Fairfax has gotten in early-ish with the results of its latest monthly Ipsos poll, which is well in line with recent form in having Labor leading 54-46 on two-party preferred, up from 53-47. The primary votes have Labor up one to 36%, the Coalition down one to 38%, the Greens steady at a still unusually high level of 16%, and Palmer United scoring one of their occasional showings at 2% rather than the more common 1%. Bill Shorten’s lead as preferred prime minister increases from 43-39 to 45-39 – approval ratings should be along later. A question on preferred Liberal leader has Malcolm Turnbull leading on 41%, Julie Bishop on 23% and Tony Abbott on 15%. Further findings: 69% support for same-sex marriage with 25% opposed; 58% believe the government is doing too little on climate change, with 32% opting for about right.
UPDATE: The approval ratings are interesting in showing a recovery for Bill Shorten, who is up four points on approval to 39% with disapproval down six to 49%. Tony Abbott on the other hand is mired at 59% disapproval, and down one on approval to 35%. Shorten has consistently done relatively well on net approval in Ipsos, which is presumably related to its lower uncommitted ratings. ReachTEL, it seems, gets still more positive for Shorten by eliminating an uncommitted option altogether.
UPDATE 2: The respondent-allocated preferences result records Labor’s lead blowing out all the way to 56-44, after being equal with the headline figure on 53-47 last time. As this scatterplot shows, there has been a strong trend away from the Coalition on preferences in respondent-allocated polling conducted since the 2013 election. Contributing factors include a rise in the Greens’ share of the non-major party vote, and the Palmer United collapse.
UPDATE 3 (Essential Research): This week’s reading of the Essential Research fortnightly rolling average swims against the tide in recording a small shift in the Coalition’s favour, reducing the Labor lead from 53-47 to 52-48. The primary votes are 41% for the Coalition (up one), 38% for Labor (down one) and 10% for the Greens (down one). The most interesting of the supplementary questions relates to approval of government ministers, which delivers an excellent result for Julie Bishop of 56% approval and 22% disapproval, with Malcolm Turnbull close behind at 47% and 24%. Bottom of the table of seven by some margin is Joe Hockey, at 31% and 48%. Other questions register a conviction that a re-elected Coalition would introduce laws like WorkChoices (44% likely versus 26% unlikely), and a belief that not enough is being done to tackle climate change (53%, versus 24% for doing enough and 7% for doing too much).
Awful last quarter but the Eagles with about have the reserve squad have just done Freo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
William
Have you looked at the respondent-allocated preferences from before previous elections and determined their usefulness?
14
JacetheAce
In fact, the numbers are even worse:
“According to the stated second preferences of respondents, rather than the allocation of second preferences as they flowed in September 2013, the situation for Coalition MPs is even worse. On this measure, the government has cornered just 44 per cent support to Labor’s 56 – a 12 point gap – representing a 9.5 per cent swing that would wipe out as many as 44 seats.”]
9.5 votes out of every 53.5 votes (the LNP 2PP share in 2013) say they’re shifting to Labor. That is, 17.8%, or more than 1/6, of LNP supporters are defecting. That is serious vote-rustling by Labor.
Mind you, it’s not over. The LNP could lose another million or so votes to the party of reason, progress and justice between now and the next election.
Abbott has left no foundations for a successor to build on. There is no policy beyond Labor bad, and be afraid.
DL
Only in your fevered imaginings have I ever proclaimed to be a twitter expert.
TBA@38 [WHO is the preferred Labor Leader is the question… that Fairfax won’t tell us]
You of all people should realize that nobody cares who leads the opposition when they are in front, how do you think we got to here ?
pedant:
That is true. Although I cannot see Abbott behaving like Rudd did.
[38
TrueBlueAussie
WHO is the preferred Labor Leader is the question…]
lol
lol
lol
Anyone! Anyine would be preferable to Tony (Capn’) Abbott.
[Why does he bother, sprocket? Because among Liberal voters “Mr Abbott [still] enjoys the support of 33 per cent to Mr Turnbull on 25″. Those who love him still love him – pity about the swingers whose vote he needs.]
Maybe the Lib voters are so happy to have a plethora of such popular and lovable potential PMs to choose from that only having one in three preferring Abbott is seen as a good thing. Long may their delusions live.
BK @ 102: Here’s Antony Green on changes in preferences flows at the Queensland State election.
http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2015/02/huge-shift-in-preference-flows-at-2015-queensland-election.html
[88
daretotread]
dtt…to think, this is what happens when Abbott WINS?
briefly:
Checked out the action in the western Pacific lately? Two possible super typhoons in the making!
confessions @ 107: Well, I guess we will have to wait and see. I personally think he’s capable of pretty well anything. He’d probably take replacement by Mr Turnbull rather more badly than replacement by another conservative like Mr Morrison (presumably with the blessing of the rest of the conservative faction).
As the government has reeled through one crisis after another in recent times, its members have reassured themselves with a simple thought: “However bad we look, voters will not cop Bill Shorten and Labor.”
The polling until now has tended to confirm that view: no matter how badly the Prime Minister might have been travelling, the Opposition Leader has often been in the same territory.
Read more: http://www.afr.com/opinion/columnists/laura-tingle/coalitions-nightmare-is-that-bill-shorten-might-be-electable-20150816-gj08pj?stb=twt#ixzz3iy7AsmV9
Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook
@110 – well, QLD isn’t the best case, since it’s got OP voting. However, the 2013 election was a kind of a protest election and I think we probably should give the respondent allocated some credence.
William
Do you think there’s anything in the theory that Freo decided to not give their utmost against WC so as to increase the likelihood of Hawthorn having to go west in week one? Lyon has done such a thing on at least one occasion I can think of.
112
confessions
howdy confessions…I admit, I’ve been looking closer to home lately. The N. Hemisphere season does seem very violent so far….terrible storm in China last week.
We don’t see much of abbott depicted as Popeye these days – kicking arse etc 🙂
Not really BK, but it presumably means something. Here is a scatterplot showing the shares of preferences credited to the Coalition in all the respondent-allocated two-party polling published since the 2013 election:
pedant:
Personally I’m of the view that if Abbott is to be replaced it’ll be by Morrison. That would inevitably mean a front bench reshuffle where Turnbull can replace Hockey.
TBA seems crankier than normal woth Tony’s failures & Bill’s success.
No, Tom, because that would be ungallant.
vic @ 114
[As the government has reeled through one crisis after another in recent times, its members have reassured themselves with a simple thought: “However bad we look, voters will not cop Bill Shorten and Labor.”]
Is that really around the right way, though? Mightn’t it be that this mob are reeling through one crisis after another because they believed that whatever they did, voters wouldn’t cop Bill Shorten and Labor?
briefly:
I saw raw footage posted by a storm chaser in China when that cyclone hit. Pretty scary stuff.
[119
William Bowe]
….terrified voters run en mass from the Troglodytes to Labor…
oops @ 123
To be clear. I’m quoting victoria who was quoting Laura Tingle.
[124
confessions]
the chasers are crazy…not my thing, that’s for sure…usually prefer to avoid the inclement.. 🙂
[Was it a bad time to put out a story about how fit the PM was?]
He can start running now!
Morrisson obviously needs a lot more media cosmetic surgery before he becomes remotely acceptable as Lib leader to either the public generally or just Lib voters.
He scored only 5% with all voters as preferred Lib leader – Mal got 41%, Julie 23%, Tony only 15% and then Morrisson down the bottom – presumably.
With only Lib voters he didn’t rate a mention – Tony at 33%, Mal at 25%, Julie at 23%, Joe [remember him?] at 6% and Morrisson nowhere.
So what next, after “Women’s Weekly’ can they do to show us soft and sweet Scott and how long will the process take?
Time is running out.
[This is a News Corpse Journo?
@PSyvret: This could be a very flag heavy week in Canberra … http://t.co/l63T6zhzYj%5D
He’s a token non-RWNJ so that news corpse an say they provide a “balanced” service. Remember, Philip Adams wrote for them.
Freo tried pretty hard in the last quarter for a team that was letting West Coast win…
I’ve sort of been splitting the difference between previous-election and respondent-allocated preference numbers in my head. Don’t think it fair to entirely discount what punters are telling the pollsters, but also think what people did is a pretty good indicator of what they’ll do.
Ipsos Poll
2PP: ALP 54 (+1), with 56 on respondent allocated preferences.
Primary: L/NP 38 (-1), ALP 36 (+1), GRN 16 (0)
PPM: Abbott 39 (0), Shorten 45 (+2)
Just about perfect.
Do him nice and slow, Bill. Make the filthy bastard and his nasty little gang feel every minute of it.
I certainly don’t think the change in preference flow from last election will be as dramatic as the Qld election because 1. no optional preferences and 2. not as huge a drubbing last time. But I do think there will be significant improvement for Labor if Abbott is still the PM.
Similarly for why the polls that reduce or exclude undecideds tend to be much better for Bill. The answer is simple. The majority just want Abbott gone. It doesn’t matter how much people might have reservations about Shorten or Labor – if they are the vehicle that they need to get rid of Tony, then they’ll get onboard. Abbott can hardly complain seeing as that’s the only reason he got to be PM in the first placed.
Display name
[As the government has reeled through one crisis after another in recent times, its members have reassured themselves with a simple thought: “However bad we look, voters will not cop Bill Shorten and Labor.”
Is that really around the right way, though? Mightn’t it be that this mob are reeling through one crisis after another because they believed that whatever they did, voters wouldn’t cop Bill Shorten and Labor?]
Yep. Hence their crappy Budget last year
Fess
You were wondering about this earlier today
http://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/afr-complaints-over-latham#.xolooaqjOg
119
There is a noticeable trend against the Coalition there.
Thanks William
I doubt the Federal Court will give an injunction
[“However bad we look, voters will not cop Bill Shorten and Labor.”]
Many Labor supporters including myself have been disabused of a similar delusion regarding Abbott. Shorten requires far less polishing than Tony ever did.
One source of Mr Abbott’s current problems may be that he seems to be, in priority order:
1. The leader of a faction within his party.
2. The leader of his party.
3. The leader of his coalition government.
4. The leader of his nation.
I would guess that most voters expect the priority ordering to be the exact reverse of this.
poroti @ 84
[Abbott getting the royal order of the boot would not be as big a surprise. Maybe even a relief for voters on both sides.]
Yes. But the public expect Turnbull to replace him. Getting Scum will be as much of a surprise to the average swinging voter as offing Rudd was a few years ago. Apart from the tragics like us, Scum is just not on the average person’s radar. And his ascension can easily be painted, not the least by Turnbull, as the same Liberal Party right wing fanatics who brought us the Marriage Equality fiasco imposing their will over the people’s choice.
And Scum is just not that good. He may not be Captain Clusterf!@k, but he does not have what it takes to both unite the party (definitely not!!!) and enthuse the public. He talks down at people, talks too fast and doesn’t answer questions.
shellbell @ 138: Another reason for taking the Senate order route for getting documents, if the numbers are there in the Senate.
Note that the trend shown in that striking chart William’s done is partly driven by the Greens’ share of the total non-major vote increasing.
victoria:
Thanks for that. Wow, WTF is Latham’s problem?!
He must be feeling deprived of relevance with Labor polling strongly and the coalition continuing with the switch flipped firmly to vaudeville.
[As the government has reeled through one crisis after another in recent times, its members have reassured themselves with a simple thought: “However bad we look, voters will not cop Bill Shorten and Labor.”
The polling until now has tended to confirm that view: no matter how badly the Prime Minister might have been travelling, the Opposition Leader has often been in the same territory.]
Poor Laura seems incapable of understanding that, irrespective of Preferred PM figures, Labor has held a winning TPP lead for more than 12 months. Pontificating on PPM is meaningless except for filling up blank spaes.
fess @ 107
[Although I cannot see Abbott behaving like Rudd did.]
Two years ago I would have agreed. With everything I have seen since, there is a huge risk that he will destabilise the party out of revenge if he is rolled. It’s fundamentally in his nature.
Fess
Who knows but it aint good
Don’t know how much if any of this is true, but Fairfax’s AFR is getting a lot of grief about the alleged antics of Mark Latham, including losing Westpac as a major sponsor.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/afr-complaints-over-latham#.dbgbQQoz0
Pedant
And Abbott’s conduct re ssm debate was done as leader of faction within his party
Vic
Whoops, missed your post on the “Latham” matter.
The female journo twitterati have been calling out the troll behaviour for some time now.