BludgerTrack: 53.1-46.9 to Coalition

A dip in support for the Coalition recorded by Morgan makes its presence felt in the latest weekly poll aggregate reading, although the Coalition is still projected as on track to retain its thumping majority from 2013.

A fairly pronounced narrowing in the Coalition’s lead may now be observed on the BludgerTrack poll aggregate charts, thanks mostly to an unusually soft result for the Turnbull government in this week’s Morgan result. This shows up as a 0.6% move to Labor on two-party preferred since last week, but it’s only made a slight difference on the seat projection, which credits the Coalition with a net gain of one seat since the 2013 election despite a 0.4% lower two-party vote. The aggregate also records a lift in support for the Greens, who had had some of the wind taken out of their sails when Malcolm Turnbull became Prime Minister. The addition of new figures from Essential Research to the leadership ratings results in essentially no change to an overall picture of Turnbull enjoying massive but nonetheless slightly reduced leads over Bill Shorten on both net approval and preferred prime minister.

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.

1,097 comments on “BludgerTrack: 53.1-46.9 to Coalition”

Comments Page 21 of 22
1 … 20 21 22

  1. davidwh@993

    Just got the latest email update from Wyatt Roy. Apparently we will have NBN on 11 March – but he didn’t nominate which year.

    WiFi services on Bribie get a bit suspect when we have bad weather so hopefully things will improve in March.

    Real NBN or Fraudband?

  2. Yes WWP Bill Mitchell and Bernie Sanders etc never said that the government had magical spending powers, just that tea party types deliberately misrepresent with that strawman to cut spending in areas they want to attack. Saying that the government can spend as much as it wants is not saying they should spend without limit everywhere with no consequences.

    I think this article was a very good summary
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/09/repeat-after-me-the-australian-economy-is-not-like-a-household-budget

  3. [Time to see your optometrist I suspect.]
    Have another look… its a puppy dog, leaning to its left and tilting its head to the right.

    Awwwwww, cute.

  7. [Colton

    Currently on my first holiday in 3 years plus i have 3 kids under 8 so dont usually get the chance to comment.]

    Slacker

  9. Bemused we have had a green box down the road for some months so I suspect we aren’t getting FTTP.

    Currently the speed test is telling me we are getting 22/4/0.86 so even Fraudband will be better I guess.

  13. [Cheeky bugger]
    But thanks for reminding me to see the optometrist.

    I am probably due for a check up from the neck up as well.

  14. davidwh@1009

    Bemused we have had a green box down the road for some months so I suspect we aren’t getting FTTP.

    Currently the speed test is telling me we are getting 22/4/0.86 so even Fraudband will be better I guess.

    Don’t bet on it.

  19. david
    [Currently the speed test is telling me we are getting 22/4/0.86 so even Fraudband will be better I guess.]
    Unlikely. More likely it will be no better than what you have, possibly worse.

  21. Sohar@1015

    ‘I think bemused’s new gravitar is “the thinker”.’

    Who said Bemused doesn’t get irony.

    Well I know it does make me stand out a bit from some here who largely just repeat what others have said.

  24. Pegasus @ 977

    You must of missed the lol at the end of that comment.
    The greens are not worse than the libs. I’ve never said that they are. Thats why you will not find me bagging the greens with every post. Unlike you whose every post is a dig at labor.
    Nor do I think the libs are better than the ALP unlike you where a quick glance at your last probably 100 posts have been implicit or back handed criticism of the ALP. Your words here speak for themselves.
    I stand to be corrected but I bet you can not point me to one comment recently where you have criticised the Libs without also bagging the ALP.
    Not sure what a progressive leftie is meant to be but I sure can spot a ‘regressive leftie’ when I see one.

    Pegasus @ 988

    I dont agree with every decision the ALP make. I do however understand the political reality that currently exists in this country in regards asylum seekers.
    Can you or any other green please tell me why you voted down the Malaysian soultion?
    That in my opinion revealed the true motives of the ineffectual greens. Bash the ALP at all cost.
    Even at the cost of human lives and the suffering of children.
    I can only guess as to where Reza Berati would of rather been sent, Malaysia or Nauru/ Manus Island?
    I can only guess because no one can ask him because hes DEAD!!!
    So please spare me the sanctimonious tripe that you and other greens find so easy to display.
    If the libs and ALP have blood on their hands on the asylum seeker issue as the greens so often claim then the greens must take some responsibility for that mans horrible death and all the rapes, cruelty, mental torture of kids and secrecy we see now by this despicable govt.
    The greens should be utterly ashamed of their duplicity and the rank opportunism that we saw on display when voting with Abbott, Morrison and gang and no amount of deflection will change that fact.

  25. Peter Martin ‏@1petermartin 1m1 minute ago
    Just out. Excellent statement from Turnbull and Morrison explaining the modelling.
    :large

  26. ‘check up from the neck up’ is a phrase used by Kinky Friedman. Strictly speaking it refers to a visit to a psychologist, but colloquially means that the person in question is being odd or talking nonsense.

  27. Simon Katich@1025

    ‘check up from the neck up’ is a phrase used by Kinky Friedman. Strictly speaking it refers to a visit to a psychologist, but colloquially means that the person in question is being odd or talking nonsense.

    Thanks for that. Never heard that expression before although I have heard a bit of Kinky Friedman.

    Doesn’t quite describe your posts which are among the most sensible here.

  28. WWP @829

    Banks create money all the time, create the majority of money and are in practice unconstrained by capital adequacy and reserve requirements.

    This money is lower powered than government issued money (i.e the is a slight risk the bank will fail) but is mostly the same (and national governments are most like financial entities rather than households or non-financial corporations). Bank issued money is not wealth but:
    – can be used by businesses to generate real wealth through investment in real economy businesses, and
    – more problematically, can be used by bankers and property developers to extract real wealth from the real economy.

    It is interesting to note that whilst private money printing by banks continues apace there are all sorts of objections when the government does it (except when the reserve bank does becuase very few people understand what they do).

    Business lending (aka creation of money by a bank for use in a business) is (or should be) governed by a time value of money calculation.

    Business loans are rejected because the business plan does not supported the lending: either the return is inadequate or the plan is implausible (including the risk of default being too high and the required real resources not being available).

    Business loans are not rejected becuase “the bank has run our of money” (*)

    The national government situation is more complicated for a large number of reasons, but one is that the national government is both the spender of monies and the financier of that spending (i.e. it fills the roles of both business and bank in the analogous case).

    However the basis for decision making should be similar (noting that the risk of default is zero) in that the government should decide whether to do things based on some notion of return (more complicated than in the business case)

    As with the business+bank at (*) the notion that “we’d like to do it but we can’t afford it” is nonsense and usually translates to “we don’t want to do it but it’s popular and we don’t want to upset people or have to explain why”.

    So the question is why do politician routinely resort to and get away with statements that would be absurd if applied to the business+bank situation?

    I’ve not yet said anything about taxation or issuance of government securities because they are completely distinct policy instruments from expenditure with no technical relationship between them (although there are some conventions providing a wholly artificial linkage). One might suppose that maintaining the conventional linkages somehow links the money economy to the real economy but I don’t think that this is the case:
    – the fiscal situation of modern economies is not (in fact), balance over the cycle but in fact a small deficit over the cycle
    – where major economies (in particular the US) have run sustained fiscal surpluses it has led to disaster: the US government has had seven sustained periods of surplus, including one in which they repaid all securities and each and every time the surplus period has been followed by a financial crisis – seven out of seven ought to be enough experimentation given the disastrous residue of each experiment

    So we are perhaps left with: the government should aim for balance across the cycle but should ensure that it fails to reach this aim?

    Instead of playing pretend governments should accept that there will be (and should be) a nominal gap (long term aggregate deficit) representing a transfer of real resources from the next generation to the current, and should concentrate on ensuring that the next generation is indeed wealthier (in real resources) than the current generation (as governments used to do before they confused themselves by misunderstanding finance)

    The gap is filled by increased securities issuance and/or monetary financing. Neither is financially “better” than the other. The main difference between them is that securities issuance subsidises the wealthy whereas monetary financing subsidises those receiving the benefit of the government spending (often not the wealthy).

  29. K17

    That’s a lot of thinking going on around the world!

    The Buerghers of Calais is my favourite Rodin. Whoever put one in the gardens of the British Houses of Parliament was a genius.

  30. Kevin-one-seven @ 1007

    HAHAHA!!!
    Trust me, after the last week looking after a sick and teething 9month old Im almost missing work. Almost.
    Makes me appreciate those mums in particular who do it every single day, something my partner has great delight in reminding me of at every opportunity.

  34. Colton@1030

    Kevin-one-seven @ 1007

    HAHAHA!!!
    Trust me, after the last week looking after a sick and teething 9month old Im almost missing work. Almost.
    Makes me appreciate those mums in particular who do it every single day, something my partner has great delight in reminding me of at every opportunity.

    I take my hat off to the ladies who cope better than any bloke could.

    I am at the lucky grandparent stage now and get to enjoy the grandkids without all the work. 😀

  37. Oh dear. Voges bowled in last over of the day, ruled a no-ball, replays show it wasnt but it cant be referred.

    Kiwis robbed.

    Love’n’ it.

  38. WeWantPaul
    Posted Friday, February 12, 2016 at 1:58 pm | PERMALINK
    The GST hike was considered (along with other taxation changes) , but rejected as ineffective by the Govt of the day.

    I think you would be quite foolish to think the GST is anything but hidden for political purpose, and will be increased to 15% by a returned LNP govt. The only caveat being a senate that rejects it.

    Not while Malcolm’s PM it seems.

  40. [Diogenes

    Posted Friday, February 12, 2016 at 4:04 pm | Permalink

    K17

    That’s a lot of thinking going on around the world!

    The Buerghers of Calais is my favourite Rodin. Whoever put one in the gardens of the British Houses of Parliament was a genius.}

    I was thinking about this very sculpture (on your right under dappled sunlight as you enter the MR) when your post popped up.

    The wonder of it is that a mass of artful metal bits can have such a powerful impact on the emotions.

  42. [ Peter Martin ‏@1petermartin 1m1 minute ago
    Just out. Excellent statement from Turnbull and Morrison explaining the modelling.
    :large ]

    Interesting that they have released this. I have a very strong suspicion though, that this modelling would never have seen the light of day if the ALP had not run a “scare” campaign around the GST.

    And that said you can bet serious coin it would come back into the mix very quickly if the Libs were to win the HoR and Senate at the next election. Their donors want it and associated company tax reductions too bad for them to drop it for long, and the Libs “next in line leader” ScoMo doesn’t seem happy its dropped.

  45. Colton

    Well said re the Greens and their duplicity in siding up with the Liberals re Malaysia policy. Crocodile tears from the lot of them. They should be ashamed.

    Anyhoo I missed the Shorten presser, but judging from some commentary on twitter. He gave it Mal for not fronting up today to explain The Stuary Robert decision

  49. “Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources Barnaby Joyce has not confirmed whether he wants to keep Agriculture or move into another role”

    Surely he’ll go for immigration. After all he chucked Deps dogs out.

  50. Rex

    The only reason the GST modelling has seen the light of day is to give them cover for backtracking, and to quash future scare campaigns that they are still going to consider it if re elected

Comments Page 21 of 22
1 … 20 21 22

Leave a Reply

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