ReachTEL: 55-45 to Coalition

ReachTEL finds no indication that the government’s travails over the new year have done any harm to its standing with the voters.

The first ReachTEL poll of the year for the Seven Network supports Roy Morgan and Essential Research in finding nothing too radical has happened over the new year break. The poll records the Coalition’s two-party lead at 55-45, unchanged from the last poll on November 26. That’s all we have at this stage, but hopefully full results will be on the website soon.

UPDATE: Here we go. On the primary vote, the Coalition goes from 48.8% to 48.5%, while Labor goes from 31.1% to 31.8%, and the Greens go from 11.2% to 10.8%. A little surprisingly, Malcolm Turnbull’s lead on the all-or-nothing preferred prime minister question has widened considerably, from 71.3-28.7 to 80.8-19.2.

UPDATE 2 (26/1/16): The latest fortnightly face-to-face and SMS poll from Roy Morgan, which went from being the Coalition’s worst poll series to its best when Malcolm Turnbull took over, has given the government its weakest result since September. The Coalition is down 3.5% on the primary vote to 43.5%, but Labor is likewise down a point to a dismal 28%, with the Greens up two to 15%. On the headline respondent-allocated two-party preferred figure, the Coalition lead narrows from 56-44 to 55-45, while the previous election two-party result goes from 55.5-44.5 to 54-46. The accompanying press release also informs us that the Nick Xenophon team is outpolling Labor in South Australia, where the primary votes are Coalition 31.5%, Labor 21.5% and NXT 22.5%. The poll was conducted over the past two weekends from a sample of 3247.

Also out yesterday was a Galaxy automated phone poll of 506 respondents from Clive Palmer’s electorate of Fairfax, conducted for the Courier-Mail, which recorded primary vote support for the beleaguered Palmer at a risible 2%. This compared with 50% for the Coalition and 27% for Labor, compared with 2013 election results of 41.3% for the LNP, 26.5% for Palmer and 18.2% for Labor.

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.

2,714 comments on “ReachTEL: 55-45 to Coalition”

Comments Page 55 of 55
1 54 55
  1. Puff – you do understand there are plenty of transgender men who were born biologically female? Some have undertaken gender reassignment.

  2. Jimmy

    No I think you are thinking about cultural roles that have only a limited association with gender. i am thinking in terms of biology.

    Societies develop cultural behaviours that suit the particular curcumstances, and in harsher times this related to the ability to survice and reproduce – ie to get food and shelter and not to be devoured by predators or killed by aggressive neighbours.

    Now fairly obviously most men (not all) and stronger and taller than most (not all) women. For most societies therefore the maximum survival will occur when men are allocated the hard physical tasks and also tribal/family defence. However actual dominance in the culture is not always linked to gender and in many human (and animal) societies, females are dominant. There is a school of thought that suggests that in societies where MOST of the food comes from agricuture or from gathering plants and small animals, the society will largely be matriarchal in character. When herding is dominant, society becomes more patriarchal.

    The nurturing role is OBVIOUSLY biologically determined, since in early human society a child would only live if it had breast milk, usually to the age of 4 or so. Women were thereofore forced into the nurturing role – there was little option, especially in the absence of birth control. In most societies (including feudal Europe) the training of a boy/nurturing was male dominated from the age of 7 or so.

  3. Objection to even the lowest level of NBN speeds is not confined to Oz RWNJs.

    The most important thing missed, from stupidity or on purpose, is that households now have multiple devices connected to the wifi in the house – computers, mobile phones, and so on.

    [Broadband in the United States still lags behind similar service in other industrialized countries, so Congress made broadband expansion a national priority, and it offers subsidies, mostly in rural areas, to help providers expand their offerings,’ writes Bill Snyder. And that’s where an effort by the big ISPs and a group of senators to change the definition of broadband comes in. Of course, the ISPs want the threshold to be as low as possible so it’s easier for them to qualify for government subsidies. In a letter to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, dated January 21, 2016, the senators called the current broadband benchmark of 25 Mbps downstream and 3 Mbps upstream ‘arbitrary’ and said that users don’t need that kind of speed anyway. ‘[W]e are aware of few applications that require download speeds of 25 Mbps.’ the senators wrote, missing the simple fact that many users have multiple connected devices. ]

    The basic speed mentioned in the article above, 25 Mbps downstream and 3 Mbps upstream, is about what I have, and it works well – for the moment, and there are times I would like greater capacities, mostly for uploads.

  4. Pegasus @ 2648,

    ‘ The ALP is also shedding members because they have had enough of the party.

    Just returned from a meeting of my local Greens branch (and it aint in the inner city).

    Its membership continues to grow and is now at a very health high level.

    New members continue to include ‘refugees’ from the ALP, some of whom have finally let their ALP memberships lapse after a couple of decades or more.

    Asylum seeker policy is often cited as a reason for the switch to Greens membership.’

    Scenario: Greens Branch Meeting

    Agenda: Bitch among ourselves at ALP
    Bitch among ourselves at ALP Asylum Seeker policy
    Devise ways to co-operate with the Coalition government in order to try and upstage the ALP
    Don’t discuss any ‘Meat Is Murder’ policies in deference to the leader
    Pat each other on the back for being holier than thou and the ALP

    …Go home and boast about it on Pollbludger. 🙂

  5. dtt @ 2651,

    ‘ I had a diamond python on a bedroom a few years ago. Someone (not me) put in in a pillow caseand took it outside.

    I had one at the front door last year – wanted to come inside. The cat was hissing.’

    I don’t have pets so that’s OK. I think I’ll let it stick around to keep the Antechinus and Chidditches at bay. 🙂

  6. dtt @ 2668,

    ‘ The reality is that men have a Y chromossome and only 1 X chromosome. In other words rought 1/50 (46) or 2% of their genome is different. No matter how much hormone you take you can never change this cellular DNA. Now this Y DNA or lack of an X probably represents something like 500-1000 different proteins that a male body makes or does not make because of this DNA. It will affect the way you breath, muscles, sensitivity to drugs, food metabolism, probably neuron pathways, blood flow etc.’

    Exactly. Both my sons have Haemophillia as they are XY
    I am a Carrier because I am XX.

    That XY is the one thing that Transsexuals can never change. Nor can Chas(tity) Bono ever acquire a Y chromosome, so the point becomes a hormonal one I think, as opposed to a core physiological one. I believe that it is the hormones that the people washing around their bodies incline them to one side of the gender divide or the other, especially as they wash around their brains. This they then exaggerate by taking more of the same orally and having the op if they desire to.

    Fair play to them if they do. However they are never fully male or female because of their chromosomal makeup. Just like my son can never have an operation to step his congenital condition back down from what he was born with, which is a chromosomal abnormality which has bequeathed him extra male hormones and all that goes with it. He is very hairy. 🙂

  7. Good morning Dawn Patrollers.

    Mark Kenny tells us how Turnbull’s moderate image is beginning to fray.
    Here we go. Sydney house prices have peaked and are now dropping. Is it a hiss from the bubble?
    But Stephen Koukoulas tells us that waiting for the “crash” has cost Australians thousands.
    Yet where we are it’s like a desert! Our dam has empties for the first time since we’ve been here.
    Same sex marriage reform is threatening Coalition unity. And serve them right!
    “View from the Street” has its say about the plebiscite. He also farewells Clive Palmer with a slow clap.
    Is ATAR broken as the sole university entrance criterion?
    For once I agree with Fox News!
    Bob Ellis reckons it’s a game changer for Trump.

  8. Section 2 . . .

    The interview poor Jamie Briggs gave to my local rag gets some visibility in the MSM.
    The right wing rump is playing up. Now it’s Andrews off to the US to hang out with some conservative defence mob.
    Abbott’s speaking engagements require our scrutiny and concern.
    Malcolm Turnbull and Tony Abbott the fundamentalist preacher.,8613
    The man who beat Centrelink’s system.
    Youth smoking rates are at a record low. Good!
    The Anglican church is now under scrutiny at the Royal Commission.
    Michelle Grattan tells Morrison he cannot short change us by not having a taxation green paper.
    Meanwhile Tony Wright really takes the piss out of Abetz and his rump compatriots. The ridicule is starting.
    Josephine Tovey rightly hops into Ted Cruz over his ridiculous claim about our gun laws and rape.

  9. Section 3 . . . with Cartoon Corner

    Now Clive Palmer’s nephew is in the sights of the Queensland Nickel administrator.
    How well are new refugees setting into Australia?
    The AMA says that public hospital funding will be the biggest problem for state governments.
    Elizabeth Farrelly asks whether our national identity is a matter for pride or shame.
    Apple’s clever accounting could conjure up a zero Australian tax bill for 2016. Surely there are ways that we can counter this. This arrogant mob needs to be taken down a peg or two.
    Heath Aston reckons that Apple’s disclosure could be a defining moment for it and its fellow rorters.
    Ron Tandberg and the right wing rump at work. Nice.

    Alan Moir with an unwelcome reminder for Turnbull.

    Great work from Pat Campbell on the rump and the plebiscite.

    Roy in the Herald Sun asks the obvious question.

  10. Good Morning

    political_alert: Labor’s @AlboMP will announce his intention to nominate for preselection in the 2016 federal election, 10.40am, Sydney #auspol

  11. On the transgender thing.

    I have a simple rule. Treat people as the gender they identify as. Even if its a drag queen on a stage.

    I do wonder on the genetic argument if we did genetic tests of every transgender person what their XY or as is true in some cases XXY or YYX results would be compared to what society told their parents what their gender was.

    There is still a lot of unresolved questions with transgender people.

    As for the attention seeking claims I say poppycock. No one chooses to be discriminated against. Also attention seeking is the last thing I call those brave enough to have their penis removed and turned into a vagina. Thats a conviction beyond any claims of attention seeking as men will tell you when they imagine the prospect of living life without a penis.

  12. “View from the Street” has this to say:

    [Now, a referendum would be binding, but can only be held regarding a matter covered in the Constitution, which marriage is not. Indeed, as we learnt when the High Court slapped down the ACT’s brief attempted legalisation of same-sex marriage, the only body that can determine the laws on the subject is the Federal Parliament. So ultimately this is going to have to go to a vote – you know, like literally every other law in the country does.


    Of course marriage is covered in s51 of the Constitution.

    [ The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:

    (xxi) marriage;

    (xxii) divorce and matrimonial causes; and in relation thereto, parental rights, and the custody and guardianship of infants; ]

    How difficult would it be to put a Constitutional referendum that added to the marriage provisions saying that gender of the married couple (as well as other things like religion etc.) was not to be a bar to a valid marriage?

    Then it WOULD be official.

Comments Page 55 of 55
1 54 55

Leave a Reply

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