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.
I listened to JGs interview with John Faine this morning but haven’t seen any of the fan club comment, so I will.
She did well and you can hear it for yourself here http://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/2014/10/07/4101936.htm?§ion=latest&date=(none)
[Julia Gillard is the only guest for this Conversation Hour.
She was the 27th Prime Minister of Australia (2010 – 2013), and is currently Chair of The Global Partnership for Education. Before becoming Australia’s first female Prime Minister, she was Deputy Prime Minister, and Minister for Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, and Social Inclusion.
She served as the Member for Lalor from 1998 to 2013
Julia Gillard’s new book is My Story (Knopf). ]
This Essential confirms, yet again, that the Libs have lost around 5.5% in TPP vote since the election.
It shows that the issues where the Government’s actions are most improved are “boats and repeal of the Carbon Price and the Mining Tax and military action in Iraq.
On COL issues, health etc. it’s not so. good.
Tells you that the priorities of the Government are not attuned with those of the electorate atm. I’m not sure if and when this penny is going to drop.
This poll also shows Labor is strong on the issues that the electorate is focussed upon. Put all the whingers like the Greens and the PB hand wringers back in their box.
Rex Douglas@157
Oppositions don’t win elections because they produce or maintain narratives. Oppositions win elections when governments are ready to lose them, provided also that the opposition doesn’t scare off the voters itself.
The Shaw circus (with all its consequences) is not the only possible reason why the government in Victoria is trailing. It is also suffering from same-party-in-Canberra federal drag which is a powerful force in state elections historically.
This so-called Government is strongest on Dog-Whistling, trouble is that the electorate has grown tired of it.
It might have worked for Howard, but now it’s seen as no more than blatant racism.
This sorry excuse for a Government is seen to be pandering to racists in an attempt to distract the electorate from the fact that they are ruling only to the benefit of the Mining elite. I reckon that Abbott will get an almighty shock at the next election.
Greensborough Growler@202
By the time Morgan’s skew is adjusted for, no other pollster agrees that the loss is still quite that large. I make it 4.5 points and BT this week will probably make it less than that. Essential has long runs of leaning to one side or the other compared to everyone else.
“@abcnews: #BREAKING: Attorney-General extends reporting time of royal commission into trade unions by a year to December 31, 2015”
New terms of reference too. Failed so far so rejig and get the unions and drag Shorten in no doubt
GG
[… and the PB hand wringers back in their box.]
Nooooooo, I just got out of my box and now you want to put me back in! *wrings hands*.
As an observer I must say that this is possibly the most bizarre thing you have said zoomster
[guytaur
as I’ve said to you before, I don’t need to listen to other people to form an opinion. I don’t need to outsource my thinking.]
It makes no sense. No one lives in a bubble to form an opinion. Nor does listening to other people constitute outsourcing thinking.
guytaur
[New terms of reference too. Failed so far so rejig and get the unions and drag Shorten in no doubt]
Closer to the next election as well.
[
guytaur
Posted Tuesday, October 7, 2014 at 2:43 pm | Permalink
…
New terms of reference too. Failed so far so rejig and get the unions and drag Shorten in no doubt
]
After the Burka war; there has to be something.
DN,
If you’re back in your box, at least you can continue to be a “knocker’ with your hand wringing.
*plans to jump out and surprise GG when he leasts expects it*
Zoomster and Fred
You both raise the issue of inspiration.
Zoomster governments need to be 20% inspiration and 80% perspiration (ie as you say hard work and carefully working through the issues. At election time governments need a 40% 60% balance.
Oppositions need to be 80% inspiration and 20% perspiration. If they win government they can work on 20% a year on their inspirations and leave 20% for the next election.
Fred
I sort of worry a little when you list “inspiration” as
[1) A price on carbon.
2) Renewable energy target.
2) Broadband.
3) NAtional disability scheme.
4) Gonsky.]
Even if they were ever really election winning “inspiration” I suspect not any longer.
Carbon price has lost its gloss and is about as inspirational as ebola
Broadband yes it inspirational in 2007 but has lost its gloss now. While still a positive it is not a vote catcher (or not much)
NDIS – great idea but I doubt it was EVER a true popular “inspiration” Much as it is a great idea and I fully support it, for 95% of the population it is ho-hum and a way to spend money. Labor’s trouble is that while NDIS is passionately supported by public sector unions who stand to gain, it is just NOT a real “inspire me sort of issue. The same with mental health although I suspect this does touch more people and possibly it could be made truly “inspirational”
Finally Gonski. Same comment as above. It is not and never was an issue likely to stir the hearts of anyone other than hierarchy of teacher’s unions. Now Gonski is a fine idea and once explained to me by Jane Caro (not the ALP) I fully support it. But inspirational it ain’t. Think of it as brussel sprouts. Good for us but no one really cares much.
Labor is going to have to do a lot better than those four damp squibs to win government.
Astro
read it in the context of guytaur never advancing an argument of his own and this being an issue we’ve already had exhaustive discussions on.
Really, this just proves my point about why we don’t get in depth analysis – because people seize on random comments out of context.
Here’s the full script, including subtext:
“As I’ve said to you before, guytaur, when you’ve referred me to someone else instead of explaining your own position, I have already (as anyone following this issue on this blog knows) read and listened to a vast range of opinions on this topic. I can now express my arguments on it using my own language, and have reached a point where I am confident of my position. If the professor has something new to say which might alter this, then please tell me what this is. At this point, I don’t need to listen to other people to form an opinion. I don’t need to outsource my thinking. I find it disappointing, as I’ve said before, that you are still relying on the opinions of others instead of advancing arguments yourself.”
If I have to do this for every post I write here, instead of assuming that the person I’m addresssing (rather than other random readers who haven’t been party to the conversation) has at least some idea of what I’m talking about, then things will get very tedious indeed.
Kevin,
This Essential shows the mood change in the electorate is substantial when compared to the previous election.
It also clearly shows the issues that the Government has focussed upon are not that important to voters.
Whether the numbers are absolutely correct to whatever degree of accuracy you deem inportant is a big “So what” at this stage of the election cycle.
The Government is behind and the interest is whether they have the skills, courage or nous to change over the next two years.
I’m sure that will keep PB fueled in the coming months.
On inspiriation.
Politicians have the whole of the Australian populace to draw inspiration for governance from, but I think Rex was referring to campaigning, which is specifically the/a domain of politicians.
I think Labor are currently playing a solid defence. There’s a fine line between that and being passive/slow.
Old favourites
_________
last fed. election Abbott went on at length about the Cost of Living and how he was going to do something to stop the rises…all hype and bullshit,but then in my lifetime I have seen all sides make the C0L an issue when the poublic is concerned abot inflation.. I can remember Menzies ionce camaign on “Put Value back in the pound”…nothing ever happened on that front
nothing ever happens really
Like “Jobs,Jobs.etc” Oppositions always seize on bad figures re jobs but as we all know govts have little they can do to create jobs…all these matters are beyond government but the world markets,and matters beyond the conrol of a small economy like ours…decide what happens
It all give the Pollies something to talk about,and hopefully win
@216 That last sentence should probably be “There is, however, a …”
dtt
right. So let’s not have governments which actually do things which need doing. Let’s go for ones which sound great, even if they don’t deliver.
And if what a government achieves can’t be woven into a narrative, or inspire people, then let’s junk those achievements.
I think you’re actually proving my point. When offered the choice between a pedestrian government which delivers what people want, and an inspiring one which doesn’t, I’d plump for the first every time.
DN,
Do you freelance as the “Spanish Inquisition’ in your free time?
deblonay,
Yet, despite all that standing still we advance as a nation.
I won’t admit to anything I don’t understand the meaning of, GG :P.
Zoomster
[Here’s the full script, including subtext:]
Well, given the subtext was missing, it’s easy to see why I misinterpreted. It does seem as though you didn’t expres syourself very well as both Guytaur and myself saw the logic fail in the statement you made. So rather than being critical of people saying what you said makes no sense, you could just clarify what you meant.
[read it in the context of guytaur never advancing an argument of his own and this being an issue we’ve already had exhaustive discussions on.]
Well I did, and it still made no sense. In fact those particular words in sequence will never make sense. It’s only when you add a bunch of other words that they will make sense.
[as I’ve said before, that you are still relying on the opinions of others instead of advancing arguments yourself.]
It’s a perfectly valid way to conduct an argument. There’s nothing wrong to pointing to authorities on a subject and saying this is an argument that supports my POV. Generally the expert in the field can express it better.
You can’t claim to have a better understanding that Guytaur simply because you put it in your own words, rather than pointing to commentary. It’s about the substance.
[If I have to do this for every post I write here, instead of assuming that the person I’m addresssing (rather than other random readers who haven’t been party to the conversation) has at least some idea of what I’m talking about, then things will get very tedious indeed.]
Well you should be able to clarify what you mean. The words you used didn’t make sense in any context, unless you are somehow omniscient.
DN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tym0MObFpTI
Raaraa
[They’re only doing that because businesses probably said it’s going to tie up their HR departments with many false applications.]
ABC this morning reported the government said it was only an idea, not a firm proposal, re:40 job applications per month.
But, then the ABC went on to report that the government had been inundated with complaints from small business concerned with being bogged down with non-genuine job applicants….
A statement from the government said it has listened to and taken on board those complaints and will not proceed with the proposals.
Confused?
I think the newspoll quarterly is important and needs careful scrutiny.
First WA. Labor is in trouble. BIG trouble. The shift to the greens resulting from the Ludlum/Bullock battle seems to have locked in and the small drop in greens vote has gone to the LNP. It is too early to make firm predictions but Labor needs to lift its game or it will no longer be the opposition in WA.
NSW seems to have “plague on both your houses” mentality. Not good for labor. Minor parties doing OK
Victoria is good for Labor (I think SA should be like Vic so I just do not trust the Newspoll figures)
Qld also is looking VERY good for Labor.
GG @ 224
I plead innocent.
deblonay@217
Hi deblonay.
Thanks for your kind remarks last night just after I left.
I responded this morning @75 on this thread if you haven’t seen it.
Zoomster
Without the inspiration you are not going to be in government so it is a bit irrelevant what you choose.
It should be blindingly obvious to anyone with your campaign experience but Labor needs to pick three good exciting/importsnt issues and also have 7 sensible if less exciting issues. With 10 solid campaign issues you have plenty of real stuff to meet your needs but also three catchy exciting ones.
The trouble with the 2010-2013 government/campaign is that they had sensible issues but no exciting ones.
So far nothing is emerging from labor that meets the exciting/important criterion.
The Greens have “exciting” issues a plenty the spying laws, anti war stuff and maybe uni fees etc.
DN,
That won’t sve you.
dtt,
Lots of exciting issues. But, sadly no votes if these polls are to be believed.
Labor thanks you for your preferences.
[First WA. Labor is in trouble. BIG trouble. The shift to the greens resulting from the Ludlum/Bullock battle seems to have locked in and the small drop in greens vote has gone to the LNP. It is too early to make firm predictions but Labor needs to lift its game or it will no longer be the opposition in WA.
]
labor in wa is a total joke – that the LNP has strong support both at state and federal level means collectively we are almost as stupid as qlders – although even we would be smart enough to kick Newman out. We should be smart enough to kick Barnett out after two, but even that is not clear.
@billshortenmp: We want to hear your ideas on how Labor can help tackle the rising #costofliving. SUBMIT HERE: http://t.co/1gmdtGNIek http://t.co/aKDORm4JG7
Astro
This is all part of a very very long running discussion between myself, several other posters and guytaur about his incessant posting/reference to other people’s arguments instead of advancing his own.
The occasional ‘appeal to expert knowledge’ is acceptable (although when that’s all you do it’s not) but guytaur does it all the time and seems to think it’s all he needs to do.
(Sorry for the third person attack stuff, guytaur!)
As for the rest, sorry, posts do need to be read in context. Sometimes the contexts for posts here go back years.
I have made exactly the same (or as close to as to make no difference) comment to guytaur before. Anyone who has read the threads over the last couple of weeks knows I have researched the issue referred to.
I could have added ‘at this stage, on this issue’ to each of the statements I made, and yes, it would have made things clearer. But, as I said, if it becomes a requirement that we need to do this for every post just in case someone else who hasn’t followed the conversation might get confused it will get very tedious.
Oh, and I responded to guytaur when he raised the logical inconsistency, because that’s what one does in a discussion.
People who butt into conversations thinking they understand what’s being talked about often make mistakes. (And it’s a failing of mine). The usual response is to recognise that it was person butting in who made the mistake, not the people in the conversation.
I only wish that Labor will grow a pair and stand up and call out the Abbott regime for the grubby racist that they are
[However, the government’s overall support has remained the same, with the Coalition’s primary vote on 40% and Labor’s on 39%; the Greens remain on 10% and the Palmer United Party on 4% for the same two-party preferred outcome, 52%-48% to Labor.]
Abbott officially going nowhere.
He can run from the budget but he cant hide.
Terrible results for a first term PM in a war with considerable voter support. Absolutely appalling effort in those circumstances. Suggests his brand cant be fixed.
I think the LNP will have to dump him before 2016.
zoomster
There you go again with the smear. I can and do advance my own arguments. Even on this issue. I just do not any more as you do not listen.
So I post expert commentary at you instead.
However your smear is nasty and bullying style behaviour because it keeps getting pointed out to you there are views about other than spear carrying Labor ones.
dtt
I must apologise. You listed some issues close to my heart and suggested they were uninspiring, so I over reacted!
I think it underlines my point, though. There are some things which need to be done, inspiring or not.
As for inspiration and campaigning, it may be a personal thing, but I am inherently distrustful of it. Inspiring speeches so often consist of a set of motherhood statements, which play on the emotions – they may uplift people, but without substance they’re worthless.
I’m not saying there isn’t a place for inspiration, there obviously is. I am saying that there’s a danger in rejecting candidates/parties/campaigns on the basis that they lack inspiration. Settling for a candidate who sounds brilliant but is incapable of delivery rather than one who sounds boring but delivers would obviously be counter productive.
So GIVEN THE CHOICE between the two, I would go for good governance over inspiration every time. Ideally, of course, one goes for both.
203
The Victorian Government is also behind because of the whole Tristan Weston/Simon Overland/Sir Ken Jones mess derailing its honeymoon and because it was elected because of its public transport promises and then within a year of being elected dropped PT as a priority and went for a massive road project.
guytaur
as I said, I apologise for the third party criticism. Astro asked me to explain what I meant, so I did, and it sounds harsher than I really meant it to.
And no, asking me to go and read what someone else has written or said without giving me an indication of what they’re written or said won’t work, and I’ve made that clear to you before. Give me the gist of it and I’ll have a look, because I’ll know why I’m meant to be looking.
Guytaur,
It’s a feature of lefty posters that there tend to be more views than there are issues.
You labelling someone as an “expert” reminds me that “X” is an unknown quantity and that a “”spurt” is a drip under pressure.
zoomster
Last time I gave you no link. I gave you a comment and told you where to find comments from professor williams on the NAT SEC laws we have been discussing.
Any context failure is yours not mine
GG
Well what do you call Professor Williams in regard to law? I thought expert was apt
-The NBN, ALP version not ‘Fraudband’, is potentially a major driver of economic and social progress in the immediate and long term future for all Australians.
That it is not broadly [pun] recognized as such is directly related to deliberate media disinformation.
-Gonski could be a major reform, in a positive sense, of Australia’s currently inequitable education system.
That it is not recognized as such is directly related to deliberate media disinformation.
-RET has , prior to its demise, created jobs, helped cleanse the atmosphere, encouraged investment in what should be the sunrise sector of a 21st century economy.
That it is not continuing to do so is directly related to deliberate media disinformation on behalf of anachronistic vested industries.
We have a massive failure of media responsibility and performance in this nation,
The media is deliberately failing to give credit where credit is due and hence many initiatives are under appreciated and misunderstand and in the place of such credit we have trivial scare and war mongering and numerous bright, shiny, very smelly red herrings.
Our media is broken, it needs to be fixed.
That it is not recognized as such is directly related to deliberate media disinformation.
Zoomster
I fully agree and the majority of government is about getting the boring things done. What makes the Abbott government so different from the Howard government is that Howard was 90% boring hard work and 10% ideology (until his final year or so. Abbott is 0.0005$ work and 99.9995% ideology.
My point is that oppositions need a narrative – one that can be wrapped up in slogans. People need a reason to vote for you. Now this can be positive or negative (like abbott) but either way it must tell a story. Abbott used “no new taxes”, “stop the boats”, “stop the waste,” They worked for him.
So far for labor nothing is emerging and although it is early days, come this time 12 months from now if we have not got a story and some positive ideas we will not win.
Zoomster
Jeepers
[People who butt into conversations thinking they understand what’s being talked about often make mistakes. (And it’s a failing of mine). The usual response is to recognise that it was person butting in who made the mistake, not the people in the conversation.]
Seriously? Your comment made no sense, and now you patronise me because I said so? I didn’t make an error; your comment made no sense. It was when you clarified it that it made sense. Blaming me for your inability to express yourself is poor form.
And somehow I am butting in on a private conversation?
[I could have added ‘at this stage, on this issue’ to each of the statements I made, and yes, it would have made things clearer.]
When you re-wrote your comment it made sense. It was a necessary thing to do. It needed to happen because what you wrote made no sense. So rather than lecturing people about ‘butting in’ into conversations on a blog on the internet, all you need to do is make your statement clearer.
[Oh, and I responded to guytaur when he raised the logical inconsistency, because that’s what one does in a discussion]
Sure, but you didn’t clarify your comment so that it made sense.
[The occasional ‘appeal to expert knowledge’ is acceptable (although when that’s all you do it’s not) but guytaur does it all the time and seems to think it’s all he needs to do.]
This is not true; you are making up rules. There’s no reason that people can’t guide you to an opinion piece.
Some experts in their fields
http://www.nswlaborlawyers.com/terror_laws
Fred-
Sorry those issues are boring as batsh*t. Nothing to do with the media. Just not “sexy” issues. And it is twerpy for oppositions )OK for bludgers) to use fraudband – looks juvenile and conveys nothing.
Now what might be “sexy issues” –
1. infrastructure – big stuff – a harbour bridge etc
2. A REALLY strong, strong triple strong line on manufacturing – not a mousy economist influenced line. Get Doogie Cameron to sing it. Play the nationalist Aussie first card. Works a treat.
3. Save medicare – Now this is a big and sexy issue. might even win them government.
4. probably save the barrier reef – if sold well
5. pensions super and the old – if sold well could be a real winner – everyone gets old or has old parents
5. Uni fees – but needs wise selling
Astro
[It was a necessary thing to do. ]
No, it wasn’t, really. Necessary for you. But as the comment was aimed at guytaur, he was the only one who needed to understand it.
Re DTT @245: Labor’s ‘narrative’ could be something like ‘look to the future’, ‘protect our future’ or similar. Something snappy and future-oriented. Into this we could weave education, new inductries (renewables), dealing with climate change, security for the retired, disabled and ill, jobs, fair work and so on. Compare on contrast this with the backward looking Libs, tying our future to what will be dying industries like coal.