Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor

Labor roars back in the latest Essential poll, despite a slump in Bill Shorten’s personal ratings.

The latest fortnightly Essential Research poll sharply reverses a recent trend away from Labor, who are back to leading 54-46 on two-party preferred after their lead fell to 51-49 in the previous poll. This is apparently driven by a four point drop in the Coalition primary vote, but as usual we will have to wait until later today for the full numbers. However, it’s a curiously different story on leadership ratings, on which Malcolm Turnbull gains two on approval since last month to reach 42% while remaining steady on 42% disapproval, while Bill Shorten is down four to 33% and up five to 46%. Turnbull’s lead over Shorten as preferred prime minister is unchanged, shifting from 40-26 to 41-27. Like ReachTEL and unlike Newspoll, Essential has posed a straightforward question on company tax cuts that finds approval and disapproval tied on 37%. The poll also finds 68% support for an increase in Newstart.

UPDATE: Full results here. The Coalition primary vote crashes from 40% to 36%, Labor’s rises one to 37%, the Greens are steady on 10% and One Nation are steady on 8%.

UPDATE 2: Further details from those ReachTEL polls for Sky News, which were conducted last Wednesday. In the national poll, after allocating results from a forced response follow-up for the 5.1% undecided, the primary votes were Coalition 36.5%, Labor 35.3%, Greens 10.7%, One Nation 9.3% and others 8.2%, translating into a 52-48 lead for Labor after respondent-allocated preferences favoured them by 54.8-45.2. Malcolm Turnbull’s lead on the forced response preferred prime minister question was almost exactly unchanged at 54.6-45.4 (54.5-45.5 last month); his very good plus good rating went from 29.9% to 30.8%, and his poor plus very poor from 32.6% to 37.0%. Bill Shorten went from 28.4% to 27.7% on good plus very good, and from 35.5% to 39.9% on poor plus very poor.

In the poll for the Braddon by-election, after allocating the forced follow-up results from the 5.9% undecided, the primary votes were Liberal 48.2%, Labor 34.5%, Greens 6.6%, independents 7.2%, others 3.5%, resulting in a 54-46 Liberal lead on respondent-allocated two-party preferred. In Longman, with the 7.1% initially undecided likewise allocated, the results are Liberal National Party 40.4%, Labor 37.3%, independents 5.5%, Greens 2.7% and others 14.1% (confirming there was no specific option for One Nation), resulting in an LNP lead of 52-48. Respondents for these polls were asked how they would vote “if a by-election in the federal electorate of X were to be held today”. The by-election polls were conducted last Wednesday, from samples of 824 in Braddon and 810 in Longman; the national poll was conducted Wednesday and Thursday from a sample of 2523.

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.

2,057 comments on “Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor”

Comments Page 41 of 42
1 … 40 41 42

  2. Player One @ #1999 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 9:54 pm

    C@tmomma @ #1996 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 9:47 pm

    Player One @ #1995 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 9:47 pm

    C@tmomma @ #1994 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 9:42 pm

    Correct me if I’m wrong …

    You are indeed wrong.

    How?

    There was no denial of service attack on the census. That was a fairly lame and easily refuted excuse.

    So, you disagree with this stated fact:

    the “denial of service” cyber attack on the 2016 census.

  3. @C@tmomma

    It has nothing to do with being more prepared in terms of Ceanus 2016.

    One of the reports was that the subcontractors of IBM failed to follow a process properly.

    All DDoS attacks will do is slow or temporarily put websites off line.

  5. @Bemused

    No because it was you need your pullin in.

    We didn’t put other posters down when they are suggesting things.

    Smart ass.

  7. Zoidlord @ #2002 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 10:01 pm

    @C@tmomma

    It has nothing to do with being more prepared in terms of Ceanus 2016.

    One of the reports was that the subcontractors of IBM failed to follow a process properly.

    All DDoS attacks will do is slow or temporarily put websites off line.

    …which has a cascade effect and produces the desired outcome. Chaos.

  8. C@tmomma @ #2001 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 10:01 pm

    So, you disagree with this stated fact:

    the “denial of service” cyber attack on the 2016 census.

    I disagreed with the rest of your post as well, but couldn’t be bothered arguing since your whole post is based on a false premise.

    Perhaps we can save time here – what is your actual point?

  9. @Bemused

    Because it’s about time someone get’s their own medicine.

    Kama is a Bitch.

    @C@tmomma

    That is the designed effect 🙂

  14. Player One @ #2007 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 10:07 pm

    C@tmomma @ #2001 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 10:01 pm

    So, you disagree with this stated fact:

    the “denial of service” cyber attack on the 2016 census.

    I disagreed with the rest of your post as well, but couldn’t be bothered arguing since your whole post is based on a false premise.

    Perhaps we can save time here – what is your actual point?

    You’re not going to draw me into a slanging match with you, P1, by your being supercilious towards me, I can’t be bothered either, so I will simply say that I was merely pointing out that, despite all the frothing at the mouth at the time wrt whether the cause of the chaos on the night of the Census was due to the ABS being unprepared for the overwhelming number of people that submitted their forms online at the same time, or not, that we finally have a definitive answer. The Census was the subject of a DNS cyber attack.

    I just thought it was good to know for sure, finally.

  18. Player One @ #2016 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 10:24 pm

    C@tmomma @ #2013 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 10:19 pm

    The Census was the subject of a DNS cyber attack.

    I just thought it was good to know for sure, finally.

    I have no idea what your point is, but you are entitled to believe this if it makes you feel better. For myself, I’d want some actual evidence.

    P1, you sound silly repeatedly questioning what my point is, but whatever. However, I don’t know what more ‘proof’ you need than a senior intelligence source reported to a Senate Estimates committee hearing that there had been a DNS cyber attack on the 2016 Australian Census!?!

  20. C@tmomma @ #2017 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 10:28 pm

    P1, you sound silly repeatedly questioning what my point is, but whatever. However, I don’t know what more ‘proof’ you need than a senior intelligence source reported to a Senate Estimates committee hearing that there had been a DNS cyber attack on the 2016 Australian Census!?!

    The evidence would have been very easy to come by. Unfortunately, all the evidence collected on the night – by people who are experts in this stuff – demonstrated precisely the opposite. As did the subsequent admissions by IBM that they took the website themselves down after a “false positive”.

    Both stories were full of holes at the time, and no evidence has been presented since that makes either one any more believable. I know this is not your domain of expertise – but it is (or perhaps I should say was!) at least peripheral to mine.

    And I still don’t understand what your actual point is.

  24. @P1

    The website was taken down, which is proper way of doing things if you are half ass Administrator.

    P1 you are looking for ghosts that are not actually there.

  25. Zoidlord @ #2022 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 10:43 pm

    @P1

    The website was taken down, which is proper way of doing things if you are half ass Administrator.

    And are you a “half ass administrator”?

    P1 you are looking for ghosts that are not actually there.

    I think you are confusing me with C@tmomma, who is clearly out to prove … well, something … I’m just not sure what!

    But this discussion has gotten beyond absurd. I’m off to bed.

  26. I think you are confusing me with C@tmomma, who is clearly out to prove … well, something … I’m just not sure what!

    Just the facts. Finally.

  28. P1

    C@tmomma isn’t out too prove anything.

    Not sure what is your problem against C@tmomma, but the old saying goes.

    Don’t start a convo if you don’t plan on finishing it.

  29. Player One,
    You must be tired. Otherwise you would have got it by now that my point was, simply, to point out that there had finally been an admission by a reliable source, who likely has more expertise in the area than your peripheral involvement in it, that the cause of the Census 2016 debacle was a DNS cyber attack, NOT that too many people submitted their forms online at the one time. Which is what I thought was your point, laboriously put, at the time.

    But I could be wrong about that. As I said previously.

    Oh, and I know that there was a series of attacks earlier in the day, not just one false positive, however, it seems as though they continued. Contrary to what you have said.

  35. Watch ALBATROSS

    Greetings and welcome to ALBATROSS. Watch on a system with good speakers if possible; the sound is big and immersive. ALBATROSS is offered as a gift to the world, which means you can stream and share for free (but please do not publicly post any screenshots or clips). Please consider a donation to help us spread the film around the world.

    Thank you and we hope you love it! ~cj and the ALBATROSS team.

    https://www.albatrossthefilm.com/watch-albatross

  36. Woah woah woah, all this talk of DDoS attacks. Have any of you even been the target, or the instigator of such a cyber attack?
    “All DDoS attacks will do is slow or temporarily put websites off line.”
    That depends on the type of attack (layer & method), how large/effective the attack is, and how much you’re forking out on protection…
    Otherwise you can look forward to such niceties as extended downtimes, Null Routes, provider flat out declining to provide you service because the attacks you draw effect their entire systems and other customers.

  39. C@tmomma @ #2059 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 9:42 pm

    Here is the truth of the matter via Senate Estimates, as it relates to a justification for passing the government’s Cyber Espionage Bills before the 5 by-elections:

    A senior intelligence source confirmed that the taskforce was the first to be established for the sole purpose of assessing cyber defences for elections and was initiated by a request from the Australian Electoral Commission, which feared a repeat of the “denial of service” cyber attack on the 2016 census.

    I’m unsure how that establishes the truth of anything? What evidence has been put forward to support the fact that a DDoS attack (of the DNS-reflection variety, which is what the ABS claims to have experienced) did in fact occur? Have they released the IP addresses of the DNS servers that were leveraged to pull off the attack? Or confirmation from the operator of even one of the impacted servers that their server was compromised and used as part of a coordinated DDoS attack against the census?

    The bureau’s and ministerial say-so is not evidence, particularly when both have a vested interest in not looking like they simply failed to design their IT system in a way that would cope with the levels of legitimate load it experienced.

    It seems to me like it was a sophisticated and sustained effort. Beyond that which any Australian entity had had to deal with previously.

    Again, what is the basis for this view? DNS-reflection attacks are neither new nor poorly understood. There are publicly available tools which detect and report upon such attacks, including when they occur within/against Australia/Australian sites. None of them detected any significant DNS-reflection attack (or any other DDoS attack) on the census.

    If there had been an attack that went beyond what “any Australian entity had had to deal with previously”, it would have shown up, and the independent evidence supporting it would be overwhelming.

    In the absence of any such public evidence, and in the absence of (to my knowledge) any such evidence being furnished up by the Government, you seem to be putting too much faith in Government say-so.

  40. Thanks for Albatross.
    Just watched a take-off at 7.40 in and the following flight sequence was something else.
    cheers.

  41. I think Ctar1 is gone. I am sure he would have commented on at least some of the topics on PB over the last months. So I think he must have passed away.

    I miss Ctar1. If i am right, sadly, I say Vale and thank you.

  42. Confessions says:
    Saturday, June 9, 2018 at 8:54 pm
    Steve777 @ #2002 Saturday, June 9th, 2018 – 6:44 pm

    When I was in the work force, one of my pet annoyances was people who showed up 5 minutes late to a 9:00AM meeting with a cup of coffee. Their morning cup was more important than everyone’s time.

    That’s my pet hate too: tardiness.
    ————————————-

    My pet hate was meetings.

  45. Greensborough Growler says:
    Saturday, June 9, 2018 at 11:18 pm

    Isn’t it time?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MC4QCidHrs

    [sarcasm mode on] I do wish people would not post links to music – it so often leads me off to the black hole of such things, usually ending up with the Australian Pink Floyd’s variation of Echoes about 3 hours later.[sarcasm mode off]

    Like you, GG, I’m a vaper. Over 7 years now. Like you, switched over instantly. Since then, my spouse not only lets me puff in the car, but tries to work out what flavour I am favouring currently. Now we’re in Ballarat, a visit to the vaping shop in Daylesford is so much easier. Vape on!

Comments Page 41 of 42
1 … 40 41 42

Leave a Reply

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