The first Newspoll in three weeks is a 54-46, compared with 53-47 last time. On the primary vote, the Coalition is down a point to 36%, Labor is steady on 38%, the Greens are steady on 9% and One Nation is steady on 8%. Malcolm Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister has also been cut from 46-29 to 42-31, although this isn’t reflected in the leaders’ approval ratings, which have Turnbull’s net rating improving from minus 20% to minus 17% while Bill Shorten is unchanged at minus 20% (we will have to wait a little longer for the exact approval and disapproval numbers). The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1695. The Australian’s paywalled report is here.
UPDATE: The poll also records a narrowing in the lead for same=sex marriage, down six points since mid-August to 57%, with opposition up four to 34%. However, there is markedly higher support among those who have already voted or definitely tend to (61% to 34%) than among the non-definite (38% to 35%). However, only 15% say they have already voted, which surprises on the low side. A further 67% say they will definitely vote, with a further 7% saying they probably will. Support for the survey being held is down five points to 44%, with opposition up three to 46%. Another question finds 62% supporting “guarantees in law for freedom of conscience, belief and religion if it legislates for same-sex marriage”, with only 18% opposed. Kevin Bonham has a very thorough account of all the polling related to the survey.
Word that is…
TPOF @ #1194 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 5:25 pm
Loved it ❗
Vote often – if you live in a block of flats – check the bins.
😍😍
confessions @ #1200 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 5:30 pm
So, you think it’s fine to participate in a non binding, non scientific poll that allows you to judge the merits or otherwise of someone elses lifestyle choices?
You care so much for Homosexuals you just want to judge them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/troy-toohey/ill-never-forgive-malcolm-turnbull-for-asking-me-to-validate-my-own-existence_a_23217399/?utm_hp_ref=au-homepage
adrian @ #1186 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 4:49 pm
I would try to explain it, but it seems you would probably not understand it.
GG:
The postal survey doesn’t ask voters to judge merits or otherwise of others’ lifestyle choices. And seeing as the process is what it is, yes, absolutely I think it’s fine for me to participate in it.
I may not like it or agree with how this has been done, but I don’t see it as at all disingenuous for me to vote and have my say.
briefly @ #1187 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 4:56 pm
I agree there is no defensible rationale for that view. But it is not the view either we or the UN HRC have adopted.
“You care so much for Homosexuals you just want to judge them.”
confessions @ #1205 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 5:37 pm
Apparently, that’s not the opinion of many homosexuals as that link I posted confirms.
You’ve just gone along for the ride!
kezza2 @ #1198 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 5:29 pm
Ummm. Does anyone understand this?
Apparently, that’s not the opinion of many homosexuals as that link I posted confirms.
Player One @ #1208 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 5:42 pm
I do.
Just a reminder that the survey closes 7th November (post by 27th October). So another month of this.
Then wait till the ABS publishes results. 15th November.
Assuming Yes ‘wins’, wait until the Coalition figures out how to deal with it.
If legislation is brought to parliament, wait to see if it is in anyway acceptable to the other parties or some soup of compromise and dribble.
GG:
If gay people choose not to vote that’s up to them, and they will have their own reasons for not voting just as you and P1 do.
I think marriage equality is long overdue in this country, and having equality in law an essential element for a progressive democracy such as Australia. Voting Yes in the postal survey is in no way disingenuous if someone holds this value as I do.
Player One
briefly @ #1187 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 4:56 pm
The premise of the position adopted by PO and GG is very simple. It is that LGBTIQ persons are not entitled to equal protection under the law. The best they can hope for is a lesser standard of recognition and protection than is available to heterosexuals. There is no defensible rationale for this view, which is founded on the notion that prejudice is acceptable, even desirable.
I agree there is no defensible rationale for that view. But it is not the view either we or the UN HRC have adopted.
The UN Committee referred to the text of the Covenant in relation to marriage. The Covenant uses the words “men and women” and found, on a very narrow construction, this did not give rise to a Treaty obligation on the part of NZ to legislate SSM.
NZ later made this legislative change in any case, presumably because of the absurdity inherent in a finding that supposes LGB persons are neither men nor women. This was a very feeble finding against the submissions of 4 individuals. It has no effect and has been ignored.
The reasoning of the EU in relation to equal protection of relationships appears to support the case for reform in Australia. Without reform, in this jurisdiction, SS relationships cannot be afforded the same recognition and protection as is available to opposite sex relationships. This may not be the case in other jurisdictions, but it certainly is the case in this one.
‘I would try to explain it, but it seems you would probably not understand it.’
You’re right there, fortunately.
A lot of comments about Christian conservatives on this site.
Recently Council of Imams Queensland president Yusuf Peer said gay marriage was unacceptable to Islam, and that Muslims should respect LGBTQI people but “condemn only their actions”.
The National Imams Council was unambiguous: “Islam places the family unit at the heart of a healthy society, and in this context, the right of children to be cared for and raised by both a mother and father is one that must be protected.
“Islam also explicitly and unambiguously states that marital relationship is only permissible between a man and woman; any other marital relationships are Islamicly impermissible.”
Also with 2.5 percent of the Australian population being Buddhist even the Dalai Lama comments are not pro gay marriage. There is also a very large Chinese population that is very conservative when it comes to marriage equality.
But I understand this is PB so we must pick on whites preferable male and of course the ultimate trifector is conservative.
confessions @ #1213 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 5:53 pm
So you’re happy to impose emotional pointless pain.and suffering on those you wish to liberate even though you know the vote outcome is non-binding and that the ultimate decision for change, if any will be made by politicians that can choose to ignore the result.
That fits my definition of disingenuous.
GG
Oh dear. It was bound to happen. The more you say the more exposed you become
What part of the survey relates to lifestyle choices?
(So, you think it’s fine to participate in a non binding, non scientific poll that allows you to judge the merits or otherwise of someone elses lifestyle choices?
You care so much for Homosexuals you just want to judge them.)
P1
It wasn’t a difficult question.
YES or NO.
You decided not to exercise your vote. By your abstention, you have virtually voted Yes.
Easy peasy.
As in, you didn’t agree with the proposition and could have voted NO.
Instead, you decided to forego your democratic right, and tried to convince others to take your stance.
It didn’t work.
Simon Katich @ #1212 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 3:45 pm
Hopefully the L/NP blow themselves up over this and spend the Christmas break arguing about it.
Grimace
Yep. If the survey is a resounding yes, it will blow up the coalition and when Labor get into power they can get on with enacting legislation. Win win
victoria @ #1218 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 6:01 pm
Would have thought you’d agree that coupling with someone is a lifestyle choice. But, apparently not.
No, GG, no one is happy about the process, but now it’s under way I (for one) am respecting the wishes of those who are suffering the pointless pain and suffering and vote the way they have asked people to.
Steelydan @ #1216 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 5:59 pm
Your definition of “very large” seems quite strange. You don’t win anything in a democracy by going to where the votes aren’t.
zoomster @ #1224 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 6:04 pm
As long as your conscience is salved, it’s OK to judge homosexuals?
Shouldered with the burden of a reasonably decent, mildly progressive Imam, a bunch of Muslims would rather be assholes than evolve even a little bit:
Yep does not have the quite same ring to it does it AR
Victoria its interesting how GGs antipathy to gay people keeps leaking out the seams. He doesn’t seem to think that dogwhistling ‘homosexual’and ‘lifestyle’ will get called out in a place like this.
Sorry, GG, I’m not judging anyone. I’m acting in the way homosexuals have asked people to. That’s not judgement, that’s respect.
[kezza2
P1
It wasn’t a difficult question.
YES or NO.
You decided not to exercise your vote. By your abstention, you have virtually voted Yes.
Easy peasy.
As in, you didn’t agree with the proposition and could have voted NO.
Instead, you decided to forego your democratic right, and tried to convince others to take your stance.
It didn’t work.]
SHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
She might understand your post.
I think Rebecca Huntley’s view is a little more sophisticated than the view offered by P1 and GG.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/19/how-prepared-are-we-to-have-our-say-on-marriage-equality-if-a-fine-or-cake-stall-isnt-involved
kezza2 @ #1219 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 6:01 pm
So – please explain to me why so many here believe that by abstaining I have effectively voted ‘No’?
No, I exercised my democratic right – in a voluntary vote, I have the right not to vote.
Well, that remains to be seen. But given that the ALP will legislate for same sex marriage as soon as they are elected, then if you believe this vote actually achieves anything other than making a lot of people go through a lot of suffering they didn’t need to go through, and angering a lot of other people, then I think it is you who is mistaken here, not me.
Oh – and what did the ‘bacteria’ have to do with anything?
Steelydan
A lot of comments about Christian conservatives on this site.
Recently Council of Imams Queensland president Yusuf Peer said gay marriage was unacceptable to Islam, and that Muslims should respect LGBTQI people but “condemn only their actions”.
As has been remarked, clerics are pretty much the sam everywhere, no matter which code they play in. They are not to be trusted. They are not interested in equality. They wish to preserve their own privileges and authority. The single best thing we can do is ignore them.
I haven’t imposed emotional pain and suffering on anybody. All I’ve done is exercise my right to vote.
And I repeat: the postal survey isn’t asking voters to cast a judgement on someone else’s lifestyle choices. It simply asks whether voters think same sex couples should be able to legally marry. How voters feel about the choices gay people make in their lives is immaterial to the question at hand.
Steely I’ve already reflected on the anti-gay sentiments in non Christian sectors.
Marriage Equality accepted in civil law is part of a process that will also put pressure on other faiths and cultures.
I know several gay muslims and they all want Martiage Equality even though the Liberals have created a process that prevents several of them from being able to participate.
..and if the gays I know didn’t want to be ‘liberated’ I would respect that, too. But they don’t. They want to be able to get married, and they want people to show their support for that idea. And if people don’t, then the pain and suffering is absolutely pointless.
It’s called making the best of a bad situation.
Steelydan @ #1227 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 6:05 pm
Yes, because for one thing there’s not currently an Islamic equivalent of the Pope. There’s some crazy person in charge of ISIS who claims to be basically that, but he’s neither reasonably decent nor any amount of progressive.
You’re putting made-up nonsense against something that really just happened. Of course that won’t have the same substance to it.
If there were an actual story about the official leader of Islam calling for moderation/tolerance and then being accused of heresy for it, I’d share that too.
The proposition that choosing Yes in this survey is the same as “judging homosexuals” or is “to impose emotional pointless pain and suffering” is pure nonsense. Quite the contrary, it is to oppose prejudice and the violence that is implicit in prejudice.
There is something very saddening about having to speak up for – to negotiate to obtain – something that is inalienably right. But that cannot mean we must cling to silence. We must defy prejudice. Prejudice itself demands it.
cud chewer
I know several gay muslims and they all want Martiage Equality even though the Liberals have created a process that prevents several of them from being able to participate.
Why can’t they paticipate, you lost me. Don’t want to get into a debate about the survey I think we agree but why can’t your friends participate.
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/sep/24/lost-rubens-portrait-james-i-lover-rediscovered-glasgow
Lost Rubens portrait of James I’s ‘lover’ is rediscovered in Glasgow
Painting of George Villiers, first Duke of Buckingham, thought to have been a copy, is identified as original after 400 years
[Player One
…
So – please explain to me why so many here believe that by abstaining I have effectively voted ‘No’?]
No, what we’ve been arguing is that you advocating others to boycott is effectively “NO” campaigning, as most here would be “YES” supporters so if they boycott then it’s one less “YES”, supporting your preferred position.
briefly @ #1238 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 6:16 pm
As always, you waffle away your perfidy in a vain attempt to rationalise your appalling attitudes.
Ignorance is bliss!
That seems to be the Governments position in their HC submission.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/sep/26/politicians-unaware-they-held-dual-citizenship-should-keep-jobs-says-brandis
Steelydan @ #1239 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 6:18 pm
If true, it only further re-inforces that the only moral decision is to not participate in this farce of a process.
Steely when you have your dad hand you the form and you know he will be watching what box you tick, what do you do?
A young gay muslim friend related to me that he pre-empted this by handing it back to his dad ‘you handle it’.
frednk @ #1231 Tuesday, September 26th, 2017 – 6:06 pm
Then you have apparently either not read, or not understood her article. Rebecca Huntley agrees strongly with my view that the whole process is appalling, but her opinion is that we should participate because it could be a foretaste of even more appalling things to come. Votes on issues so complex that they make the issue of same sex marriage look trivial by comparison.
I understand her argument (as you apparently do not) – I simply disagree with hre proposal on how we should react. We both believe that determining public policy via voluntary opinion surveys is wrong. But she apparently believes we should participate because we will all naturally vote ‘Yes’. However, anyone who thinks this should take a long hard think about how they would react if the vote did end up as a ‘No’. Even if this one turns out well, what about other current issues? Voluntary euthanasia? Capital punishment? Banning the burka?
As she concludes:
We may soon be asked to vote in a ‘voluntary survey’ on exactly this issue – at least if the current government is re-elected. You can see the campaign starting already – should we have more expensive renewables, or should we instead try and keep energy costs down, keep the lights on and keep our industries running? How do you think Australians would vote on that one?
GG…I would have thought you would have some sympathy for the victims of prejudice. Catholics have certainly been the targets of sectarian repression both here and abroad. You’d be well versed in this. How is that you are indifferent to the prejudice – and the violence that is implicit in prejudice – that is directed against our LGB brothers, sisters, children and other loved ones?
Cud chewer
I actually feel sorry for GG. He is struggling with the whole thing
Victoria I confess some sympathy for GG and others like him who have been “gotten while they’re young”
If the Catholic branch of those who subscribe to the Bronze Age Goatherder’s Manual think that marriage between a man and a woman is so holy, shouldn’t they promote the idea by allowing priests and nuns to marry each other?