Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor

Another quiet week on voting intention from Essential Research, which also records a better reception for Labor’s budget proposals than the Coalition’s.

Essential Research’s fortnight rolling average has Labor’s two-party lead unchanged at 54-46, the only change on the primary vote being a one point drop for Labor to 37%, with the Coalition on 37%, the Greens on 10% and One Nation on 6%. An occasional question on the attributes of the parties yields little change since it was last asked in May, the biggest movers being “have good policies”, “clear about what they stand for” and “too close to big corporate and financial interests” for Labor, all of which are down five points. Another question finds Labor more trusted to find Medicare, the NDIS, universities, the age pension and public schools, but the Coalition more trusted to fund independent and private schools (keeping in mind that not everyone would feel these things should be funded). Labor’s specific budget response proposals all get highly positive responses; more respondents oppose (39%) than favour (24%) removing the deficit levy on the top income tax rate; and an overwhelming majority (78% to 7%) expect the bank levy will be passed on to customers.

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.

1,793 comments on “Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor”

Comments Page 36 of 36
1 35 36
  1. You know, I think people can at least see Labor wrestling with it’s collective conscience about Budget measures introduced by the Turnbull government and they understand it. Just as they understood what a craven capitulation Beazely undertook, as commented upon earlier today. Which the electorate did not approve of at all. Ditto the Rudd capitulation on Climate Change. Spineless they don’t approve of. Standing up for what you believe in, they do.

  2. It’s become so unremarkable that no one has remarked on it. Another Newspoll and the Turnbull government is behind.

  3. So that’s 13.

    What we really need for comedy gold is an IPSOS with a 54 or 55 so we can all enjoy the contortions of the Fairfax galahs explaining how the budget bounce that only they could see just up and pissed off two weeks later.

  4. Of course, maybe Turnbull DID have a post Budget bounce, which kept the Coalition numbers from going backwards…

  5. Yes Falcon, it really isn’t news.
    Apart from Abbott’s effort, I wonder what the longest losing NewsPoll streak was.

    Actually I think KB has done a post on precisely that.

  6. It’s become so unremarkable that no one has remarked on it. Another Newspoll and the Turnbull government is behind.

    The easiest explanation for any poll movements since late last year is random noise. Tbf to Trumble he does seem to have put a floor under his own sats and the 2PP fall. But he ain’t getting back what he’s lost. There looks like a lot of locked in feelings to give them the flick and no amount of doing the Timewarp is going to change that.


    Taxi for Theresa May? The first poll since the Manchester bombing is out and it makes for grim reading in CCHQ.

    The numbers that matter: the Conservatives are on 43%, Labour on 38%, the Liberal Democrats are on 10%, while Ukip are way down on 4%. On a uniform swing, far from strengthening her hand, the PM would be back in office with a majority of just two.

    A hung parliament is possible. Really, even with a bare majority, you’d have to say the Commons would be a shambles on most issues, not least Brexit.


    This is a very odd election. Conservatives talking about building, rather than selling, council homes. Tony Blair and Jeremy Corbyn sharing a campaign slogan. Stepping back from the campaign itself, even the existence of the election is an odd bit of political economy for one big reason: a British Prime Minister has chosen to go to the polls at a time when voters are seeing their wages fall.

    Official data out this Wednesday, 24 hours before the Conservatives launch their manifesto, looks set to confirm what we have been projecting for some time – real wages started falling in the first three months of this year as historically slow wage rises were overtaken by fast rising inflation on the back of a higher oil price and weaker post-Brexit pound….

    But the fundamental fact remains that, in the middle of a simply catastrophic decade for earnings – one which, according to OBR forecasts, will be the worst in over two centuries – a Prime Minister has called an election by choice at exactly the point at which it is confirmed that voters pay packets are shrinking not growing. These are odd times, for our politics and our economics.

  9. The Trump stuff. Surely the Russian Embassy knew it was being monitored. In using a clear channel to mention the approach from Kushner they knew it would be picked up by US security. So maybe it is just Russian disinformation. If true the Russians were happy to let the information out.
    So it seems that Russia doesn’t have any real interest Trump, but he provides a great opportunity to distract and destabilise the US.
    Further the tweets from Mensch etc are most amusing, but hey maybe they are Russian agents too. Or if they really are getting good info, then maybe the US security folk feeding the info are Russian agents.
    Fear Uncertainty and Doubt.
    On another thought. If the US security is prepared to leak to this degree against an establishment and business friendly fella Trump, I wonder how a progressive like Sanders would have gone if he had made President and had tried to implement real change.

  10. Cat momma
    Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 10:45 pm
    I wonder if Laura Tingle has got the message yet?

    Her performance on Insiders this morning would suggest “No”. She said that because Labor was questioning the revenue to be raised from the Bank Levy that Labor would be seen as siding with the banks! Her Editor, Sutchbury, has clearly read the riot act that no matter how stupid the government line must be pushed.

  11. lizzie @ #1671 Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 5:38 pm

    Peta Credlin wrote a piece called “Time for Truth on Islam.”
    Bruce Haigh‏ @bruce_haigh · 2h2 hours ago
    The arrogance and cheek. I spent half my working life in Muslim countries and would not presume to write the definitive article on ‘Islam’

    An honest headline would be;

    Time for My Perception off Islam.

    I agree, I’ve lived more than half my working life in other countries and I would never claim an understanding of any of them, maybe an appreciation of them but no more.

    Shit, I don’t even understand how Howard and Abbott could become PM!

  12. C@Tmomma
    Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 10:45 pm
    I wonder if Laura Tingle has got the message yet?

    She is peering into the night waiting for the Turnbull dawn. She’s been crap since he became PM. The always wrong just makes her dig in.

    Is she really supposed to comment on politics? Or is her expertise economics or something?

  13. FalconWA,
    It’s just that Laura Tingle used to exhibit opinions independent of her editor if common sense suggested it.

  14. Question,
    I thought Laura Tingle’s expertise was in economics AND politics. Anyway, I guess we’ll see what she’s got to say about this latest Newspoll tomorrow.

  15. Labor on the front foot again, this time in NSW:

    Labor pledges 25 per cent affordable housing mandate if elected

    Every residential development built on state-owned land under a NSW Labor government will have 25 per cent of its dwellings designated affordable housing, the opposition has pledged.

    For privately-owned land rezoned for development, 15 per cent of homes would be designated affordable housing, it says, in a further bid to help low and middle income earners rent or buy in the surging Sydney property market.

  16. Slow because I’m on a tablet.

    Someone linked her talking to Phillip Adams a few days back. There was a brief reference to some comments on social media. Sounded to me like she said something like “I’m paid to do this so I’m right”.

    What comes after denial? Anger? : )

  17. Newspoll makes sense. Whichever way we look at it, incomes are under pressure….household incomes, nominal wages, real wages, effective labour demand, GDP growth, real GDP per capita are all feeble. The debts of the indebted classes are soaring….yet serviceability is getting tougher. The electorate will vote their financial discomfort….particularly as the LNP have proposed measures that will intensify the discomfort of middle-lower income households.

  18. Bryon
    Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 11:11 pm
    The Trump stuff. Surely the Russian Embassy knew it was being monitored. In using a clear channel to mention the approach from Kushner they knew it would be picked up by US security. So maybe it is just Russian disinformation. If true the Russians were happy to let the information out.

    Yup. Putin must be very amused. He has appears to have successfully upended US politics.

  19. Jackol, Bemused, and Zoidlord if you are still around – I agree with all the points you made. It was certainly a mistake for us to get involved in Afghanistan. It is a mistake for us to be involved in the Middle East at all. But we ARE involved in Afghanistan, and we bear considerable responsibility for what happens from now on. Certainly I think it would be desirable for us to withdraw, and if that includes a political settlement that involves the Taliban to some degree, then so be it. But the point is that we cannot just withdraw unilaterally without any kind of resolution in place – particularly given that would expose women and girls who have sought to gain an education and who have gone into politics to potential backlash once military forces have withdrawn.


    Polls have margins of error that are supposed to factor in their limitations, but they didn’t cover Labour’s fall in this case — why?
    Margins of error are a complicated thing to measure. The way we calculate them traditionally assumes use of a random sample. But pollsters use quota samples, in which you try to create a representative mini-population based on a number of criteria: gender, age, group, region and social class. In that case it’s problematic to talk about margins of error.

    When you do quota samples, you are making assumptions about what actually matters. From the point of view of the psychological behaviour of people, this isn’t correlated very much with gender, religion and so on. So the quota samples could be biased from the point of view of psychological behaviour.

    Why don’t polls use a random sample?
    Random samples are much more expensive. The other thing that companies use to drive the cost down is the mode of polling. Face-to-face polling would be much more expensive [than calling or doing Internet surveys], but you’d be more likely to have a random sample and to have a real representation of the electorate. Many people on the phone will refuse to answer a survey.

    So random, face-to-face polls would be more accurate, but would cost more money and take more time. And it would still not change the fact that many people act differently when they are in the polling station.

Comments Page 36 of 36
1 35 36

Leave a Reply

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