The eagerly awaited pre-spill Newspoll concurs with Galaxy in having Labor’s two-party lead at 57-43, from primary votes of 35% for the Coalition, 41% for Labor and 12% for the Greens. The Coalition result is down three points on the last Newspoll of December 12-14, and one point lower than Galaxy; Labor’s is up two, and two points lower than Galaxy; and the Greens’ is steady, and one point higher than Galaxy. The previous Newspoll result was 54-46 on two-party preferred. Phillip Hudson’s paywalled report on the Newspoll result in The Australian can be read here; the tables are featured on The Australian’s website here.
Tony Abbott’s personal ratings are 24% satisfied and 68% dissatisfied, for a net satisfaction rating of minus 44%. In a history going back to 1985, the only occasions when Newspoll produced a worse result for a Prime Minister were when Julia Gillard recorded minus 45% in the poll of September 2-4, 2011, and in four polls under Paul Keating from August to October in 1993. Alexander Downer had two worse results as Opposition Leader near the end of his tenure in December 1994, and Andrew Peacock matched it in a poll conducted during the 1990 election campaign. Bill Shorten leads Abbott as preferred prime minister by 48-30, up from 44-37 last time, a result surpassed only by a 20% lead for Alexander Downer over Paul Keating during the former’s short-lived honeymoon period in July 1994. Shorten is up five on approval to 42% and down three on disapproval to 40%.
Head-to-head questions on the Liberal leadership find Malcolm Turnbull favoured over Abbott by 64-25 and Julie Bishop favoured 59-27, while Turnbull is favoured over Bishop by 49-38. The poll was conducted from Friday to today from a sample of 1178.
UPDATE: To follow today’s action as it unfolds, you could do quite a lot worse than to tune in to Crikey’s Liberal leadership spill live blog.
@ 746
SMH have nothing on the Huffington Post.
In the end, I purposefully added their whole site to my browser’s Ad Blocker blacklist, in order to save my keyboard from being smashed in sheer incredulity and frustration at the disconnect between their headlines and the article text.
I kept hoping things would get better, and there would be a return to their early form. But it was time for an intervention to save my sanity. I’ll be similarly blacklisting their Australian version when it launches here, to save my sanity.
Their general quality is about one notch above those “most popular articles from the Web” links that infect the bottom of various news webpages.
I just saw Abbott turn his back on Tanya Plibersek at the start of her condolence speech for Tom Uren.
The informal vote:
(sorry if anyone has already posted it)
Puffy
I noticed that too.
lefty e
Posted Monday, February 9, 2015 at 12:40 pm | Permalink
What a massive blow to a PM’s legitimacy: 40% of his own MPs dont support him.
Thats worse than one of the Gillard votes.
“My question today is to the Prime Minister. Given one third of her Parliamentary colleagues have today expressed a lack of confidence in her, how can she claim to have a mandate to continue as Prime Minister?”
Tony Abbott February 2012. On the day Gillard won a ballot 71 -13
OK!
Cansomebody on Bill Shorten’s staff tell him that his blue tie is just as nasty as Abbott’s and that if you where a rather nice but adventurous blue suit you do NOT were a bright and ghastly blue tie.
Albo – good try- suit and tie well co-ordinated – pity the tie is out of date and much too thin.
Tony Burke – nice tie, guy behind Tanya P – tie in bin pleasa NOW!!!!!
Tanya P – nice -simple, elegant, inoffensive, professional – A very simple piece of jewelry recommended
For the enjoyment of Bludgers something I posted this morning on Bolt’s blog:
Bolt opined:
[Night after night on 2GB I’ve been rung by livid Liberals threatening to quit the party if Turnbull is made leader…]
And that’s Abbott’s problem. He thinks the problem is with his base and therefore refuses to acknowledge the true reality.
Andrew’s unsolicited advice to Abbott at the end of last year was bone headed and wrong. His final suggestion was for Abbott to “fight”. Fight who? Fight what? Fight for what? Abbott’s entire life in parliament is marked by what he is fighting against – the republic, RU486, Pauline Hanson, Labor, carbon tax, mining tax, PPL for a time before the man of conviction changed his mind in a stunning act of political hubris, arrogance and ultimately betrayal, humane treatment of asylum seekers, Rudd, Gillard and just about everything Labor did or attempted to do in government
What’s Abbott for? What’s his vision for Australia besides digging up more dirt, destroying the renewable energy sector costing this country billions in lost revenue and tens of thousands high paying, high tech jobs, and destroying the NBN which if completed as Labor had planned would lay the foundation for the next quarter century of economic growth and innovation. Instead he’s consigning us to a backward looking future, where the rich get richer and lower and middle income earners can aspire to nothing.
The great conflict at the heart of Abbott’s problem with electorate is that he needs to appease two diametrically opposed constituencies: the right-wing base who happily vote against their own interests and delude themselves that someone willing to do the bidding of billionaires understands their concerns – and moderate centrists, who just want a competent, no frills government that doesn’t threaten their livelihoods, seek to remake Australia as some Tea Party wonderland and makes good policy based on actual evidence that correlates strongly with reality. The difficulty for Abbott is that he barely comprehends this problem and therefore can’t possibly hope to solve it.
As a watcher of politics I want Abbott to hang on until the election so the voters get the satisfaction of tossing out him and his incompetent government. As an Australian deeply concerned about the future of this country I want Abbott and his rotten ideology gone as soon as possible, some time this morning would (have) be(en) nice.
This is my light-hearted look at how I thought things might play out. Maybe next time? I hope you enjoy.
[The Demise of Tony Abbott
Part 1
The Beginning of the End
Tuesday, 10th of February, 2015
Spill motion passes by 1 vote. (Abbott wishes his BFF Slippery Pete was still there.)
Three candidates for the leadership emerge Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison, who is adopted by the ‘anyone but Turnbull’ faction.
Round 1
Turnbull; 40 votes
Abbott; 38 votes
Morrison; 34 votes
Round 2
Turnbull; 45 votes
Abbott; 57 votes
Abbott re-elected leader of the Liberal Party.
Deputy leader; Teflon Bishop re-elected unopposed.
Turnbull resigns from cabinet to abide his time amongst his supporters on the back benches.
Morrison, who apologises, saying he was just trying to stop Turnbull, is allowed to continue as Minister for the Abuse of the Down Trodden, Leaners and Misfortunates.
Johnston is resurrected to keep Fraudband on track. His first act as Minister is to announce a major infrastructure programme of re-establishing the Telegraph network across Australia. Described as a necessary back-up to digital communications and seen as essential to the nation’s security. Major construction is to be out sourced to Japan. The Minister complained, ‘We have no industries left in Australia capable of handling such a major project.’
]
Heard Abbott walked out of the meeting accompanied by Abetz and Cormann. What a trio!
Vale, Kep Enderby
[“SMH have nothing on the Huffington Post.
In the end, I purposefully added their whole site to my browser’s Ad Blocker blacklist, in order to save my keyboard from being smashed in sheer incredulity and frustration at the disconnect between their headlines and the article text.”]
The Sydney Leftist Herald is no longer a newspaper… it is a tabloid.
I proved the other day using a google search that they wrote up to 8 articles every day regarding Abbott-this, Abbott-that.
I mean I’ve heard of editorilising but it’s become like a twitter feed rather than a serious newspaper.
[“What a massive blow to a PM’s legitimacy: 40% of his own MPs dont support him.”]
39%… which is the truth… just doesn’t sound as good does it?
MTBW@728
Is Shorten taking the piss by wearing a blue tie? Or is that complete coincidence?
@762 – is that all you’ve got?
Something PVO said after the vote was interesting. He was of the view that the PMO and his advisers and staffers lived in a bubble, but now believes it extends to other MPs on the front bench. He thinks so many are disconnected from the reality of the electorate
100 people voted…
61% voted for no spill motion. This doesn’t mean only 61% support the PM it just means 61% decided there was no point to even vote on who would be PM.
39% voted for a spill motion. This doesn’t mean 39% don’t support the PM, it just means 39% supported having a vote on who would be PM.
Aren’t facts a wonderful thing?
Now Abbott with a condolence motion for “Colleen McCulla”.
seriously 762 that is the % his own government that don’t want him he is not suitable as a PM the rest of the country does not want him , can wreck but not build
[39%… which is the truth… just doesn’t sound as good does it?]
Just a couple of days ago you were saying that there’d only be a handful of votes against Abbott.
TBA
Shorten and Labor are so pleased that Abbott is still PM. They know how much the electorate despise Abbott. It makes their job so much easier
Revised Ministry list
[TrueBlueAussie
Posted Monday, February 9, 2015 at 2:32 pm | Permalink
“What a massive blow to a PM’s legitimacy: 40% of his own MPs dont support him.”
39%… which is the truth… just doesn’t sound as good does it?
]
TBA
Assuming cabinet solidarity, 39 of 67 back benches don’t support Abbott.
That’s 58%.
Shorten opens by reprising Mr Abbott’s QT.
Good familiar first qurstion
TrueBlueAussie@762
There was 101 in the room so he had 100 (less himself).
He got only 60 (61-1) to support him so the maths checks out.
Itep
39. that’s only a handful, or two … Or nearly eight. Remember these guys have Hockey doing the math.
Talk about disconnected. Dixer on jobs
“@crk5: Tony Abbott presents to the House a revised ministry list. Tony Bourke makes the comment “You’ll need another one for tomorrow..” #qt”
[“Just a couple of days ago you were saying that there’d only be a handful of votes against Abbott.”]
It wasn’t a vote on Abbott.
Christ how dumb has this country become? It was a vote on whether there would even be a vote on the leadershit.
It was NOT a vote on Abbott, no matter how much the media spins it.
TBA
so what is your newspaper of choice these days?
TBA
so what is your newspaper of choice these days?
And there was one informal. If that person had confidence in Abbott, he or she would have votes yes instead of informal.
Mr Abbott, flustered, goes ‘Ma- Ma-ma Madame Speaker’.
TBA
Your spin not working. For any that cannot work it out for themselves we have seen comments by the likes of Peter Van Onselen and Barrie Cassidy.
How long until the next Newspoll – a fortnight?
Can hardly wait!
Tom.
TBA
I agree that you should keep digging that hole.
I thought 61-39 was the latest Newspoll.
Boerwar
Abbott does that often
[I proved the other day using a google search that they wrote up to 8 articles every day regarding Abbott-this, Abbott-that.]
Anyone would think Abbott was a Prime Minister with a minus 44% net approval rating or something. No, the SMH should have followed the lead of TBA, and gloated about the Prince Philip knighthood on Australia Day on the grounds that it would “piss off lefties”.
[It was NOT a vote on Abbott, no matter how much the media spins it.]
So the 39 wanted a leadership spill so thay could vote for Abbott? LOL
ru
Touche’
“@SwannyQLD: 39 of Tony Abbott’s colleagues want to send him to Colombo to live #qt”
William, my biggest issue with SMH isn’t just the amount of stories they write on Abbott(a couple every day) it’s also the fact the headline almost never matches the content of the article.
It’s pure click bait for the twitter generation.
As to my preferred online source of news surprisingly it’s The Guardian. At least they don’t pretend to be something they aren’t and stick with a story for longer than 10 minutes.
Bit agro there True Blue! If you are worried about the state of education in this country maybe you should talk to Mr Pyne about implementing Gonski. Remember that stuff called policy? NDIS / Gonski / Carbon Pricing all wrecked by this govt – they do not develop they wreck.
Calm down true blue!
[It wasn’t a vote on Abbott.
Christ how dumb has this country become? It was a vote on whether there would even be a vote on the leadershit.]
Yeah, they called it for larfs! Ha-dee ha ha!!
[TrueBlueAussie
Posted Monday, February 9, 2015 at 2:43 pm | Permalink
“Just a couple of days ago you were saying that there’d only be a handful of votes against Abbott.”
It wasn’t a vote on Abbott.]
Who was it a vote on?
At the moment Abbott is the only person in this leadership race. No one else has declared their intention to run.
On Jon Faine this morning after the spill motion, a number of callers including an elderly “Mark” called in and blamed the media for the spill. Mark blamed the media (ABC, Murdoch-media named) for scrutinising the government instead of letting politicians do their job and said he can’t possibly win this argument against Faine because the latter is a lawyer.
I also note one of the critical callers claimed to be a “Labor voter”.
Would TBA be saying it wasn’t a vote on the leadership if it had been say 98-2 (i am assuming the one Tory nong would still have voted informal)
Would TBA be saying it wasn’t a vote on the leadership if it had been say 98-2 (i am assuming the one Tory nong would still have voted informal)
[“So the 39 wanted a leadership spill so thay could vote for Abbott? LOL”]
Totally conceivable. There are some people in the LNP who would like to see it go to a vote to put an end to the Turnbull ambitions and put the leadership thing to bed.
I’m not saying everyone who voted that way did so for that reason but it’s a long bow to draw that calling for a vote means that they don’t support Abbott. It’s not proven.