Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor; ReachTEL: 53-47

New and new-ish federal voting intention numbers from Essential Research, ReachTEL and YouGov, plus a bonanza of same-sex marriage polling that is consistent only in pointing to a big win for “yes”.

Three new results on federal voting intention:

The Guardian reports Labor’s lead in this week’s Essential Research fortnightly rolling average is 54-46, up from 53-47 last time. Primary vote numbers to follow later today. (UPDATE: The full results reveal the Coalition is down a point to 36%, Labor up one to 38%, the Greens steady on 10% and One Nation steady on 7%)

• A ReachTEL poll for Sky News, conducted on Thursday from an unusually big sample of 4888, has Labor’s two-party lead at 53-47, out from 52-48 at the previous poll on August 23. The primary votes are all but unchanged, with the Coalition steady on 34.5%, Labor down 0.3% to 36.4%, the Greens down 0.1% to 10.2% and One Nation up 0.6% to 11.0%. On 2016 election flows, the result would have come in at 54-46. The poll has Malcolm Turnbull leading Bill Shorten 51.7-48.3 on preferred prime minister; Turnbull’s performance rated as very good or good by 26%, average by 34% and poor or very poor by 39%; Bill Shorten’s respective numbers coming in at 31%, 31% and 37%.

• The YouGov poll for FiftyAcres maintains its idiosyncratic form in having the Coalition with a 51-49 lead on respondent-allocated preferences, compared with 50-50 a fortnight ago. After producing somewhat more conventional primary vote numbers last time, it’s back to having both major parties deep in the doldrums, with Labor down two points to 33% and the Coalition steady on 34%. The Greens and One Nation are also steady on 11% and 9%, with minor players soaking up the difference. Labor is credited with a fairly conventional 73% of Greens preferences, with the Coalition getting 68% from One Nation and 60% from the rest. A two-party result based on 2016 election flows would have come in at around 53-47. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1054.

Same-sex marriage survey latest:

• The Australian Bureau of Statistics’ yesterday released the first of what will be weekly estimates on the response rate for the same-sex marriage survey. It estimates that 9.2 million survey forms have been received, amounting to a turnout of 57.5% of eligible voters. The result will be announced on November 15.

• The ABS figure is at odds with two polls that have emerged in the last few days, which can only partly be explained by postal lag effects. A ReachTEL poll for Sky News, conducted from a sample of “nearly five thousand people”, found 79.5% identifying as having voted. This included 64.3% who said they had voted yes compared with only 15.5% for no, with another 6.0% saying they still intended to vote yes and 5.7% for no. The other poll is a survey for the Marriage Equality campaign finding 77% of those eligible had voted, including 69% of the 18-to-24 cohort and more than 80% of those aged over 65. However, the Essential poll comes in a good deal lower, with 47% saying they had already voted, up from 36% a week ago, and another 33% saying they will definitely do so.

• Essential Research now has support for same-sex marriage at 61%, up from 58% last week and 55% the week before, with opposition tracking from 34% to 33% to 32%. Of those who voted, 64% said they voted yes compared with 30% for no.

• Without providing further detail, Sky News relates that a ReachTEL poll “separate” to the one it commissioned itself had a 72-28 forced response split in favour of yes, reducing to 61-39 among those who said they had already voted.

“ The Sky News ReachTEL poll has 47.2% very concerned or somewhat concerned about “what might be taught in schools if same sex marriage is legalised”, compared with 42.8% for somewhat or not at all concerned.

• The YouGov poll found 64% of respondents saying they had discussed the survey with family, 54% with friends, 21% with work colleagues and 14% with others, with only 17% saying they had not discussed it with anyone.

Other recent attitudinal findings:

• The ReachTEL poll found a 53-47 split in favour of Labor on who was best to manage the energy crisis and rising power prices. It also found 41% would support more coal seam gas mining if it meant reduced gas prices, with 36% opposed.

• Absent qualifications about lower prices, a Research Now survey of 1421 respondents for the Australia Institute found 49% would support a moratorium on fracking in their own state, with 24% opposed. Seventy-four per cent said they would support higher renewable energy targets in their own states.

• The YouGov poll finds 42% saying Tony Abbott should “play a quieter role and not be so critical of Malcolm Turnbull”, compared with 31% for “he should continue to speak up in the media, even if it involves being critical of Malcolm Turnbull”. Results were fairly similar across different voting intentions, with the exception of One Nation, whose supporters were notably harder on Turnbull. It was also found that 40% thought it wrong of Tony Abbott to relate the headbutt incident to the same-sex marriage campaign, compared with 34% who thought it was right, with clear distinctions emerging in this case betweeen Labor/Greens and Coalition/One Nation supporters.

• Also from the YouGov poll, 59% were in favour of a royal commission into the banking industry, with 19% opposed.

• Essential Research has results from its occasional questions on trust in institutions and media organisations, but all we have from The Guardian is that the the federal police performed best on the former, with religious organisations, trade unions and political parties bringing up the rear, with the ABC as always taking the mantle of most trusted news organisation.

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.

1,728 comments on “Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor; ReachTEL: 53-47”

Comments Page 3 of 35
1 2 3 4 35
  1. What do you all think of this?

    The Turnbull government will push state and territory leaders to hand over the identities of all Australian drivers in a bid to strengthen national security laws.

    If the states agree to the request at Council of Australian Government meeting in Canberra on Thursday, it would mean authorities would be able to identify any Australian with a driver’s licence in seconds using facial recognition technology.

    Play Video
    Turnbull to push COAG over terror laws
    The Prime Minister wants to be able to detain terror suspects for up to 14 days, and for drivers license photos to be given to federal authorities. Vision courtesy: ABC News.
    Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull confirmed on Wednesday morning the technology could be used in public spaces such a shopping malls and airports.

    “We are determined to keep Australians safe,” he said.

    “We believe if we can bring together drivers’ licences we can start to build up a national system to be able to identify people, particularly those involved in terrorist activities.”

    Up to 50 per cent of Australians are already on the federal government’s facial recognition database through their passports, Mr Turnbull told ABC radio.

    http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/turnbull-government-to-push-states-to-hand-over-all-drivers-licences-20171003-gytshq.html

  2. Jared Kushner Is Trying To Hide His Russia Secrets By Moving His Emails To Trump Servers

    After Special Counsel Robert Mueller requested Jared Kushner’s private emails, Trump’s son in law moved his emails to Trump Organization servers.

    USA Today reported:
    President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and daughter Ivanka Trump moved their personal email accounts to computers run by the Trump Organization as public scrutiny intensified over their use of private emails to conduct White House business, internet registration records show.

    The move, made just days after Kushner’s use of a personal email account first became public, came shortly after special counsel Robert Mueller asked the White House to turn over records related to his investigation of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and possible collusion with Trump associates. It also more closely intertwines President Trump’s administration with his constellation of private businesses

    The only reason to make this move is to try to hide records from the Special Counsel’s request. Jared Kushner is trying to dodge giving Mueller his the emails that were government business conducted on a private email account by moving the emails so that he can claim that they are outside the jurisdiction of Mueller’s request.

    http://www.politicususa.com/2017/10/03/jared-kushner-hide-russia-secrets-moving-emails-trump-servers.html

  3. Obama’s disaster chief unloads on Trump for dismissing Puetro Rico’s suffering as not ‘a real catastrophe’

    Jeremy Konyndyk, who formerly served as Disaster Assistance Chief in the Obama administration, broke his own “don’t tweet angry” rule to take on President Donald Trump’s “fatal” response to the disaster in Puerto Rico.

    On the ground in San Juan Tuesday, Trump downplayed the island’s devastation by comparing it to Hurricane Katrina.

    “Every death is a horror, but if you look at a real catastrophe like Katrina and you look at the tremendous hundreds and hundreds of people that died and what happened here with a storm that was just totally overbearing,” Trump said. “No one has ever seen anything like that. What is your death count?”

    https://www.rawstory.com/2017/10/obamas-disaster-chief-unloads-on-trump-for-dismissing-puetro-ricos-suffering-as-not-a-real-catastrophe/

  4. I read an article in which someone said there is only one great certainty: Trump is going to sack Mueller and there will then be an almighty Constitutional crisis.

  5. @ GG – I tend to distrust everything, unless I have some reason to believe it.

    Reasons may include:

    Trust of the person publishing it – if WB says something, my default assumption is that it is true as he has earned that. Similarly, peer review of academic journals that I know and trust means I take such papers seriously.

    Trust through publishing your source data and methodology – for the most part, I trust people not to outright fabricate things. But I won’t trust them not to mislead, misinterpret, misrepresent. In order for a poll to be worth anything to me, I need to:

    * See all questions asked, and all statements made before the question. “Gays have said that after gay marriage becomes legal, they intend to force everyone to marry the closest person of their gender, do you support the legalisation of gay marriage?”
    * See the methodology (phone, online, face to face). (face to face, taken in a very conservative church?)
    * See the sample size. (1200, that’s good)
    * Be sure that they would have published the results regardless of the conclusion. If not, I assume they ran 5 polls and published the one that looked best.

    As far as I can see, we are at 1/4 on the trust scale?

    If you want us to take it seriously, find the other 3 pieces of information. Until then, no-one will think it means anything.

  6. [Religious organisations, trade unions and political parties were the least trusted organisations on the list. Trust in religious organisations has declined from 30% in October 2015 to 26% in this week’s survey.]

    The religious trust figure is significant.

    From the last census 60% of the population declared as holding some sort of religious affiliation.

    So, if this poll is to be believed it indicates less than 44% of those have trust the institutions that control those religions.

    That figure assumes that the 30%, no religion and the 10% not stated don’t trust religious institutions which is probably not the case, so the actually trust within the religiously affiliated is probably lower than that.
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/AustralianReligiousAffiliation_2.svg

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/oct/04/support-for-marriage-equality-rises-in-guardian-essential-poll

  7. Secrecy now shrouds the public service’s decentralisation mess

    As the bureaucracy nears its deadline, the policy makes even less sense.
    …Paddy Gourley

    http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/public-service/secrecy-now-shrouds-the-public-services-decentralisation-mess-20170928-gyqkoi.html

    There can be little doubt that Joyce’s rush-of-blood-to-the-head decision on the pesticides authority was taken without due cabinet process, consultation with interested parties or proper regard to consequences for the agency and those in the agricultural sector who rely on it and who now face, at least in the short to medium term, lower standards of service. It was boilerplate political pork with oink, oink, oink all over it. Why couldn’t the Deputy Prime Minister have been more subtle and decide to put the authority in a National Party electorate other than his?

    The government must now try to make a silk purse from a sow’s ear. It won’t be easy as hounds are baying and many want to get in on the act.

  8. SK

    Is Satyajit Das a Henny Penny

    Just thinking the same as I decided not to bother reading the article.

    On this opinion he’s repetitive but he is smart generally.

  9. PhoenixRed

    “Whether or not collusion occurred and then can also be proven, there is mounting evidence that the White House anticipates damaging reports from the Russia probe.”

    Not that this means anything… but Ken Starr (remember him?) has said publicly that he thinks Trump is in deep shit.

  10. Voice Endeavour @ #106 Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 – 10:57 am

    @ GG – I tend to distrust everything, unless I have some reason to believe it.

    Reasons may include:

    Trust of the person publishing it – if WB says something, my default assumption is that it is true as he has earned that. Similarly, peer review of academic journals that I know and trust means I take such papers seriously.

    Trust through publishing your source data and methodology – for the most part, I trust people not to outright fabricate things. But I won’t trust them not to mislead, misinterpret, misrepresent. In order for a poll to be worth anything to me, I need to:

    * See all questions asked, and all statements made before the question. “Gays have said that after gay marriage becomes legal, they intend to force everyone to marry the closest person of their gender, do you support the legalisation of gay marriage?”
    * See the methodology (phone, online, face to face). (face to face, taken in a very conservative church?)
    * See the sample size. (1200, that’s good)
    * Be sure that they would have published the results regardless of the conclusion. If not, I assume they ran 5 polls and published the one that looked best.

    As far as I can see, we are at 1/4 on the trust scale?

    If you want us to take it seriously, find the other 3 pieces of information. Until then, no-one will think it means anything.

    Plenty of straw man arguments there.

    Most of the info you demand is hiding in plain sight. It’s just you’d rather not seek it out. You seem to be expressing your right to discount information from sources that you think will challenge your view of the world.

    I only posted the Devine piece because it challenges the paradigm of the roosting class at PB.

    It’s interesting also because it shows a trend in line with other recent polls regarding the SSM vote and makes an effort to identify the cohort that are seemingly more likely to be voting No and why!

    Whether it’s accurate or not is hard to say atm. But, some here are abusing Devine for putting the information out there. Sure there might be some caveats. But, i see the article as fairly standard analysis of polling information.

  11. http://www.theage.com.au/business/mining-and-resources/miners-leave-themselves-open-to-corruption-report-finds-20171003-gythoa.html

    The project included interviewing 47 experts from government, industry, academia and consultancies, reviewing the various acts and regulations and studying court cases and relevant published research.

    The report identified a number of “high risk” areas, including light touch due diligence into the applicant and its principals and inadequate research into the beneficial ownership of the applying company.

    The risk of corruption is compounded by the fact that companies aren’t required to declare their track record and compliance and environmental record with jurisdictions outside Australia. It means companies with environmental breaches in countries outside of Australia can operate large mining projects in Australia. And they do. “This can be of significant concern when large mining projects are operating in areas where there are risks of impacts to ecology, biodiversity or water resource,” it warns.

  12. @ GG – lets assume I am dumb. You say some of that information is “hiding in plain sight”.

    Any chance you could help me out by pointing to the hiding places?

  13. With 50°C days predicted I am finding the time and space given to the SSM issue infuriating.

    FFS. We still have months more of it.

    No doubt it is an important issue to many. But dragging it out is feeding the chooks.

  14. lizzie,

    Yes, I’m not opposed to the idea of decentralisation of Government departments, but for it to happen it needs to have a benefit to the operation of the department or at least be neutral.

    Developing viable centres outside the major cities is important to take pressure off the continued over expansion of these cities, but it needs to be as part of a concerted policy covering things like infrastructure, transport and communications.

  15. Barney

    Seems that planning is dominated by developers and pork barrels.

    Simon Katich

    I would have thought that once the ‘votes ‘ are in, there should be no more barracking, but it doesn’t seem as if that will happen.

  16. Voice Endeavour @ #115 Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 – 11:14 am

    @ GG – lets assume I am dumb. You say some of that information is “hiding in plain sight”.

    Any chance you could help me out by pointing to the hiding places?

    Was not saying you are “dumb”.They are your words.

    Re finding the information, I can only suggest you change a couple of attitudes when you next change your fire alarm batteries.

  17. CTar1

    APVMA ? Still battling through 2 registrations, much swearing from boss’ office 😉 I just do the method + production validation work, much less stressful. As for “fast work” .We received notification of a continued certification of our company following a regular audit. an audit done nearly 8 months ago! Boss had completely forgotten about it.

  18. The article written by Satyajit Das was taken from Bloomberg News, a global publication aimed at business and government leaders. I tend to find that articles in business publications are more objective than in the “popular media” because their audience is less likely to swallow bullsh*t. (The WSJ and AFR might be a bit suss because of their ownership/editorship.)

    Looking at Bloomberg now, they have an article slamming Turnbull’s NBN:

    ustralia’s A$49 billion ($38 billion) broadband network was meant to spearhead a digital revolution. Instead, the botched project risks becoming a poster child for government mismanagement.

    The nation’s biggest-ever infrastructure investment has turned into a political football, plagued by cost overruns and construction delays.

    With the network years behind the original schedule and only about half finished, Australia has slumped to 50th place on a global ladder of internet speeds, behind Kenya and a string of former Soviet bloc nations. Public frustration with the project is boiling over amid mounting criticism that politics is trumping policy across a host of areas from housing to energy and damaging Australia’s economic prospects.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-03/digital-doom-threatens-australia-where-internet-speeds-lag-kenya

    This article also links to another – business and political leaders across the globe are reading what Australia’s MSM are often loath to tell people here.

    What Went Wrong With Australian Politics?
    By Jason Scott
    October 3, 2017, 7:00 AM GMT+11

    Viewed from afar, Australia is the envy of the world with its 26 years of unbroken growth and abundant resources. But scratch beneath the surface and it’s a different story. An era of stability and economic reform has been replaced by a revolving door of leadership and politics trumping policy. The nation is sliding in international rankings for innovation and education, leaving it struggling for economic momentum even as global growth picks up.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-02/how-politics-is-poisoning-the-lucky-country-quicktake-q-a

  19. @ Lizzie – November 15 will be just the start of the issue. It will drag on for a long time still.

    The Liberals will put forward a bill Labor can’t support.
    Labor will put forward a bill/amendments that the Liberals won’t support.

    The Liberals will declare the issue a complex one, and say that more thought is needed and we shouldn’t rush into anything.

  20. Simon Katich

    With 50°C days predicted I am finding the time and space given to the SSM issue infuriating.

    FFS. We still have months more of it.

    No doubt it is an important issue to many. But dragging it out is feeding the chooks

    Agree totally. Endless repetition of the same old prattle. Some people need to get a life.

  21. Voice Endeavour
    @ Lizzie – November 15 will be just the start of the issue. It will drag on for a long time still.

    The LNP will tear themselves apart if they try this. A majority of Lib voters favour ME. If it appears the LNP are trying to thwart the expression of the majority of the electorate as well as their own supporters there will be a revolt among Lib MPs. The saner of the Libs will be very keen to have this settled. As things stand, the Liberal Party, by the actions of Abbott and Abetz, is being affiliated with the Crazy-Nasty Campaign. This will hurt the Liberals and they know it.

  22. Devine reckons that every sin is a real sin, except for lying which involves the Jesuit’s ‘mental reservation’.

    This means that if you tell a lie for a good purpose it is a good lie as long as you acknowledge in your mind that it is a lie.

    Others just call it sanctimonious hypocrisy.

  23. [briefly
    Devine is a religious reactionary and No Campaigner. She is an evangelist. Everything she says is automatically suspect.
    ]

    I can see why GG is attracted to her. 🙂

  24. Jack A Randa @ #38 Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 – 8:23 am

    Will, re Essential reporting a smaller “I have returned my survey” percentage – they wouldn’t be silly enough to use their usual 2-week running average on a question like that – would they?

    No idea. But the ABS data sets a floor on the valid range of numbers. We know that at least 57.5% of people have returned their surveys. Any poll reporting a turnout below that number is suspect.

  25. Voice Endeavour
    @briefly

    Ahh, what I wouldn’t give to be that naive again

    Well….at the very least the pro-SSM Libs in the House will refuse to play along with any more gamesmanship by the Right. The Libs who comprise Turnbull’s base will be hoping the issue will be dealt with and that public attention can be turned to other things. SSM is a negative issue for the Libs. They would be crazy to prolong this.

  26. The ABS report implies that about 70% of forms had been mailed by 30/9. The number is likely to be a little higher than that. By the end of this week, more than 75% will have been mailed. This likely represents at least 85% of all the forms that will be returned, meaning at most a further 10-12% of forms will remain to be mailed in the subsequent three weeks. It is basically all over.

  27. Let’s assume the poll referenced by Devine is ok and note that 57.5% of possible votes had been received by the ABS last Friday ( a figure that did not include votes posted but still in the mail system).

    So if the participation rate was 60% as many predicted nearly everybody has already voted and the ‘collapse’ of the yes vote has happened too late to have any effect on the result.

    If the participation rate reaches 70% as some now expect then 85% of the people who will vote have already voted and so the ‘collapse’ will have only a minor effect on the final result.

    I’m not sure no vote supporters should be too encouraged by this poll

  28. Plenty of opportunity for the Libs to bash Labor by using a dodgy ME bill. Youse know the programme “the people have voted yes and all that stands in the way of ME is Labor”.

  29. That was what I have expected right from the start Mike. I hope Labor & the Greens will work together on how to deal with a really bad bill so the messaging can be clear & simple.

  30. YouGov?

    Starting to look as if the reason why overseas polling houses get nonsense results in their home market runs deeper than non compulsory voting.

  31. sanctimonious
    ˌsaŋ(k)tɪˈməʊnɪəs/Submit
    adjective derogatory
    making a show of being morally superior to other people.
    “what happened to all the sanctimonious talk about putting his family first?”
    synonyms: self-righteous, holier-than-thou, churchy, pious, pietistic, moralizing, unctuous, smug, superior, priggish, mealy-mouthed, hypocritical, insincere

    Try harder GG.

  32. briefly @ #142 Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 – 12:20 pm

    sanctimonious
    ˌsaŋ(k)tɪˈməʊnɪəs/Submit
    adjective derogatory
    making a show of being morally superior to other people.
    “what happened to all the sanctimonious talk about putting his family first?”
    synonyms: self-righteous, holier-than-thou, churchy, pious, pietistic, moralizing, unctuous, smug, superior, priggish, mealy-mouthed, hypocritical, insincere

    Try harder GG.

    Don’t need to. It’s only you!

  33. Since GG loves dictionary definitions so much, I found these entries interesting for ‘growler’:

    3. British Slang. a four-wheeled, horse-drawn carriage.

    5. an iceberg large enough to be a navigational hazard.

    Number 3 conjures up images of “love and marriage”. Number 5 seems apt.

  34. bigot
    ˈbɪɡət/Submit
    noun
    noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
    synonyms: dogmatist, partisan, sectarian, prejudiced person;
    More Origin
    late 16th century (denoting a superstitious religious hypocrite): from French, of unknown origin.

    or

    bigot
    noun [ C ] UK ​ /ˈbɪɡ.ət/ US ​ /ˈbɪɡ.ət/ disapproving
    ​a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who does not like other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life:
    a religious bigot

    GG, you have inverted the language. Congratulations.

    You’re welcome to your devotions. But they are not mine and I simply ask you to keep them to yourself. My privacy is every bit as important as yours.

  35. Mr Newbie @ #145 Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 – 12:30 pm

    Since GG loves dictionary definitions so much, I found these entries interesting for ‘growler’:

    3. British Slang. a four-wheeled, horse-drawn carriage.

    5. an iceberg large enough to be a navigational hazard.

    Number 3 conjures up images of “love and marriage”. Number 5 seems apt.

    A growler (/ˈɡraʊlər/) is a glass, ceramic, or stainless steel jug used to transport draft beer in the United States, Canada, Australia, Brazil and other countries. They are commonly sold at breweries and brewpubs as a means to sell take-out craft beer. Rarely, beers are bottled in growlers for retail sale.

    A most sacred and important task that I take very seriously.

  36. Trump takes his bufoonery to Puerto Rico

    “The whole 13+ minutes is surreal. Time and time again, Trump makes the whole thing about him — using the various officials, military and otherwise, around him to reinforce the ideas that he is doing a great job. On display is someone wholly wrapped up in himself, incapable of understanding that this moment — on the ground of a historic natural disaster for the Puerto Rican people –was not about him.

    This is Trump off the telemprompter. Twitter Trump. Trump’s real personality — when words are not being carefully selected for him.

    Trump knew — because everyone wrote about it and TV talked about it relentlessly — that the big question today in Puerto Rico was whether he could show some actual empathy, some human kindness to people he didn’t know but who were still his constituents.

    And, even knowing that, Trump delivered a navel-gazing, self-championing, victimhood-seeking speech that reeked of tone-deafness and out-of-touch-ism.

    Even for this President, who has redefined presidential — and not for the better — this is a truly remarkable low.

    But he wasn’t done.”

    http://cnn.it/2yGlTtY

Comments Page 3 of 35
1 2 3 4 35

Leave a Reply

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