Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor

The latest result from Essential Research finds the Coalition back to what at the time was a surprisingly poor result a fortnight ago.

The latest result of the Essential Research fortnightly rolling average is back at 54-46, after moving a point to the Coalition last week. On the primary vote, Labor is up one to 41%, the Coalition is down one to 39%, and the Greens are down one to 9%. The result combines two polling periods from the past two weekends extending from Friday to Monday, and so does not meaningfully account for the three-days-and-counting that the Prime Minister has spent as a national laughing stock.

Other questions ask respondents to rate the government’s handling of various issue areas, and since this question was last asked at the peak of a recovery period for the government in September, the movements are adverse. There has been a 10% correction in the government’s biggest strength of that time, relations with foreign countries, the net rating down from plus 15% to plus 5%, but managing the economy is also down solidly from minus 6% to minus 14%. Other movement is in the order of zero to 5%.

A separate question also finds the government copping a surprisingly mediocre rating on handling of asylum seekers, with good down three since July to 38% and poor up one to 36%. However, a further question finds 26% rating it too tough, 23% too soft and 35% opting for “taking the right approach”, which seems to be the best result that can be hoped for. Forty-four per cent expressed support for sending asylum seekers to Cambodia with 32% opposed.

Not sure if we’re going to get the Morgan face-to-face poll we would ordinarily have seen on Monday, but I can reveal that Ipsos will be in the field this weekend for the Fairfax papers.

UPDATE (Morgan): Morgan has published a poll that’s not quite cut from its normal cloth. The method is the usual face-to-face plus SMS, the field work period is normally Saturday and Sunday, and the results published the combined work of two weeks’ polling. But this time the field work period was Friday to Tuesday, and not inclusive of any polling from the weekend of January 17-18. In other words, a substantial part of the survey period comes after the Prince Philip disaster. The portents for the government are not good: compared with the poll that covered the first two weekends of the year, Labor gains a point on the primary vote directly at the Coalition’s expense, leaving them at 37.5% and 39.5% respectively. After a hitherto soft set of polling results so far this year, the Greens shoot up from 9.5% to 12%. Labor now holds formidable two-party leads of 56.5-43.5 on respondent-allocated preferences, up from 54.5-45.5, and 55.5-44.5 on previous election preferences, up from 53-47 to 55.5-44.5. The sample of 2057, while still large, is about two-thirds the usual.

ReachTEL, which is not normally prone to hyperbole, is talking up results federally and from Ashgrove which the Seven Network will reveal shortly.

UPDATE 2 (ReachTEL): The ReachTEL poll, conducted last night to take advantage of the Prince Philip imbroglio, is bad-but-not-apocalyptic for the Coalition in terms of voting intention, with Labor’s lead up from 53-47 to 54-46. The primary votes are 40.1% for Labor, 39.7% for the Coalition and 11.3% for the Greens.

However, the headline grabbers relate to Tony Abbott’s personal ratings. The poll finds him a distant third for preferred Liberal leader, on 18% to Malcolm Turnbull’s 44% and Julie Bishop’s 30%. The five-point scale personal ratings find Tony Abbott moving 9.5% in the wrong direction on both indicators, with very good plus good at 21.6% and bad plus very bad at 61.6%.

Bill Shorten is respectively up from 21.3% and 27.1% and up from 37.7% to 38.3%, and while that’s a net improvement, it’s interesting to note he does less well on the five-point scale than approve-uncommitted-disapproval. The poll also found 71% of respondents were opposed to the Prince Philip knighthood, with 12% in support.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

944 comments on “Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor”

Comments Page 4 of 19
1 … 3 4 5 … 19

  1. Not looking too good for Sukurmaran and Chang given Joko’s hardline comments a day or so ago.

    I didn’t think that there would be a lot of support from Australians for the two of them but I was fairly surprised at the more-or-less fifty/fifty split.

    I doubt that we are going to see an outright Presidential act of clemency. But I hope that some way is found through an appeal process to provide a way through.

  4. Reachtel

    12% support Abbott’s knighting of Prince Philip, 71% against

    Less than 1/4 of LNP voters support the knighthood

    16% think Abbott is doing a good job, 61% think a bad job

    18% think he should lead Coalition
    Hockey 6%
    Bishop 30% (but most popular in Coalition supporters)
    Turnbull 44%

  8. [Also, it didn’t take long for many to start wondering if the events of June 2010 were a good idea.]

    I was just speaking to a liberal colleague with whom I’d discussed the stupidity of the night of 23 June 2010 on 24 June 2010. My position then as it is now was that even if Rudd needed to go (and I still see no credible evidence of this) it was done in a monumentally stupid way. In particular the public had no reason to view the events as anything other than power hungry factional clowns unnecessarily and stupidly flexing muscle with a too weak caucus timidly following along.

    On the other hand liberal voters and the public generally would breathe a sigh of relief and not be the least bit surprised if Abbott was dumped. ‘Why didn’t they do this earlier!’ Would be a wide spread feeling.

    I baited my liberal colleague with the suggestion they can’t get rid of Tony because there is no one to replace him with and he went straight to Turnbull.

  11. MTBW@134. I wasn’t making any comment about what Labor should/shouldn’t do. I was responding to bemused’s question about why I thought Rudd would have been less of a problem for Gillard if there hadn’t been a hung parliament.

    From the start of 2012 onwards, a person (rumoured to have been the man himself, although there is no proof of this) or persons working on behalf of Rudd mounted an unprecedented and relentless level of backgrounding against Gillard to key members of the Press Gallery. They knew that there was no possibility of retribution against Rudd or any of his backers because anyone expelled from the party would immediately hold the balance of power.

    I accept that expelling anyone for this disloyal undermining would have been no easy matter. But, if Gillard had had a reasonable majority, there would have been a least some prospect of disciplinary action. And that would have cramped the plotters’ style.

    I also accept that you and bemused cannot see that there was anything wrong with the undermining of Gillard, because you seem to think that it was all about the rightful king being restored to the throne. And, any way, Gillard wasn’t much good.

    I agree that Gillard wasn’t that great, although she had a really tough time of it which wasn’t all her own doing by any means. But the use that was made of the Press Gallery to undermine her was a damaging incident in the history of our body politic. As, IMO, is the growing campaign against Credlin. It’s all part of a process of turning politics into a form of reality TV show.

  13. William – I think the “corker” element was that Abbott no longer is the preferred Coalition pick for leader. Turnbull always got big leads over Abbott due to ALP and Greens voters, but for Abbott to be behind Bishop among his own base is pretty terrible.

  14. I suspect that the only way that the libs can make a clean transition is if Rupe pulls Julie Bishop from behind the curtain and proclaims her empress (despite her stutter and lisp). Otherwise it will be a bloodbath with these clowns stabbing each other in the front, back, etc etc. However, of course, being anointed so directly by a clearly desperate Rupe will create its own difficulties.

  15. It will be amusing if that old American misogynist Murdoch gets his way and Credlin gets sacked.

    I think she has probably prevented many Abbott “disasters” from ever seeing the light of day. Without her, it will be a sequence of brilliant “Captain’s calls” like this knighthood fiasco!

  16. meher baba@161

    MTBW@134. I wasn’t making any comment about what Labor should/shouldn’t do. I was responding to bemused’s question about why I thought Rudd would have been less of a problem for Gillard if there hadn’t been a hung parliament.

    From the start of 2012 onwards, a person (rumoured to have been the man himself, although there is no proof of this) or persons working on behalf of Rudd mounted an unprecedented and relentless level of backgrounding against Gillard to key members of the Press Gallery. They knew that there was no possibility of retribution against Rudd or any of his backers because anyone expelled from the party would immediately hold the balance of power.

    I accept that expelling anyone for this disloyal undermining would have been no easy matter. But, if Gillard had had a reasonable majority, there would have been a least some prospect of disciplinary action. And that would have cramped the plotters’ style.

    I also accept that you and bemused cannot see that there was anything wrong with the undermining of Gillard, because you seem to think that it was all about the rightful king being restored to the throne. And, any way, Gillard wasn’t much good.

    I agree that Gillard wasn’t that great, although she had a really tough time of it which wasn’t all her own doing by any means. But the use that was made of the Press Gallery to undermine her was a damaging incident in the history of our body politic. As, IMO, is the growing campaign against Credlin. It’s all part of a process of turning politics into a form of reality TV show.

    No campaign of backgrounding was needed.

    She was quite successfully undermining her credibility herself.

    Even if we accept the complete litany of gripes against Rudd, what was done to him, and the way it was done, was guaranteed to provoke a backlash in the public at large and in the caucus.

    With the benefit of hindsight Gillard was doomed from her first day as PM. There should have been some cool heads with the ability to foresee this. Maybe John Faulkner did.

  18. K17

    Yes, I wonder if there are any Liberals with enough self esteem to be a bit sick of being Rupert’s dupes. Probably not enough to make any difference, but I could be wrong.

  21. I don’t think Abbott’s leadership position is as dire as some wish-fulfilment people would like it to be.

    We are still 18 months and two budgets from the next scheduled election.

    As many of us used to say when FPJG was under the pump, 18 months is a long time in politics.

    And despite how bad it threatened to be at the last election still some 48% of the electorate were on-side with Labor – despite all.

    Are we to believe the conservatives could not rely upon some kind of rock-solid support at the 48% level – regardless of Abbott?

    While a TPP of 48% means a swag of seats to the winning side, the Senate is still messy, messy, messy.

    Not good for Oz regardless.

  22. Ratsak, was it u earlier saying we shouldn’t discount Robb as deputy? I agree, health pending, i wouldn’t discount him from leader.

    Great move by Shorten bringing up republic. He should bring up a whole host of progressive policies that turnball/bishop have shown support for to stir up the far right and make the leadership issue a wasp nest

  23. Tricot

    On the other hand as Andrew Robb reckoned when discussing the Vic election results. Once a government is behind for over a year or so by these sort of margins it is all over red rover .

  24. Tricot 171

    You make a few brave asumptions though. One of those being that Labor would have received that vote without changing leaders; personally, I highly doubt that. Also, that Abbott is going to be able to turn things around; an extremely brave assumption!

    I think one thing that will be in the minds of Coalition MPs who have doubts about whether Abbott is the person to lead them to the election, is will they want to go down the same road as Labor and leave switching leaders until very close to the election. I am more inclined to think that they will want to give a new leader a lot more clear air than that.

  26. Tricot – That 48% support you posit kinda puts the current polls of 45%, 46% in perspective.

    Abbot has put off a lot of people who would normally vote Liberal.

  28. [ On the other hand as Andrew Robb reckoned when discussing the Vic election results. Once a government is behind for over a year or so by these sort of margins it is all over red rover . ]

    The tories will trying to establish if people have stopped listening to abbott.

    When they know that has happened, they have their decision made for them.

    Maybe not yet, but either way its like this government is near the end of a second term in voter standing.

  29. matt31

    But the Libs in Victoria gave Denis Napthine plenty of clear air after desposing of Ted Baillieu who went very quietly and amicably. Didn’t help one bit (of course the Abbott factor played a signficant role but that, ironically, doesn’t negate the argument about the dangers of deposing a first-term leader early, late or any other time. This will weigh very heavily I’m sure.

  32. Tricot#171 and others. The current circumstances look exactly like those we have seen dozens of times before when a party leader (PM or LOTO) are in deep, deep trouble.

    I can’t remember one occasion in which the outcome was good for the said party leader. But I guess there’s a first time for everything.

  34. [ Rocket Rocket
    Posted Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 6:49 pm | Permalink

    FPJG had much worse polls than these 45 & 46 for Abbott. So hopefully the Liberals stick with him right through to 2016 election. ]

    Its also pretty cool that he has the sword poised over him for almost another two years as well.

    Wonder when they will pretend they are all nice guys ? 🙂

  36. [Long odds I know, but you could find a Kevin Andrews to blow it open with a challenge (probably not Kevin this time – maybe a Dutton or similarly useless drone). The mere fact that the challenge is called will fatally weaken Abbott and those who may have supported him in the behind the scenes stuff.]

    The stalking horse approach is well based in military theory – send some scouts or probes, perhaps even an expendable detachment to draw the opponent out. Our Federal Parliament is littered with such pawns, and someone like Dutton or Mal Brough could fit the role.

    On a related note, I am currently travelling and on checking in to a small country town motel in a safe Country Party seat, the owner engaged me in conversation. The topic? How out of touch Tony Abbott is with this Prince Phillip knighthood thing. I replied that Tony should have given to someone popular like Prince William.

  37. Yes it is true that JG had worse numbers than this Government, although having said that Abbott’s personal numbers are nearing that very territory. Also needs to be remembered that we’re talking about a second term Labor Government, hung Parliament, poisonous media environment and many other factors; for this current Government to be consistently poling 8-10 points behind midway through it’s first term is nothing short of dire.

  43. meher

    [I also accept that you and bemused cannot see that there was anything wrong with the undermining of Gillard, because you seem to think that it was all about the rightful king being restored to the throne. And, any way, Gillard wasn’t much good.]

    It was not about the rightful king being restored for mine it was all about ambition on behalf of the Right to get control over someone who ran his own race and look how that turned out.

    I would not give you tuppence for the likes of Conroy etc and their little secret meetings at restaurants around Canberra planning how they were going to change the nation and their push for personal power.

    I was a Member of the ALP for too many years to not know the shenanigans that go on.

    My grandfather was a Federal Member for twenty years and around the dinner table I heard all of his stories and didn’t forget them.

    I think for myself and do not rely on anyone to process my thoughts for me.

    We will have to agree to disagree but for mine the Rudd removal was disgusting and if that had never been caused by the likes of Arbib Bitar and all the other so called power brokers in the party we might have had a three year ALP Government with no interuptions.

    It was wrong then it is wrong now and no tomes from you will change my mind.

    Let’s turn our thoughts on the wanker who is now PM and get on with it.

  45. The other factor in Abbott’s favour in terms of him staying in the role is that unlike Rudd, he is not loathed by his own colleagues.
    Abbott’s colleagues want him to succeed and that factor alone should give him some more time to turn things around.

  47. BK

    [I just hope like crazy I will be able to se a Campbell Newman concession speech!]
    It would make a wonderful entrée before the main course of an Abbott concession speech.

  48. [@April_Pressler: “@GhostWhoVotes: #ReachTEL Poll Preferred LIB Leader: Abbott 18.1 Turnbull 44.6 Bishop 30.5 Hockey 6.7 #auspol”]

    Could we be looking at a “Grand Coalition”?

    Turnbull deputy and portfolio of his choice – maybe a business oriented super portfolio, HoJo retains Treasury, Bishop the Younger gets the big office

  49. Boerwar @130:

    Kindly stop slandering the Greens. Kamnenos is most certainly not our kettle of fish, even if we share agreement on one or two policy points – and even that’s weaker than you portray, since like any good little neoliberal, you don’t seem to understand what “anti-austerity” actually means. Personally, I’m disappointed that Tsipiras chose ANEL as coalition partner, rather than To Potami.

    And before you equate your slander of the Greens with my criticism of the ALP (for instance, @106), I’d like to point out that I restricted my criticism to actions the ALP has undertaken – I criticized the ALP for negotiating the TPP, rather than sledging accusations of palling around with antisemites and the like.

    As opposed to your tactics of slinging guilt by association (even when we’re not associating), strawmanning our political positions, begging the question and assorted other bullshit.

    It’s getting very tiresome, and every time you (a confirmed ALP supporter) go on yet another half-baked anti-Greens rant, you weaken the very real support that the Greens who read PB continue to offer Labor by preferencing it.

    Is it entirely rational? Probably not, but humans seldom are – and you can only kick someone so many times before they do something silly (such as voting/preferencing LNP) for the purpose of spiting you and people like you.

    You can disagree without resorting to strawmen…can’t you?

Comments Page 4 of 19
1 … 3 4 5 … 19

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *