James J relates that the fortnightly Newspoll in tomorrow’s Australian is bad news for the government, showing Labor leading 54-46 on two-party preferred (up from an already above-trend 53-47 last time) from primary votes of 38% Coalition (steady), 36% Labor (up two) and 13% Greens (down one). Tony Abbott is down one on both approval and disapproval, to 37% and 52%, while Bill Shorten is up two to 37% and down one to 45%. Preferred prime minister is at 39-38 in favour of Abbott, unchanged on last time. The poll was conducted from Friday to Sunday from a sample of 1175.
UPDATE: Essential Research bucks the trend a little to record the Coalition up a point to 40% and Labor down one by 38%, with Labor’s two-party lead narrowing from 53-47 to 52-48. The Greens are up a point to 10%, with Palmer United steady at 4%. Further questions found strong opposition to deregulation of university fees (53% disapprove, 22% approve), support for the NDIS being funded by a higher Medicare levy (44% approve, 34% disapprove), and a willingness to pay a higher GST if used to fund health (56%) or pensions (44%). There was also a very strong view that climate change will lead to a higher incidence of bushfires and severe weather events in the coming years.
Also today, Fairfax offered a further tranche of its Ipsos poll finding Julie Bishop level with Tony Abbott on 20% as preferred Liberal leader, but with Malcolm Turnbull still well ahead of both on 35%. For Labor leader, Bill Shorten on 30% had competition from Anthony Albanese and Tanya Plibersek on 18% apiece.
921 comments on “Newspoll: 54-46 to Labor”
I wouldn’t take 2016 completely for granted. Even if the names currently floating around for the GOP nomination aren’t inspiring (assuming that is so; remember, you’re not the one whose vote they’re depending on), it just takes one Republican Governor you haven’t really heard of, who rises up on the promise of outside change after “8 long years” of Democratic rule to completely shake things up.
That poor campaign and resulting loss made Obama`s reform agenda hard to implement in the first half of term, because of filibustering, when he had a majority in both houses.
Of course more use could have been made of the reconciliation procedure to get more reforms past filibusters when Obama did not have 60 votes in the Senate.
Ok, so the Repugs in the US have distanced themselves a bit from the Teabaggers in their midst prior to the mid-term elections and it seems to have paid off for them with control of both houses.
Whats the odds post election of the Tea Party types still infesting the Repugs now getting all in a lather and trying to assert themselves and the more fruit-cakey parts of their agenda??
Being the 5th of November….
When we used to have cracker night in Queensland
Posted Wednesday, November 5, 2014 at 10:10 pm | Permalink
How did the panelbeating on your shoulder go ?
Seems good. Painful. Another week or so in sling. Doing all this left handed. slow going
I meant to say thanks for asking.
Just watched the iview replay of Gough’s memorial service. The (rightfull) booing of Abbott and Howard totally swamped by the eloquent eulogies.
As a beneficiary of free tertiary education myself, the contributions of Cate Blanchett and Noel Pearson really stuck home, and John Faulkner’s rallying cry for the progressive cause was inspirational.
[it just takes one Republican Governor you haven’t really heard of, who rises up on the promise of outside change after “8 long years” of Democratic rule to completely shake things up.]
GWB aside, that’s not how Republicans do things. They almost always pick ‘next in line’ or major front-runners.
Of course interestingly this time there is no well-defined ‘next in line’. Technically it’s Santorum although Christie might be able to quibble. Personally I think neither will cut it and that, despite a poor year, Rubio is still the front-runner.
Ok so I’ve looked again at the GOPguvs and I reckon Sandoval (Nevada) and Snyder (Michigan) look line the only plausible contenders, although a man with the name Butch Otter has to believe.
Martin, the second place rule is well-known and I certainly have it in mind when talking about GOP nominations. I was just pointing out a possible scenario where an outsider can throw it in the air (as you, yourself, highlighted a precedent of.)
Rubio is my pick too. Christie pisses off too many Republicans and Cruz scares the establishment. Santorum, for the aforementioned reason, remains consistently on my radar. I’d take Rand Paul seriously as well.
I will wait and see who announces before I make some sort of prediction.
I say this as someone who picked both McCain and Romney (when I picked the latter, I was howled down at places like this for not appreciating the strength of the tea party etc.)
What about Bobby Jindal? Or John Kasich? Scott Walker? Jan Brewer?
I admit some would be very beatable but there’s a treasure trove of potential GOP nominees out there.
The Republican’s won’t win the presidency. There simply isn’t any path to 270 EC votes that makes sense.
Try playing around with this, and see what you get. Even assuming Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina and Florida all go Republican (something that is almost impossible with the current demographics), they still have only 266 EC.
Here’s a Q for anybody interested in US politics: pretend Hillary doesn’t run. Who could you see putting their hand up for the Dem nomination. I’ll eliminate Biden as well.
So Warren is a name that’s thrown around, particularly by the left of the party (she might be the Kucinich of 2016). I know Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland is itching to run if Hillary doesn’t. Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York is probably the same. Anyone else?
I reckon, despite him narrowly surviving this time, Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia might be somebody who’d consider running in this scenario too.
And likewise. This is certainly a cycle that looks as likely to throw up a GOP dark horse as ever, and clearly it does happen. It’s just still much less likely than more. If I were betting I would definitely put my money on the final nominee being one of the three or four big names currently discussed.
Jindal too clumsy, Walker too polarising, Brewer wrong sex especially to go against Clinton. Kasich I nearly included so I’ll give you that 😉
Mike Beebe (Arkansas) and Jack Markell (Delaware) might be worth watching.
Dems do of course traditionally get candidates from amongst the guv’nors.
Like Governor Kennedy, Governor Jonson and Governor Truman.
Anyone who cannot see an “h” in Johnson, in my comment 918, needs their eyes checked.
I watched the Memorial on i-view…feel quite dumbfounded now…