Newspoll: 51-49 to Labor

The latest Newspoll result finds Labor bursting into the lead, with no respite for Malcolm Turnbull on personal ratings, despite the good press from last fortnight’s double dissolution ultimatum.

Newspoll has turned in a headline-grabbing result, with Labor taking a 51-49 lead on two-party preferred, reversing the result from a fortnight ago. The primary votes are 41% for the Coalition (down two), 36% for Labor (up two) and 11% for the Greens (down one). Malcolm Turnbull is down one point on approval to 38% and up four on disapproval to 48%, and his lead as preferred prime minister has been sliced from 52-21 to 48-27. Bill Shorten is up four on approval to 32%, but also up one on disapproval to 53%. The poll also finds only 19% in favour of allowing states to levy income taxes, with 58% opposed. It was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1743. Full tables behind a paywall at The Australian.

Also out today was the latest fortnightly face-to-face plus SMS poll from Roy Morgan, which reversed a sudden surge to Labor recorded a fortnight ago. The poll has the Coalition up two on the primary vote to 42%, Labor down two to 31% and the Greens down one to 13%. Where the last poll had Labor leading 50.5-49.5 on both measures of two-party preferred, this one has the Coalition leading 52.5-47.5 on the respondent-allocated measure, and 51.5-48.5 going off 2013 election preference flows. The poll was conducted Saturday and Sunday from a sample of 3174.

UPDATE: The Essential Research fortnightly rolling average is once again at 50-50, although there’s movement on the primary vote to the extent of both major parties being down a point, with the Coalition on 42% and Labor on 37%, with the Greens up a point to 10%. Other findings: Chris Bowen is now rated more trusted than Scott Morrison to handle the economy by 23%, up four since January, with Morrison’s rating unchanged at 26%; a 34%-all tie on support and opposition for granting the states income tax powers, if “it would mean Federal income tax rates would be reduced”; 64% disapproval of tax-exempt status for religious organisations, with 24% in support; improvement in perceptions of the economy since January, with 32% describing its current state as good (up four) versus 27% for poor (down four); 32% saying the economy is heading in the right direction (up two since January), versus 37% for the wrong direction (down one). The poll was conducted online from a sample of 1038, with the voting intention results supplemented by the survey from the previous week.

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.

1,608 comments on “Newspoll: 51-49 to Labor”

Comments Page 31 of 33
1 … 30 31 32 33

  1. Briefly

    [where a tax is imposed on land the value in the value in the land will have to be monetised in order to meet the tax liability. That is, the land will have to be sold or let. Where it’s let, income derived from the lessee will be used to satisfy the tax. ]

    Both of your sentences is not necessarily the case. Plenty of people who own blocks of land that produce no income still pay council rates. Foreign investors are prepared to pay holding costs and still regard a vacant property as a better deal for their circumstances than collecting rent but seeing wear and tear on their property.

    As for satisfying the tax, it rolls into the other holding costs of rental property. When it comes to either negative or positive gearing, the amount of land tax, water rates, insurance, body corporate fees, maintenance, council rates and any other outgoings have the same status as interest charges. All that matters is the total. A 1% increase in interest rates for some will dwarf land tax charges for most investors – and this is not imposed directly by the government.

    Bottom line is that an investor takes risks relating to foreseeable charges, wear and tear, damage, defaulting tenants and, most of all, substantial interest rate increases (not forgetting the advantage of decreases). They then charge as much rent as they reasonably think they can get, bearing in mind that the amount of the rent is locked in for a year at least, typically.

    I get what you are saying about the flow through of costs to the tenant, but the reality is that tenants are capable of mobility – and they don’t have to worry about stamp duty if they decide there is a better offer elsewhere – and a landlord can charge only so much as would not drive the tenant to a better prospect (even allowing for tenant inertia).

    I should note that in the ACT at least residential tenancies are heavily restricted by tenancy law. Landlords are fairly restricted in what they can do in terms of increasing rents unreasonably and what they can insist on in leases. It may be different elsewhere. And it is certainly different in regard to commercial leases where there is a presumption (whether correct or not) that lessor and lessee are on more equal terms than in residential property leases.

  2. Not after I found out she was was a thief who stole from some of the poorest workers in Australia, and the liberal party should have known she was a thief, how read her mind.

  6. Steelydan,
    Wait until all the money that the Preferential Trade Deals done with other countries is added up. Nick Xenophon at the National Press Club today said that the countries we have signed these much-vaunted ‘Free Trade Deals’ with are getting much more out of them than Australia is. He has the figures to prove it. It will probably end up in the BILLIONS. But that’s just like the Tories, they always look after themselves and their mates in business first and the little guy gets any crumbs that fall from their table.

  7. [1469
    C@tmomma
    However, my original point stands and that is that the Bush/Gore race in 2000 was so tight that the Nader supporters ended up being the difference between George W.Bush winning and Gore losing, as well as James Baker’s legal shenanigans over the ‘Hanging Chads’.    ]

    No it doesn’t stand.

    There will not be a third party candidate on the left. Voting is not compulsory in the US, and if Clinton wins the nomination, but is not able to come with positive arguments for why Sanders’ former supporters should vote for her, then that will her fault, not Sanders.

    It’s hardly a ringing endorsement, nor a compelling argument, if Clinton’s main pitch to Sanders supporters is that the other side is worse (which they absolutely are).

    My view is that progressive Democrats and young voters will turn out and vote for Clinton, because they will absolutely agree that Trump or Cruz would be an unmitigated disaster. But independent voters, who support Sanders in huge numbers because of his economic message, will not necessarily turn-out for Clinton, and that will be because they do not agree with her policies and principles. They may support Trump (though I do not think they will support Cruz, as independents are quite socially progressive), or they may just stay home.

    The onus is on Clinton, not the voters.

  8. I coach a U10 rugby union side, 13 to a team in this age group. It’s their 3rd year tackling. They can all ferociously tackle a bag , most will tackle their team mates,especially when they’re not supposed to, and about 3-4 carry that over into a real game . Into the second half things normally improve as they get worked up enough to tackle ,and about 75% join in.

  9. Name some names? The libel laws protect the venal and stupid among the rich and powerful. However, building and construction, financial planning, mining and oil, to a lesser extent banking, finance and transportation are dodgy as all getout. I think a few well-targeted Royal Commisions in Australia into the manouverings behind the war on renewables, the NBN and certain big infrastructure projects would turn up some ‘interesting’ results.

  10. Greensborough Growler @ 1505,

    Hillary will want a VP that can deliver votes.

    Julian Castro, tick!

    Hillary sows up the African Americans, White Working Class and the entrepreneurs and Castro brings in the Latinos and Southern Democrats.

  11. I don’t care what anyone says. I want Trump to be the Repulsivecan nominee.

    In Novemeber he will receive such an electoral backlash, sorry I mean pizzling, that it will trigger off an existential crisis for the Repulsives from which they will never recover.

    Now that will be fun to watch as they devour each other in a very public manner.

  12. This began because Steve stated that conservatives have more of a propensity for corruption my point is that Labor have far more runs on the board in that area.

  13. [Not after I found out she was was a thief who stole from some of the poorest workers in Australia, and the liberal party should have known she was a thief, how read her mind.]

    There were big question marks swirling around her at the time. Like how she happily accepted a salary of $275k while claiming she could not work out how she could divest herself of this salary. The sad fact is that it suited Abbott and co to lionise her and her allies without looking hard at her own bona fides. Beyond that, Michael Williamson and the people he selected to be his senior allies because of their greediness are serious aberrations from the norm in the union movement.

    There is no evidence that corruption, dishonesty and theft are rampant in the union movement. Even the examples dredged up by the TURC were almost all at a fairly petty level – especially when compared to the behaviour of all the major banks, whose CEOs took home humungous remuneration packages which dwarfed the total personal benefits obtained by the union officials fingered by Heydon.

    The simple fact, and why this government has no interest in having a federal ICAC, is that it is not interested in corruption, crookedness and dishonesty. It is only interested in smashing the construction unions on behalf of its construction and developer donors.

  14. C@

    Hillary already has the Latinos and Southern Democrats. She needs to appeal to white men, and she needs a younger white man to offset her age. With a dash of charisma.

  15. steely
    Joh Bjelke Petersen
    Mal: the NBN, that’s going to waste at least $30 Billion, the biggest theft of taxpayers money in Australian history.

  18. JD @ 1507

    My view is that if and when Clinton wins the nomination, Sanders will encourage his supporters to back her. This is typical of what happens once the nominee is chosen, but there is less rancour between the two campaigns than usual. By contrast nobody knows what will happen when the GOP sorts out its nominee.

    It is impossible to see the GOP winning the election. The concern is that if Trump does finish up as the nominee the damage that the Republicans have done to US civic norms will become worse as he doubles down on his channelling of the worst of American white middle class disaffection and alienation.

  19. There is no evidence that corruption, dishonesty and theft are rampant in the union movement.
    Rampant no but it is there to a large enough degree to merit some sort of over-site.
    labor party don’t want a federal ICAC either they are quite adamant on it so there goes that argument

  20. Jimmy Doyle,
    Let’s see how Hillary performs when she is the Democrat nominee and then we can jump to conclusions.

    I think you are underestimating the numbers of potential Democrat voters in the Fall who support the more Centrist policies of Clinton.

    We should all wait and see how she goes in the upcoming Closed Primaries in California and especially in New York, where she was the Senator and Sanders hails from.

  22. [1513
    TPOF
    The simple fact, and why this government has no interest in having a federal ICAC, is that it is not interested in corruption, crookedness and dishonesty.    ]

    But also because corruption and immoral quid pro quo is systemic in the Liberal Party. Liberals see nothing wrong with multi-million dollar donations being made to their party in exchange for policies that favour big business and the rich. Those donations might be corrupt and immoral but they entirely accord with the worldview of the Liberal Party, which is that if you are rich, you are morally good: you are a job creator and a hard-worker. Mighty convenient that this ideological worldview just so happens to be very rewarding for those who hold them and get themselves elected to Parliament.

    The network that exists between elected Liberals and very wealthy Australians is well established from private schools like Kings and SCEGGS right on up to the Free Enterprise Foundation. Then to add insult to injury, plenty of Liberals go retire straight into the corporate sector as payment for services rendered, despite being the most talentless group of hacks this country produces.

  25. Its in there DNA hmmmmmm I tell you what I will try and find out how prisoners vote, I should be able to find out through the electoral commission and get back to you.

  27. TPOF @ 1518 – I agree that that’s exactly what Sanders will do. I truly do hope that Clinton wins if she’s the nominee.

    Having said that, with Clinton’s disapproval ratings as high as they are, and given her many flaws (like her hardcore neoliberal views), there is almost no chance that the Democrats will win the House, though they may win the Senate.

    If Clinton wins the nomination there will be justified enthusiasm and celebration that America has its first female Presidential candidate (and likely President) but there will be no optimism that things are going to change for the better policy-wise.

    What’s going to happen is further gridlock and stagnation, which is to the Republican Party’s advantage. Clinton may well surprise in terms of policy, but she will have no ability to pass them given Republican stonewalling.

    I fully accept that this would also very likely be the case with Sanders.

  29. Cipes people

    Now I am not up with every US Democrat, but what i can say is that Hilary will need a running mate that energises the voters and captures SOME of the anti – establsishment demographic. the risk is that when Hilary is the nominee she wiil not enthuse Sanders voters to get out and vote, or for some – the idependents or ordinary voter they may switch to Trump.

    Now it probably is not much use chasing the latino or black vote in the South, because those states will go Repulblican come what may. Latinos in Florida are worth chasing.

  30. Talking of networks Jimmy I have to go, big meeting tonight, we are deciding the fate of the middle east some people want it over and done with but I reckon we can drag it out, keep people distracted so I can make my billions, now where did I put my secret identification ring, goodnight all

  31. A poll for Christian Aid and Global Witness has found very strong support for the idea that the government should force overseas territories and crown dependencies to be more transparent. Interestingly, Conservative supporters appear to feel more strongly about this than members of the public as a whole.

    The full details are here. And here is an extract.

    Over three-quarters (77%) of British adults agree with the statement that “David Cameron has a moral responsibility to ensure that the UK’s overseas territories are as transparent as possible”. Agreement is even stronger among Conservative supporters (80%) and older Britons (85% for those aged 45+).

    81% of British adults agree with the statement that “All companies, whether they are registered in the UK or its overseas territories, should be legally required to reveal their ultimate owners”. Agreement is even stronger among Conservative supporters (87%) and older Britons (89% for those aged 45+).

  32. Jimmy and TPOF.

    The problem Hilary has is getting the voters out. Agaist trump and cruz she will do OK because they are both so horrible that all democrasts and most independennt will crawl out of bed on a snowey morning to vote. Against Kasich perhaps not.

  33. C@

    Slightly too old, I think (given you’d want whoever her VP was to have a run at the Presidency in eight years).

    I’m favouring Martin Heinrich, unless someone similar can be found from California or similar.

  34. C@tmomma – I think it’s very likely that Clinton will win New York and California, the nomination, and the Presidency. But I’m agnostic, given her past record (particularly on foreign policy), as to whether Clinton will be a good President.

    For America’s sake, and the rest of the world, I hope she is.

  35. JD,

    I’m calling bulldust.

    Clinton will be the first insider elected since Bush 1. All the others have been ex Governors.

    Clinton comes to the job with years of Washington insider knowledge and experience. She’s probably the most qualified candidate since Richard Nixon.

    The US needs to clean house and I reckon she’s just the vinegar and spice required.

  37. Pretty much any Western politician found to have cash squirreled away in a tinpot island tax evading haven is toast right now.

    But here in Oz, nothing there, it’s legal, move along….

  38. Only stupid criminals go to jail, esoecially those who do their own violence. The smart ones have big offices and access to the best lawers.

  39. [1535
    Greensborough Growler
    Clinton comes to the job with years of Washington insider knowledge and experience. She’s probably the most qualified candidate since Richard Nixon.    ]

    So what?

    How does “insider experience” motivate radical right-wing Republicans who view compromise and negotiation as apostasy, and who regard the Democratic Party as an existential threat to America, to suddenly be supportive of a Democratic President’s agenda?

    Now I’m going to call bulldust.

    (I’m not even going to address the irony of you mentioning Nixon as a “good” example.)

  40. zoomster,
    Is Heinrich too far left for America to embrace as a VP?

    I admit he does have a touch of the Justin Trudeau about him. 🙂

  41. Here I am, trying to save Tasmania from energy armageddon and you go and have a land tax discussion without me…

    [I like your point that they are the same, they should be taxed the same, and for them to be taxed the same you need to take the lake into account. The best way would be not to have income tax at all, the river is going to flow into the lake, tax the lake.]

    The key to this metaphor is that the lake is at end of the river. To tax the lake is to circulate water back to the catchments of many lakes, via govt spending, and thereby even out everyone’s lake’s level.

    On that, Lake Gordon is down to 6.5% today; it’s now actually 5 lakes.

    The hydro generator inlet tower can be assessed with a snorkel, so the decompression unit at the site is also going to waste.

  42. Briefly

    You do realise do you not that there is ALREADY land tax on investment properties – or there is in Qld. So renters are already paying the tax. It cuts in wherever someone has land value in excess of $600,000 so if you are a landlord with two rented houses you will pay land tax.

  43. Jimmy Doyle,

    But I’m agnostic, given her past record (particularly on foreign policy), as to whether Clinton will be a good President.

    Considering the sort of tin pot dictators, like Putin ( 😉 ) that are running rampant in the world right now America would benefit from having a President who projected serious intent. Not going off half-cocked like George W. Bush did but someone prepared to make the right call at 3am when required.

    I don’t think Larry, er, Bernie Sanders would be as convincing in that role. 🙂

  44. daretotread – I agree that Kasich would be the Republicans’ best candidate, but I would’ve thought he has almost no chance of winning given how radicalised Republican primary voters are.

  47. C@tmomma – given Clinton, as Secretary of State, had a big hand in helping one of those tin-pot dictators take power in Honduras, I’m not as optimistic as you about how Clinton will conduct US foreign policy.

    I do agree, however, that foreign policy is a major weakness for Sanders. But you will recall that this was also true of Obama in 2008.

  48. JD,

    You love a tantrum!

    Despite his criminality, Nixon is rated as a much better President than average. My point was that he’d been in the centre of power in Washington since the late 40s. So he obviously is the most qualified insider in the last few decades.

    The times suggest a switch is needed to someone who knows how to play the game.

    Sanders and Cruz don’t cut it.

    Trump is a disaster.

  49. JimmyDoyle #1554
    [I agree that Kasich would be the Republicans’ best candidate, but I would’ve thought he has almost no chance of winning given how radicalised Republican primary voters are.]

    That and the fact that neither Kasich nor Cruz has a realistic path to the Nomination.

  50. Millenial,

    Cruz won big today, stopping Trump’s momentum.

    If there is no clear winner by the Convention, then anything can happen.

Comments Page 31 of 33
1 … 30 31 32 33

Leave a Reply

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