maiden @samanthamaiden 19m19 minutes ago
@Drag0nista @GrogsGamut in the unlikely event News Corp wanted to write about you Paula that info avail via a google search. Nice smear tho]
http://www.dailylife.com.au/life-and-love/real-life/i-gave-my-eight-year-old-medical-cannabis-and-i-dont-regret-it-20141006-3hdcg.html
Very interesting!
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/abbott-government-abandons-plan-to-make-job-seekers-apply-for-40-jobs-a-month-20141007-10r46j.html
One down!
Sir Mad Cyril
Fair enough – I was probably googling for the transcript, and thus missed those.
Only one of those articles, however, would constitute the kind of detailed analysis I’m talking about.
There’s a sad lack of “these are the pros, these are the cons, this is how it’s worked/failed in other countries…’ analysis in our media. They’re not non existent, just rare.
[Mexican president Enrique Pena Nieto vows to bring criminal gangs to justice
Mexican president Enrique Pena Nieto has vowed to hunt down the perpetrators of a suspected massacre of dozens of students in the south-west of the country that authorities say involved local security officials.
Where are the FA-18 Super Hornets when you need them to root out Pure Evil Death Squad Drugged Out Zombies who behead people?
Zoomster – Your earlier comments about the problem of trying to provided a thoughtful, detailed policy response to any issue comes slap bang up against the here and now need by the instantaneous media, for 30 second grabs.
The local commercial TV news in Perth (and I can’t speak for other places – but I am sure it is true) is now down to lead items of car crashes, home invasions, beatings, promos for the next program and shark bites – for a full 15 minutes or so.
The false bombing run of our one or two planes, for instance, was shown across most of the channels last night – nothing more than a replay of an allowed piece from the embedded journos (like Stafanovic)- but it was all done as a kind of breathless piece of praise for our planes and our true blues loading Aussie bombs in that terrible heat of the UAE.
Even this bit got about a minute – some 15 minutes into the so-called news bulletin.
The ‘news’ on many of the commercials is already at tabloid status.
My admission is that once a post here gets to page length – no matter how good it is, I tend to move on. Guilty of too many words myself, and guilty of not reading the sometimes lengthy pieces of others.
Guess my attention span is not what it should be.
zoomster
Yes I recall much of the coverage of Gillards speech revolved around the protest that occurred and the rest focused mainly on the Citizens Assembly.
victoria@15
Newscorp’s version of this in the Hun is just dreadful. They gave a page or two to this, but it was so disrespectful.
Trict,
If Moses came down from the Mountain today and called a “Presser” to announce he had Ten Commandments, the MSM would ask for the best three for the evening news.
GG
And then they would attack the messenger.
“Whose wife have you been coveting, Mr Moses?”
lizzie,
The broadsheets would praise Moses because he got the number down to 10.
The Greens would whinge that “Adultery is still in”.
Greensborough Growler@56
The only way for them to connect the Ring Road with the East is to tunnel under the powerline reserve between Ringwood and Diamond Creek. It will be costly and will require some acquisition. You’re right, I doubt it’ll be built any time between now and the next 50 years
And Big Business would bemoan the impact on productivity of the 3rd Commandment (Catholic numbering – the one about keeping the Sabbath holy).
zoomster
I know you don’t pretend to have a line straight to Labor HQ, but do you know if there is any truth in this statement? I’m hoping that Labor won’t negotiate on this.
[Christine Milne: The Government and Labor are going to bring down the Renewable Energy Target if they get their way]
lizzie@99
Having watched many of the shows he was in, I can understand what he says but I have the tendency to talk that fast and have many friends mishear what I say too.
Raaraa
He also looks down and drops his voice. People of my age depend quite a lot on reading lips to confirm what is said. I would have thought that someone would have ‘coached’ Josh, as he’s been on TV so much.
MTBW@119
They’re only halfing that number to 20.
[Senator Abetz told the ABC the government had listened to the community and accepted forcing the unemployed to apply for 40 positions a month could “diminish” the value of genuine job applications.
“We understand that for business this is a burden,” he said. ]
They’re only doing that because businesses probably said it’s going to tie up their HR departments with many false applications.
lizzie
I think it might be a confidence issue but I’m only speaking for myself. I find that it helps if I slow down a bit and people understand me better that way.
As for John, he’s done plenty of comedy, so many certain people who listen to him understand while leaving others in a mess. You might be right about the coaching bit.
I also find that he tends to just burst out with statements sometimes and doesn’t help.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/nurses-urge-political-action-on-violence-in-hospitals-20141006-10qxs5.html
I’ve been in a hospital a few times as a patient and I’ve seen occurances of patients and their families being violent to nurses. Definitely not what they signed up for.
BW
[Future history of the third Iraq War: We came. We saw. We bombed some of the time. We left.]
Should read:
Future history of the third Iraq War: We came. We saw. We bombed some of the time. We stayed until voters had had enough of coffins being sent home.
Raaraa@135
Part of the problem is caused by ‘mainstreaming’ where there is no separate admission path for psychiatric patients, they have to go through A&E.
A letter from a Dr at a Melbourne hospital to the Minister found its way to the media a number of years ago and he wrote of disturbed patients doing all sorts of things including wielding a big knife, stealing an ambulance and causing general mayhem.
So there’s part of the problem.
Another part is drugs and alcohol.
bemused @78
For a Liberal, Alan Hunt was relatively good and I can’t recall him ever being mentioned in a negative way.
I can mention him in a negative way. As education minister, Hunt perpetuated the unique discrimination by the then Liberal government against members of the Victorian Secondary Teachers’ Association who, unlike members of the other two teacher unions of the day, were not permitted to directly deposit their salary into their credit union.
I queried him personally about that after a dinner where he was guest speaker, and (he having been giving the bottle a bit of a nudge) became quite belligerent and was more-or-less dragged away by his minder.
VSTA members had to wait for a change of government for that discrimination to be eliminated.
Gday Bludgers, long time no speak.
Just watched the replay of last nites Media Watch, all I can say is wow, just wow.
Tony Abbott is not just incompetent, but also a fascist and lying hypocrite.
We are in for very dark times, I sincerely hope that fellow Australians realise the big mistake they made when voting this jerk in and rectify that mistake at the soonest opportunity.
Corio@138
Interesting anecdote.
I never encountered him so could only go by what I recalled from the press.
lizzie
not doing any insider stuff, but I’ve had a quick look at the basis for the reports.
Mainly seem (surprise) to emanate from ‘The Australian’ (who have a superb track record when it comes to predicting how Labor will vote…), based on the Clean Energy Council supporting exempting aluminium from the scheme.
The government apparently sees this as an endorsement of their plan, and that backing from the CEC makes Labor more likely to come on board.
How exempting an industry from the RET makes slashing the RET more attractive to the Labor party (or anyone else) mystified me, so I did a bit more digging.
Firstly, there is no reference I can find (get digging, Cyril!) to any such statement on the CEC’s own website, which is filled with briefing papers and campaign notes on why any changes to the RET should be opposed.
So what’s going on? Apparently, the CEC has said it would back exemption of the aluminium industry IF that means the RET is retained with bipartisan support —
http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/news/politics/sector-opens-door-on-renewable-energy-target/story-fnkerdda-1227081136293
The assumption by the government appears to be that exempting the aluminium industry means that the RET target could stay the same, and that Labor would go along with that because the CEC says it’s OK.
One of the problems is that uncertainty about the RET means that no one’s investing in the sector. So the argument might be that a weakened RET which has bipartisan support would at least see investment continue.
Labor has indicated that it’s willing to have the target for the RET pushed out to 2022.
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2014/is-this-the-death-of-australias-renewable-energy-industry-83477
As far as I can make out, the expectation is that the government will not back the Warburton report, but will retain the RET.
Milne will portray that as a backdown by Labor (when the alternative was no RET at all) and the government will pretend that they never wanted to get rid of the RET at all and Warburton’s recommendations were never seriously considered.
zoomster
Senator Milne was clear in what she said in that presser. She was talking about the target already set in legislation. By Labor.
As long as Labor stands by its legislated target she and other Greens will not be able to say its a backdown
Raaraa @
[They’re only doing that because businesses probably said it’s going to tie up their HR departments with many false applications.]
Abbott said the it was a “redefinment” not a back down!
Gawd I loathe that man!
If the last post of mine sounds muddled, it’s because I was working my way through the issues whilst typing!
guytaur
and what I’m saying is that Labor’s only choice might be between accepting some cuts to the RET (through extending the target date and exempting aluminium) or no RET at all.
In which case, they should go with the first option.
zoomster
It will be a sorry day when Pup stands by Labor legislation more than Labor does.
guytaur
sorry, are you saying nothing’s better than something?
If you have the choice between a watered down RET and no RET, which would you go for?
Of course I hope Labor is able to keep the present targets in place.
zoomster
Labor gains nothing by caving. Pup is unknown except for public statements supporting RET retention., but Labor throwing in the towel will make certain defeat.
Listening now to Paul Barry wringing his hands over the new ASIO Security laws.
Too late, Paul!
In any case, the idea of “journalists” actually digging down throughh the press releases and ministerial tip-offs to get at a story is pretty laughable nowadays.
BB
I agree. If the MSM had been outraged before the bill passed Labor might have had political room to move to stop the draconian aspects