Essential Research: 52-48 to Labor

A new poll suggests voters want parliament to legislate for same-sex marriage if they can’t get their favoured option of a plebiscite, as the Coalition primary vote maintains a slow downward trend.

This week’s Essential Research finds the Coalition down a point on the primary vote to 37%, Labor steady on 37%, the Greens steady on 10%, One Nation up one to 6% and the Nick Xenophon Team steady on 4%, with two-party preferred unchanged at 52-48 in favour of Labor. The poll also finds 53% favouring a vote by parliament on same-sex marriage in the event that the Senate blocks a plebiscite, with only 29% opposed. Support for the proposed plebiscite question, “should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?”, is at 60% with 30% opposed, compared with results of 57% and 28% when the same question was posed a month ago. Only 22% of respondents supported the goverment’s plan for $7.5 million of advertising to be provided for both sides of the argument, with 68% opposed. When asked about the biggest threats to job security in Australia, 31% nominated “free trade deals that allow foreign workers into the Australian market”, 23% companies using labour hire and contracting out, 18% the impact of technological change, and high wages in last place on 11%.

In other news, I mean to start shaking myself out of a spell of post-election laziness, so I’ll have BludgerTrack back in one form or another next week. In the meantime, I have the following to relate:

The Australian reports that factional arrangements ensure that Stephen Conroy’s own sub-faction of the Victorian Right will decide his successor when he vacates his Senate seat on September 30. That seems to bode well for his ally Mehmet Tillem, who previously served in the Senate from late 2013 until mid-2014, when he served out David Feeney’s term after he moved to the lower house seat of Batman at the September 2013 election. However, some in the party are said to be arguing that the position should go to a woman, specifically to Stefanie Perri, the former Monash mayor who ran unsuccessfully in Chisholm at the recent election.

• A draft redistribution proposal has been published for the Northern Territory’s two electorates, in which early 3000 voters are to be transferred from growing Solomon (covering Darwin and Palmerston) to stagnant Lingiari (covering the remainder of the territory). The transfer encompasses Yarrawonga, Farrar, Johnston and Zuccoli at the eastern edge of Palmerston, together with the Litchfield Shire areas around Knuckey Lagoon immediately east of Darwin. This is a conservative area, so the change would strengthen Labor in Solomon and weaken them in Lingiari.

• A redistribution for the five electorates in Tasmania is in its earliest stages, with a period for preliminary public suggestions to run from November 2 to December 5.

• The Liberal National Party announced last week it would not challenge its 37 vote defeat in the Townsville-based seat of Herbert, despite complaints from Senator Ian Macdonald that the Australian Eleectoral Commission had promised hospital patients it would take their votes on polling day without delivering, and that students outside the electorate were denied absent votes because the required envelopes were not available. The 40-day deadline for lodgement of a challenge closed on Saturday.

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.

2,992 comments on “Essential Research: 52-48 to Labor”

Comments Page 54 of 60
1 53 54 55 60
  1. ‘The Australian government is in a stalemate with the Labor opposition over marriage equality, after high-level talks in Brisbane on Monday morning led to naught.’

    Now that is a suprise, who woulda thought?

  2. Laughtong
    “I watched both episodes. As a child migrant in the 1960s I found it quite interesting. They had both Bob Hawke and Barry Jones as commentators and a range of journalists, so not only Howard talking.”
    As history, the doco was a load of tosh. It was a 2 hour eulogy that whitewashed Menzies’ record.
    There was way too much of Howard talking/gushing about himself. Howard tried to draw parallels between himself and Menzies at every conceivable opportunity. It reminded me of Stalin inserting himself into those fake photographs with Lenin, to portray himself as Lenin’s successor.

  3. Why do people still waste time considering “Essential Research” polls when one only has to look at who their main clients are and the background of their main staff to know which way the data will be skewed?
    No creditability and makes discussion of the topics pointless.

  4. Apparently 80% of Australians now believe in climate change.

    Believe is the wrong word to use with climate-change or any other subject that has scientific backing.

    Belief is for things that you’re asked to take on the basis of faith, with no proof available or attainable. Science doesn’t ask for anyone’s faith, it doesn’t admit, support, or endorse claims without evidence, and it doesn’t offer different outcomes depending upon whether or not you believe in it or that can be changed by saying a prayer. Science works, and produces the same results, independent of belief.

    “Believe” is something you do with religion. With science and phenomena that are described and supported by science, you either accept the facts or you don’t. And if you don’t, then you’d better do your own science to prove why the facts are wrong, otherwise you’re just being irrational and should be ignored.

    There’s no room for belief in science, and no point in using language that pretends that accepting the facts about climate change and rejecting them are somehow equivalent positions that just come down to personal opinion. They aren’t and they don’t. One side is provably correct, and the other is wrong.

  5. Why do people still waste time considering “Newspoll” polls when one only has to look at who their main clients are and the background of their main staff ….

  6. It has been revealed that WA Liberal MHR Steve Irons has made some very dubious travel claims. This comes hot on the heels of revelations that Qld Liberal MHR Stuart Robert is under investigation by the Qld Crime and Corruption Commission for a political donation scandal.

    By standards applied by the Coalition to others, the votes of these MPs in the House are tainted and the Government cannot accept them. Further, without waiting for any investigations to take place, these men should resign immediately from the Liberal Party and the Parliament. If they fail to do so they should be hounded day and night, with acres of newsprint in the Murdoch crapsheets devoted to the matter.

  7. Good points A R.
    I am always interested in the ways in which language, and the framing of an issue can affect and shape our perceptions.

  8. I can’t believe 20% don’t believe in climate change. The climate is always changing.
    In any case, ‘action’ has been taken and the Paris agreement ratified by most countries. Time to move on.

  9. A R
    “Believe is the wrong word to use with climate-change or any other subject that has scientific backing. ”
    Agreed. And well put. Belief is the realm of religion, not science.
    I accept the reality of anthropogenic climate change . It’s not a matter of “belief”.

  10. TPOF

    The problem is that those same people who have BENEFITED from kicking out the Russians for doping are shown to have been just as bad.

    You need to stop and think awhile. Two countries with say IDENTICAL money poured into sports elites but with different funding mechanisms. One is a low tax country but uses private sponsors who in effect extract the money from taxpayers via consumer prices. The other provides extensive state sponsorship paid for more directly by the tax system.

    In the first the government takes the kudos for success of athletes but uses the three monkey trick to deny plausible culpability in any “doping” or uses morally questionable but “legal” doping regimes. In the second the government again uses the three monkeys but as their is more direct government support it is classed as “state sponsorship.” I see NO moral difference between the two and while both are terrible, if one side throws stones at the other then they had pretty well need to be clean as clean.

    Banning Russian athletes may well have been justified, but ONLY if you also ban European, US and UK cyclists who are so doped up they are walking chemical factories. Wiggins asthma!!!, Chris Froome hmmmm!!!,

  11. Rummel
    “The climate is always changing.”
    Actually, most of the time the climate doesn’t change. Except when something comes along that does change it.

  12. Hey I was polled on Saturday by Roy Morgan. The whole face to face bit. Took more than 1 hour. they were mostly interested in banks but the voting also got a run.

  13. ‘In any case, ‘action’ has been taken and the Paris agreement ratified by most countries. Time to move on.’

    Hahahahahahahahahahaha.
    Your stand up routine must be a real hoot.

  14. Whilst on fixing ‘climate change’. It’s interesting to see Labor using the Green playbook on SSM that the Greens used on the ETS. 160 Million is small change for a chance for Australia to vote a resounding yes, in favor of SSM.

  15. “Whilst on fixing ‘climate change’. ”
    It can’t be fixed. The best case scenario is amelioration.
    Anyway, that’s enough feeding of trolls for one day.

  16. Believe is the wrong word to use with climate-change

    Which is why I always say ‘accept the scientific reality of AGW’ when I refer to attitudes relating to climate change.

  17. There was never any possibility of same sex marriage laws being passed under this government.
    Best to save the anger and money for the next election.

  18. Kristina Keneally ‏@KKeneally 7m7 minutes ago
    Kristina Keneally Retweeted Steve Brockway
    This could be solved in the next sitting week if the PM voted his conscience,and let his MPs vote theirs.

  19. With science and phenomena that are described and supported by science, you either accept the facts or you don’t.

    I don’t see this claim as being particularly helpful.

    Singling out “belief” as being inappropriate terminology is inaccurate to begin with. The generally accepted definition of knowledge is a “justified true belief”. Belief is a requirement for knowing something. It also has to be true, and you have to have a good reason for thinking it to be true, but belief has to be in there as well.

    Secondly science is about uncertainty. It’s the search for the best explanation we can find given the evidence at hand. But that doesn’t mean the explanations are right. Some are better than others and much of science is about trying to find better explanations without necessarily ever finding any “ultimate truth” – most things that we think we know will be wrong to some degree.

    But the fundamental issue is that the generally accepted AGW case is the best explanation we have. The media and certain sections of the public want to make it about absolute certainty when we will never have absolute certainty. We all live our lives in a cloud of imperfect knowledge and we all have to make the best decisions we can with the knowledge we have.

    Clearly the best decisions we can make at the moment (well 20 years ago, really) involve taking strong action to limit GHGs as quickly as possible. But I don’t think it’s helpful to try to make the science out to be a perfect edifice for which no questions can be entertained – but imperfect knowledge shouldn’t prevent us from taking action.

  20. cupidstunt @ #2643 Monday, September 26, 2016 at 12:33 pm

    Apparently 80% of Australians now believe in climate change.

    One doesn’t ‘believe’ in climate change. That makes climate change sound like a tenet of faith.

    What should be said is that 80% of people now accept the overwhelming scientific evidence that anthropomorphic climate change is happening.

  21. daretotread @ #2667 Monday, September 26, 2016 at 1:05 pm

    Hey I was polled on Saturday by Roy Morgan. The whole face to face bit. Took more than 1 hour. they were mostly interested in banks but the voting also got a run.

    Interesting. Sounds like they might be firing up again. There was some suspicion they might be ceasing federal polling after they failed to poll in the final weeks of the election campaign (supposedly to concentrate on electorate polling, which was also a mess.)

  22. TPOF re Fancy Bears info:

    Of course the fact that these seem to be coming from people (presumably Russian) with an agenda has to be taken into account.

    But what they are revealing is quite concerning. Whenever I have read about Therapeutic Use Exemptions, I had assumed that they were only permitted for short-term illnesses, not chronic conditions. I think that we all have the right to be extremely sceptical about the granting of such exemptions for non-standard treatments of chronic conditions. If such exemptions are to be granted, it should be by WADA, not simply the sport’s governing body. And it should only be after an extensive, transparent investigation: I don’t buy any suggestion that the right to privacy applies in these cases.

    Re Sir Bradley Wiggins: here’s a quote that’s surfaced from his autobiography about his preparations for the 2012 Tour de France, which he won, and before which he had received an injection of 4o mg of triamcinolone.

    “I’d done all the work, I was fine-tuned. I was ready to go. My body was in good shape. I’m in the form of my life. I was only ill once or twice with minor colds, and I barely lost a day’s training from it.”

    And in an interview in the last couple of days, he now says that he had “really struggled” with his asthma in the lead up to the event.

    So many questions to be answered here, by Wiggins and many other athletes. And by WADA.

  23. rummel @ #2662 Monday, September 26, 2016 at 1:01 pm

    I can’t believe 20% don’t believe in climate change. The climate is always changing.
    In any case, ‘action’ has been taken and the Paris agreement ratified by most countries. Time to move on.

    It’s not marriage equality Rummel. It won’t be fixed by a simple legislative amendment that could be done in five minutes flat.

    Climate change is a huge challenge and even getting people to agree to vague words is only the very start. You might as well say that Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin got together at Yalta and decided that Hitler and the Nazis need to be defeated. Action taken. Time to move on.

  24. Jackol:

    I don’t think it’s helpful to try to make the science out to be a perfect edifice for which no questions can be entertained – but imperfect knowledge shouldn’t prevent us from taking action.

    Agree – just because current scientific knowledge might be superseded doesn’t necessarily make it wrong – just incomplete or perhaps limited. Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity superseded Newtonian mechanics but Newtonian mechanics remains an almost perfect approximation for most day-to-day scenarios.

  25. DTT @ 1.03

    If you believe that there is total equivalence between a covert State enforced drug regime and individual athletes seeking individual dispensation from WADA, there is no point in discussing this further with you. And step in line behind Trump when you tell Vlad what a great leader he is.

  26. rummel @ #2669 Monday, September 26, 2016 at 1:08 pm

    Whilst on fixing ‘climate change’. It’s interesting to see Labor using the Green playbook on SSM that the Greens used on the ETS. 160 Million is small change for a chance for Australia to vote a resounding yes, in favor of SSM.

    $175 million – and that is just direct funding from the Commonwealth. A list of life saving and life improving things that money would be better spent on than this pointless abdication of moral and professional responsibility by this government would be fifty PB pages long.

    There are women who will die in the next year because that money was not spent on additional legal aid and refuges for victims of domestic violence. Not to mention the GLBTIQ kids who will kill themselves when they become the objects of scorn, bullying and derision as a result of the poison unleashed on our society as a result of this appalling waste of money.

  27. TPOF,

    You really are over using “Trump” as a put down for people with whom you disagree.
    Time for you to learn another cliche.

  28. socrates @ #2687 Monday, September 26, 2016 at 1:33 pm

    Its an easy mistake to make – charging everything to the taxpayer!
    http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/wa-liberal-mp-steve-irons-used-taxpayer-funds-to-attend-his-own-wedding-in-melbourne-20160925-gro9n6.html
    Fortunately under the “Bishop Principle” he need only pay the money back and it is as though he never did anything wrong.

    It’s a good thing he was not picked up under the Slipper principle. But that only applies to people the Coalition want to destroy.

Comments Page 54 of 60
1 53 54 55 60

Leave a Reply

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