ReachTEL: 53-47 and 54-46 to Labor

Disappointing results for the government from the first two voting intention measures after the budget, despite strong support for the bank and Medicare levies.

Sky News reports the first post-budget poll, from ReachTEL, has Labor leading 53-47. After exclusion of the 10.6% undecided, the primary vote results are Liberal 34.2%, Nationals 3.8%, Labor 34.1%, One Nation 11.0% and Greens 10.9%. Nonetheless, the bank levy appears to have gone down well, recording 39.8% strong support, 22.3% support, 22% neutral, 8.3% oppose, 7.9% strongly oppose, and the Medicare levy appears to have been well received as tax hikes go, with 48.2% in favour and 34.1% opposed. Nonetheless, 51.6% rated that the budget would make them worse off, 10.8% better off, and 37.6% about the same. I believe the poll was conducted last night; can’t help you with sample size at this point (UPDATE: correct on the first count, 2300 on the latter).

UPDATE: It seems a second, completely different ReachTEL poll was commissioned by Seven News and conducted on the same evening, and this one had Labor’s two-party lead at 54-46. However, no primary votes are provided, which is significant because a closer look at the numbers from the Sky News poll suggests the two-party result reflects a strong flow of respondent-allocated preferences to Labor – applying flows from last year’s federal election, the result would be 51.5-48.5. The Seven poll had similar supplementary questions and got similar answers: the bank levy recorded 60% approval and 18% disapproval, the Medicare increase 51% approval and 28% disapproval, but the budget overall was rated good or very good by only 29%, poor or very poor by 33%, and average by the rest. No sample size to relate at this point.

UPDATE 2: Here’s the regular weekly BludgerTrack update, which incorporates only the latest Essential Research results and not these two from ReachTEL.

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.

1,058 comments on “ReachTEL: 53-47 and 54-46 to Labor”

Comments Page 20 of 22
1 19 20 21 22
  1. poroti @ #778 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 2:49 pm

    Confessions
    A taste…..
    “Andrew Bragg: Can an inexperienced 32-year-old save the Liberal Party?
    Turnbull’s son-in-law James Brown, an army veteran turned academic, seized control of the Liberals’ Paddington branch from long-time president and Woollahra councillor Peter Cavanagh.
    Working with Brown behind the scenes was his close friend Andrew Bragg, a fellow branch member.”
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/andrew-bragg-can-an-inexperienced-32year-old-save-the-liberal-party-20170428-gvudgq.html

    This has all the hallmarks of a Turnbull brainfart and is typical of the crash or cash though approach that is typical of his entire career.

    Sending this child to run the war against the hardened campaigners of Labor, the ACTU and GetUp! is a catastrophe waiting for a place to happen.

  2. grimace @ #951 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 7:14 pm

    poroti @ #778 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 2:49 pm

    Confessions
    A taste…..
    “Andrew Bragg: Can an inexperienced 32-year-old save the Liberal Party?
    Turnbull’s son-in-law James Brown, an army veteran turned academic, seized control of the Liberals’ Paddington branch from long-time president and Woollahra councillor Peter Cavanagh.
    Working with Brown behind the scenes was his close friend Andrew Bragg, a fellow branch member.”
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/andrew-bragg-can-an-inexperienced-32year-old-save-the-liberal-party-20170428-gvudgq.html

    This has all the hallmarks of a Turnbull brainfart and is typical of the crash or cash though approach that is typical of his entire career.
    Sending this child to run the war against the hardened campaigners of Labor, the ACTU and GetUp! is a catastrophe waiting for a place to happen.

    BRING IT ON!!!!

  3. Every time I rebuke a commenter, no matter what the circumstances, I get the exact same Pavlovian response from Bemused, motivated by petulance over all the times it happened to him.

  4. I have no idea what Dingbat is supposed to have done , but I saw nothing of significance other than he was not in step with PB orthodoxy.

  5. It should have been for the government a lay down misere vs the mining companies. Iron ore prices were in 2004 and had been for a while about $17 a tonne by 2009 they were $100+ . They were profitable at $17 so at $100+ they were ? A year or so later $150. Added to that the ore by law belongs to us.

    Should not have been too hard a message to sell.

  6. More of that trademark Bemused Pavlovianism. Dingbat was defending an attack on a member of the press gallery for the inexcusable crime of having criticised a Labor politician. I can’t conceive of anything that could have been more in step with PB orthodoxy.

  7. William or any one else who may know
    Given there is fairly confusing news coming from the US about the possible pathways to removing Trump, does anyone know folk who are experts on US constitutional law either here or in the US who are publishing on the matter?
    It’s probably pretty obvious I would like to see Trump as far removed as possible from the nuclear codes, but I’d like to understand more about the processes.
    For instance, is there one or many pathways if the issue is interference by a hostile state in the election of POTUS.
    Is there one or many pathways, if the issue of illegal money transfers?
    Anyone know?

  8. And the next time the ALP is in power, let us have no more of this ‘I am statesman, look how I appoint useless coalition hacks to plum jobs so everyone will like me’ crap.
    I want a night of the long knives, metaphorically. Every Coalition maggot needs flushing out. (except Brendan Nelson, he is good in his role).
    No Labor ‘do you want a lolly pop’, nice guys, I want ruthless defenestration of any neo-con Coalition plants.
    It is that, or fight rear-guard actions for the whole term.

  9. poroti @ #955 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 7:20 pm

    It should have been for the government a lay down misere vs the mining companies. Iron ore prices were in 2004 and had been for a while about $17 a tonne by 2009 they were $100+ . They were profitable at $17 so at $100+ they were ? A year or so later $150. Added to that the ore by law belongs to us.
    Should not have been too hard a message to sell.

    IIRC, part of the problem was that minerals belong to the ‘Crown’ and Australia has lots of competing crowns, one for each state and one for the commonwealth.
    The states have always assumed their ‘Crown’ was the one in whom ownership was vested and some were furious at any attempt by the Commonwealth for its ‘Crown’ to take control.

  10. [ Gillard = doubly rotten apple and incompetent ]
    Bemused = very specific idiot roll obsession set off by any mention of Julia Gillard.
    Really needs to move on for its own health i think.

  11. P
    As I recall the policy process was only a tad better than the bank tax process. They plucked a single recco out of a bunch of reccos and it was all done in a big rush. (But at least there was a set of reccos. The libs just had a brainfart. The questions that Treasury was unable to answer were quite basic.)
    The other problem, IMHO, was that mining company plants like Marn white-anted it.

  12. william bowe @ #833 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 3:58 pm

    I introduced the IR issue. So it certainly was put into play.

    And “fat scabby arse” was your way of addressing that issue, yes?

    On that count C@t is right, no blow is too low against a scab. We’re talking someone who works through whilst others suffer in their fight for better working conditions for the workers of the organisation. I’m yet to experience a scab who refuses or hands back the benefits fought and won by strikers.

    The scab tingle is a worthless fat magot who deserves every bit of abuse thrown her way.

  13. Bemused
    The main point was that if a mine was making money @ $17 a tonne the same mine selling it for $150-180 would have to be making obscene profits . A simple message that was not told.

  14. imacca @ #960 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 7:24 pm

    {Gillard = doubly rotten apple and incompetent }
    Bemused = very specific idiot roll obsession set off by any mention of Julia Gillard.
    Really needs to move on for its own health i think.

    There was some sensible issues based discussion with OC until the real trolls moved in.
    Now back to issues with Poroti and hoping the trolls don’t derail it.

  15. poroti @ #964 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 7:27 pm

    Bemused
    The main point was that if a mine was making money @ $17 a tonne the same mine selling it for $150-180 would have to be making obscene profits . A simple message that was not told.

    I agree with your point but I am pretty sure it was made at the time, albeit without knowledge of the subsequent decline in price.

  16. There was only one white-anter. The one who would not release journalists to reveal all communications between themself and the journalists, as PM Gillard did.

  17. The most powerful protective factors for Trump are 1. his party’s control of Congress; 2. his party’s propensity to put tribal loyalty ahead of larger issues such as respect for proper procedure; and 3. the incompetence of Congressional Democrats in providing policies that will significantly improve society. The “Trump is a Putin puppet” story line would make an interesting Netflix series perhaps but it is not a substantive engagement with the issues that Americans face.

  18. William

    Why do you say that about Louise Mensch? Sure, a lot of it seems off the wall, but a lot has been confirmed.

    I note that none of her latest theory has mainstream reportage. But…

    Again, why do you discount her?

  19. Hardly anyone at the AFR went on strike. Clearly the situation there was different, for reasons I’m not on top of. The only people I’ve heard suggest that Laura Tingle was being a scab in filing her copy have been empty-headed bottom-feeders on this blog.

  20. William
    Thank you. Despite Victoria and phoenixRED’s thinking she may be onto something, I am interested what I outlined earlier.
    I’ll see what I can hunt down.

  21. Bemused

    The subsequent decline in price was no matter. It was a super profits tax and not a permanent set level. Pretty hard to argue a 1000% price increase and sfa cost increase is not out of the ordinary.

  22. Louise Mensch was recently putting it about that Vladimir Putin had Andrew Breitbart whacked in 2012, apparently as part of a long game to install Steve Bannon in the White House. An embarrassing interview with her concerning this and other claims can be viewed here.

  23. Wow why are people suddenly haters of Laura Tingle? She’s far and away the most prescient, insightful and professional of all the press gallery. And FFS she’s a woman at the height of her profession in an environment that overwhelmingly still favours men!

    It’s already been established that the AFR weren’t part of the Fairfax strike (something I didn’t know, but do now), so why would she be expected to join the SMAGE crew in striking?

  24. poroti @ #977 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 7:36 pm

    Bemused
    The subsequent decline in price was no matter. It was a super profits tax and not a permanent set level. Pretty hard to argue a 1000% price increase and sfa cost increase is not out of the ordinary.

    Agree, but you were making the point of their still being profitable at subsequent lower price.
    WA in particular did not want anything that might interfere with its inadequate royalties.

  25. Boerwar
    I understand that Spicer is about to be replaced with Fox News, or possibly just Trump twice a month, but then it could all be just fake news.

  26. William Bowe @ #954 Sunday, May 14th, 2017 – 7:17 pm

    Every time I rebuke a commenter, no matter what the circumstances, I get the exact same Pavlovian response from Bemused, motivated by petulance over all the times it happened to him.

    I don’t know, the rules seem unclear. Body-shaming a member of the press gallery appears to be clearly off-limits. However likening Peter Dutton to a potato appears to be tolerated.

    Not sure if the potato thing is a reference to his appearance, intellect, or something else, so maybe it’s not comparable. But if it is, what’s the point of distinction that makes one case verboten and the other acceptable? Is it that one is a politician and the other is a member of the press? Is it that the targets’ genders are different? Something else entirely?

  27. Common sense is the only workable guide in these matters, AR. If you can’t see that Mr Potato Head has a levity that is missing from “fat scabby arse”, clearly you don’t possess any.

  28. I have no real opinion on Lara Tingle. I don’t have much sympathy for Fairfax, or any of the MSM. I could care less if Tingle filed her report or her toenails.
    Where was the MSM when we needed them? Off powdering the Coalition’s arske, that’s where.

  29. a r @ #986 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 7:42 pm

    William Bowe @ #954 Sunday, May 14th, 2017 – 7:17 pm

    Every time I rebuke a commenter, no matter what the circumstances, I get the exact same Pavlovian response from Bemused, motivated by petulance over all the times it happened to him.

    I don’t know, the rules seem unclear. Body-shaming a member of the press gallery appears to be clearly off-limits. However likening Peter Dutton to a potato appears to be tolerated.
    Not sure if the potato thing is a reference to his appearance, intellect, or something else, so maybe it’s not comparable. But if it is, what’s the point of distinction that makes one case verboten and the other acceptable? Is it that one is a politician and the other is a member of the press? Is it that the targets’ genders are different? Something else entirely?

    Of course one interesting aspect is that I am one of the few who does not body-shame others and in fact have often gently chided those who have.
    If you are a teflon coated poster the boundaries are very relaxed.

  30. @Bemused

    Thanks for responding in a succinct way. I do think there are merits to many of your points. Ousting Rudd was inarguably a mistake for Labor, but Rudd brought it on himself in many ways with his leaderships style. In my opinion every PM and LOTO fights a two front war, the first front being winning over the hearts and minds of the general public and the second front being the support of the caucus. Rudd was good at the former and bad at the latter. Shorten is above average at both, which is why I think he’s got a chance of running a good government.

    BTW, I agree with WB regarding name-calling, it’s the lowest form of discussion.

  31. There was an article in Crikey last week about how Fairfax continue to publish while the journalists are on strike:

    Step One: Put the editors to work.
    ‘Managers, section editors and international correspondents are exempt from the strike action’

    As Laura Tingle is AFR’s Political Editor, I imagine she comes under this category.

  32. That interview of Mensch is very holy crap.

    Maybe whoever that interviewer was should switch out places with her on the Trump-Russia case!

  33. Of course one interesting aspect is that I am one of the few who does not body-shame others and in fact have often gently chided those who have.

    To the extent that that’s true, good for you. My main beef here is with Dingbat, who attacked a commenter for doing the right thing in defence of a commenter who had done the wrong thing. What I would like to happen is for standards of civility — not even particularly strict ones — to be enforced by the community, rather than my heavy hand. Jackol’s comment was PB at its best, and Dingbat’s response was PB at its worst.

  34. William

    Thanks, I watched it. I don’tthink she was embarrassing at all. Her point was clear, and the interviewer was was not interested in her views, only asserting his own viewpoint.

    She may be a celebrity seeker, we don’t know. She says she has “sources”. But on this alone, it is not enough to scrub her.

  35. peter love @ #974 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 7:33 pm

    William
    Why do you say that about Louise Mensch? Sure, a lot of it seems off the wall, but a lot has been confirmed.
    I note that none of her latest theory has mainstream reportage. But…
    Again, why do you discount her?

    To pilfer and/or paraphrase a few statements made by others on Mensch and on the Trump debacle more generally. We need to apply the most scepticism to the things we most want to believe, and keep in mind that it’s usually wise to disregard the best and worst things that you hear, particularly where they are based on anonymous sources and/or are not independently verified.

    I very much want to see the back of Trump, I believe him to be dangerously unstable and someone whose Presidency presents an existential threat to every person on earth. However bad the policies of any individual after Trump in the line of succession may be, I reconcile myself with the thought that they are slightly less bad than Trump even if only that they are much less likely than Trump to start a nuclear war.

    Nobody who is so immature and insecure that they can be baited on Twitter should be allowed anywhere near the nuclear trigger.

  36. I was the victim of sustained vilification today.
    Posters kept calling me a ‘Greens’.

    Typical Greens whinging when you are called out 😉

  37. blanket criticism @ #991 Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 7:49 pm

    @Bemused
    Thanks for responding in a succinct way. I do think there are merits to many of your points. Ousting Rudd was inarguably a mistake for Labor, but Rudd brought it on himself in many ways with his leaderships style. In my opinion every PM and LOTO fights a two front war, the first front being winning over the hearts and minds of the general public and the second front being the support of the caucus. Rudd was good at the former and bad at the latter. Shorten is above average at both, which is why I think he’s got a chance of running a good government.
    BTW, I agree with WB regarding name-calling, it’s the lowest form of discussion.

    Thank you for that.
    I suppose at times I do exaggerate my position in response to the demonisation of Rudd that goes on here at times.
    I have actually met both Rudd and Gillard and the contrast was stark.
    Rudd was engaging with ordinary people attending the functions, was very gregarious and accommodating to demands for photographs with people and autographs. He knew how to work a crowd and seemed to enjoy it and the crowd certainly enjoyed him.
    Gillard OTOH was not at all outgoing and appeared to engage only reluctantly with people other than those on the “official” table. Her skills obviously lay elsewhere.

    I believe Rudd had his foibles, who doesn’t, and he was very demanding of his staff who strangely seem to remain loyal to him

    He was also apparently rude to public servants and his ministers by keeping them waiting etc. Cabinet, and if necessary Caucus, should have dealt with this short of taking the steps that were taken.

    A leader needs to be a ‘front man’ (or woman) who can reach out to the average voter. Shorten can do this. Gillard, by all measures, seems to have lacked this ability. But Shorten does seem to have what Rudd, and to a lesser extent Gillard, lacked in being able to lead a united team.

Comments Page 20 of 22
1 19 20 21 22

Leave a Reply

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