Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor

Labor gains a point on two-party preferred from Essential, but the pollster joins Ipsos in finding a rise in Bill Shorten’s disapproval rating.

This week’s reading of the Essential Research fortnight rolling average has Labor’s two-party lead at 54-46, out from 53-47 last week, with primary vote numbers not available at this stage. Also featured are Essential’s monthly leadership ratings, which have Malcolm Turnbull up three on approval to 38% and steady on disapproval at 46%; Bill Shorten up one to 36% and up five to 47%; and Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister at 43-29, compared with 41-27 last time. Respondents were also asked if they favoured a series of measures on energy policy, which found strong support for regulating power prices, increasing investment in renewable energy and storage, reserving gas for domestic use, and a “clean-up of existing coal-fired power stations”, while lesser but still majority support for forcing energy companies to help their customers use less power and bringing privatised coal generators back into public ownership. Twenty-eight per cent rated Labor most likely to deliver lower power prices compared with 19% for the Coalition, with 35% for no difference and 18% for don’t know.

UPDATE: Full report here. Primary votes are Coalition steady on 36%, Labor steady on 37%, Greens steady on 10% and One Nation up a point to 9%.

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.

1,898 comments on “Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor”

Comments Page 36 of 38
1 35 36 37 38
  1. Boris
    That light on the envelope is correct. 5 yes, yes, yes, yes ,yes votes (sounding a bit like sally there ) in our house.

    But placed torch flat against envelope, shining up to me, and could clearly see the yes box marked. Turn envelope over if you can’t see it clearly the first time.

    I would obviously be no good at espionage.

  2. [shellbell
    Alias, name your charity
    ]

    You should have realised nothing is normal when you have Malcolm Roberts involved. 🙂

  3. I can think of few things more ridiculous than an absolute clown like Malcolm Roberts giving evidence in the HC. Still, it does illustrate that due process is available to all, even the most idiotic.

  4. lizzie

    Rudd was too soft and lost the opportunity

    As with America after Bush and Australia after Howard there were many calling for less divisiveness and for a toning back of partisanship. Obama and Rudd acted on that and reached out. Sadly for both countries they were both spat in the eye by the respective sets of “Opposition” vipers.

  5. Oakeshott Country
    Gee Briefly
    No wonder the “no” campaigners see this as an attack on freedom of religion. Well played.

    I’m a very great believer in religious freedom – that primarily being a universal right to freedom from religion 🙂

  6. Boris
    Hold the torch flat briefly, i couldn’t see anything until i held it flat against the envelope.

    I’ve already mailed the envelope…but anyway, I intend to hold my torch aloft from now on 🙂

  7. The impression I have is that you don’t believe that religions can set rules of marriage for their members. If l am wrong I apologise

  8. Has the term ‘sovereign risk’ appeared in the press this week regarding the government and AGL?

    Yes, JR. I nearly fell off my seat when I saw it suggested about a Coalition government action!


  9. Oakeshott Country

    The impression I have is that you don’t believe that religions can set rules of marriage for their members. If l am wrong I apologise

    I think allowing secondary boycotts is taking it a bit far.

  10. poroti, monica,

    A prime example of how the “left” is too nice for it’s own good was Hilary’s comment, “When they go low, we go high”.

    Lefties can no longer take this approach. From now on it has to be, “When they go low, we kick them in the nuts and tear their phucking throats out.”

    Let’s face it, no matter how high-minded the left is, the right are always going to accuse them of thuggery anyway, so live up to it.

  11. monica

    “I’m hoping for a more hard headed approach next time. Give them nothing. Push them out the door”
    .
    Yep be once bitten twice shy and chuck away the Marquis of Queensbury rules. Biting ,kicking,scratching and gouging all OK.

    All done for their own good. After all they need to learn that acting like arskholes has consequences and should keep that in mind next time around.

  12. With reference to the North Korea situation. I am personally not too worried about a missile strike by NK actually hitting a foreign land based target. For me it is obvious that all of Dear Leader’s posturing is about shoring up his domestic power. In the face of such deprivation being experienced by every day NK citizens, it is imperative that he create an outside enemy which the country has to unify against for their own protection. Once again this is not about threatening the US, SK or Japan it is about protecting his own arse from his own people.

  13. Here’s a picture of the object on the tube train which blew up:

    Seems like more people got hurt running away from it than got hurt by it.

  14. Oakeshott Country
    The impression I have is that you don’t believe that religions can set rules of marriage for their members. If l am wrong I apologise

    I think it’s obviously quite in order for co-religionists to agree to observe any rules they might like. What they cannot do is impose those beliefs on others…to shelter behind their beliefs in order to defend discrimination against others who do not adhere to the same religion.

    For mine, there is absolutely no difference between baking cake, dressing hair, sewing garments and witnessing documents, pouring a beer, driving a taxi, running a kindy or tending to the aged and the ill. These are services. No-one is forced to offer them. But if a person does choose to offer them, they should be obliged to deal with all comers. It cannot possibly be that a person who requests and can pay for a service should have to meet some additional test of worthiness.

  15. Lefties can no longer take this approach. From now on it has to be, “When they go low, we kick them in the nuts and tear their phucking throats out.”

    I completely agree. But the Libs only go crazy when Labor respond in kind to ramp up the outrage so Labor will cave and apologise and go back to being the responsible one, and then when the Libs behave as per normal and Labor ark up, the media is just ‘meh, they’re all the same’. It shits me.

  16. DanG,
    A prime example of how the “left” is too nice for it’s own good was Hilary’s comment, “When they go low, we go high”.

    Michelle Obama, actually. : )

  17. If Bill Shorten can dispose of Tony Abbott, and hopefully Malcolm Turnbull, a few failed Liberal MPs and their conga line of suckholes should be no problem. : )

  18. Ronzy
    With reference to the North Korea situation. I am personally not too worried about a missile strike by NK actually hitting a foreign land based target. For me it is obvious that all of Dear Leader’s posturing is about shoring up his domestic power.

    I think it has far more to do with trying to shift the balance in the 6-way negotiations towards relaxation of sanctions…towards acceptance of NK as an autonomous and legitimate State. Once it is accepted that NK is to nearly all intents indestructible – that it cannot be broken by sanctions – then the existing policy of isolation will be seen to have failed. This would be an achievement in itself as far as NK is concerned. They will have defied everyone, including China and Russia, and prevailed.

  19. It’s only Sovereign risk if Labor does it.

    Examples of Sovereign risk include:

    1. Making corporations or property speculators pay their tax, or threatening to do so
    2. Regulating corporations to protect their workers, customers, the economy or the environment
    3. Withdraw or reduce any subsidy or concession enjoyed by a corporation or ‘investor’

  20. poroti and Dan G
    Agree mostly, just do them. Slow or fast, I don’t care.
    The Coalition is corrupt. They have dragged this country to near fascism and they deserve to be booted for at least three terms. I’d prefer forever, until the ultra right are obliterated.

  21. “Labor has much to remedy when they win the next election. I expect Dreyfus has a considerable file or series of same of those who are due for early retirement.”

    Funny, Roskam writes in the AFR, if Turnbull wins the next election he might be fix things.

    ‘If the Coalition does come to its senses on energy policy and somehow does get re-elected it will have the opportunity to repair some of the damage it’s done.’.
    Not that he would suggest the alternative.

    Malcolm Turnbull’s thoroughly Liberal blasphemies
    http://www.afr.com/opinion/columnists/turnbulls-thoroughly-liberal-blasphemies-20170914-gyh5ha?btis

  22. William,
    I don’t suppose it’s possible to have the “load rest of comments” and “load more comments ” buttons available together?
    Not sure if this is just me or if anyone else is experiencing a performance drop once the thread gets longish. I use a phone and can’t install C+.
    Occasionally to make sense of posts I need to go back but loading all the comments again seems to kill performance.
    Anyway just curious.

  23. Briefly my preference is the French model. Marriage registered by the state and if you want some other religious or secular service – go for it, but this also implies that the religion has the right about who they will offer a service to, according to the religion’s definition of a valid marriage. I get the impression that you feel religions are obliged to offer a marriage service to all comers but once again l apologise if that is not your belief.

  24. Anyone who is able to legally register marriages should not be able to discriminate.

    That doesn’t stop religions from offering marriage ceremonies, just that if they want to offer discriminatory ceremonies, they’ll have to settle for referring couples on to a service that can legally recognise marriages.

  25. And why religions would care one whit about state recognised marriages is beyond me when they claim to believe their ceremonies are recognised by a greater authority anyway.

Comments Page 36 of 38
1 35 36 37 38

Leave a Reply

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