Newspoll: 52-48 to Labor

Newspoll returns after three weeks to find the situation all but totally unchanged.

One Nation are off two points on the primary vote, from 8% to 6%, but the latest Newspoll is otherwise as dull as it gets. Labor’s lead on two-party preferred is unchanged at 52-48, both major parties are unchanged at 38% on the primary vote, the Greens are up one to 10%. Malcolm Turnbull is up a point on both approval and disapproval, to 40% and 50% respectively; Bill Shorten is down one to 33% and steady on 55%. Turnbull leads 46-31 on preferred prime minister, compared with 47-30 last time. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday, presumably from a sample of about 1600.

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.

891 comments on “Newspoll: 52-48 to Labor”

  1. LU, you’re not dealing with rational people here.

    If truth be known, the dead lady was a minor comedienne, mostly unknown to the entertainment industry, who has been turned into someone who was universally loved, requiring the presence of Prime Ministers and LOTOs at her memorial service.

    If you zoom out a little, Ms Dixon is a blip in a solid and steady statistical progression that tells us one or two women per week are murdered by men, either known or unknown to them.

    What is unusual in this circumstance is the association of cruisey, hip, liberated and broadminded Brunswick with dastardly murder and rape at the most awful, fundamental level of human evil. It was the same with Jill Meagher. And there have been many, many women before them over the years.

    You could light a million candles and not get to the root cause of such outrages. You’re right to say that vigils don’t solve any problems. At best they make some of us feel better. And in the case of politicians who attend: look better.

  2. LU not logged in @ #841 Tuesday, June 19th, 2018 – 12:34 am

    Which was my point. Without them, all you have is a society that doesn’t ever pause to reflect.

    You were suggesting that people in the US don’t do this. They most certainly do.

    It has done not very much, at best.

    Well, to be more specific, I should have said that they are doing them less and less as time goes on and the mass shootings become more common. That is the symptom of their society I wouldn’t like to see happen here. But, sadly, it probably will.

    Therefore, I believe the vigils are, at best useful, and at worst, harmless.

  3. William Bowe @ #840 Tuesday, June 19th, 2018 – 12:32 am

    Some of you people aren’t very nice.

    Meet:

    LU, you’re not dealing with rational people here.
    and
    I thought you were going to bed in the vain attempt at a beauty sleep?

    and the rest.

    Now I know you’re not an idiot, just nasty, therefore I also know that you would have read that the reason I came back here was to put the commentary by Gareth Hutchens down before it disappeared overnight from The Guardian. However, you chose not to say anything about that. I noticed LU had replied to me, so I replied to him. Not that it’s any of your business. But you just couldn’t help yourself, could you? You just had to pipe up again and prove what a sad and bitter old man you are becoming.

  4. I’ve been using the Internet since at least 1984. There are potentially toddlers with grandparents who weren’t born then (unlikely, but possible). One thing I’ve learnt over that time is that heated arguments just descend into flame wars, resolving nothing while generating enmity and hostility.

    Sometimes it’s best for all to walk away from the keyboard and save it for when you’ve calmed down. Otherwise someone may well post something they later regret (or should regret – and I think that’s already happened).

    I’m not religious, but I think the biblical line to treat others as you would wish them to treat you has a lot going for it.

  5. imacca @ #770 Monday, June 18th, 2018 – 10:28 pm

    ” I don’t think a single panelist suggested that the victim “should have known better” than to go walking alone at night.”

    […]

    2: Its going to take a while for that to happens, will never be absolute (cause the universe doesn’t do behavioural absolutes), and so people need to be conscious of personal security and risk.

    The implication of #2 being that a woman who goes for a walk by herself and gets attacked either has not done that or has not done that well enough. Which in fewer words is basically “she should have known better”.

    Of course most people know better, themselves, than to put it so blatantly. But that is the essence of what’s being put. As far as I can parse it, anyways.

    And I’m also really curious as to how a person is expected to be “conscious of personal security and risk”. Carrying a gun would certainly be illegal. I’m pretty sure that carrying most other things that are actually useful as personal defense items, for the purposes of personal defense, is also illegal. Actually using such an item to defend oneself is legally precarious, even if the attacker is clearly in the wrong. Because sometimes the law makes very little sense.

    So what is the actual advice here? Hire a bodyguard and/or engage a friend/partner to stand-in as one? Just plain don’t go walking around in public spaces?

    The tacit argument, I suppose, being that any woman who does choose to go walking around in public spaces has not reasonably considered her security and is taking an unnecessary and unjustifiably large risk. Particularly if she doesn’t have “her phone in one hand and her keys in the other” the entire time, as one Q&A questioner put it?

    I’m baffled at how this debate can go on, and on, and on. There’s only one person who’s acted unreasonably. There’s only one person who’s done something unnecessary and unjustifiable. There’s only one person who has put the lives and safety of themselves or others at risk. And that person sure as fuck wasn’t Eurydice Dixon.

  6. AR from the perspective of laying blame, of course not. But sadly, you can see why those things are mentioned from the perspective of prevention/avoidance. It is a sad fact of humanity that there are those that would take advantage of the defenceless with an aim to do harm.
    Risk management cares not for gender. In a perfect world such thinking would not be required.

  7. “The implication of #2 being that a woman who goes for a walk by herself and gets attacked either has not done that or has not does that well enough. Which in fewer words is basically “she should have known better”.”

    That was not what i meant by that.

    “As far as I can parse it, anyways.”

    You have parsed it wrong.

    “And I’m also really curious as to how a person is expected to be “conscious of personal security and risk”. ”

    For example: Thinking before acting. Hmmmm…should i walk through a park, in the dark, where there is a lot of cover to hide someone who may wish to do me harm, when there is no one obvious around, alone?? What are the risks involved here?? Just Dropbears, or worse??

    “So what is the actual advice here?”

    Actually think before you act.

    “The tacit argument, I suppose, being that any woman who does choose to go walking around in public spaces has not reasonably considered her security and is taking an unnecessary and unjustifiably large risk? ”

    Wrong again.

    “And that person sure as fuck wasn’t Eurydice Dixon.”

    I have never asserted or implied that she was at fault. Her actions in checking in withe friend shows that she was cognisant of risk and her personal security. She died anyway. Happens sometimes. Best will in the world and people do all the right things and it all still turns to shit. Sad, tragic but thats the way the universe works sometimes.

    Anyway tired to the pointless biffo which seems to be mainly for the sake of biffo at this point.

    Night all

  8. Clive Palmer:

    “The trouble with Pauline Hanson is she’s looking for three senators with a lower IQ than her – an impossible task.”

    Oh, I don’t know, Clive, it only took you a few minutes to find Brian Burston ….

  9. BC, there’s no limits with C@tmomma. you have to understand that.

    Her tactic is to buy into an argument that isn’t hers. Then when someone responds she accuses them of bullying her.

    It’s not just me (although it was tonight). It can be almost anyone. She thinks she owns the blog and has to chip in her two bob’s worth even when she’s not invited or welcome, or relevant (which is the most important aspect).

    Normally I’d stay away from the provocations, but add in a stoush with Confessions and a bottle of red and I’m good for an argument.

    Even William will (or should) agree that C@tmomma’s entry into the argument in order to have a go at something I said was unprovoked. I did not mention her name, refer to her obliquely or in any other way do anything that would cause her to take offence personally.

    What we got was a diatribe on something or other that I wrote, and when I chipped back a bit, some gratuitous and out-of-context insults about needing Viagra.

    Tell me who started the shit fight.

    Since I’ve left Sydney I’ve tried to stay right out of the crap that goes on here, if only to prove the point that the Usual Suspects are quite capable of lobbing on each other all on their own.

    But occasionally I jump in. Tonight was one of those nights, due to what I believe was an unwarranted attack on the male gender as being collectively responsible for the rape and murder of Ms Dixon.

    When informed we were supposed to do something about it, we asked “Do what?” but were not told.

    Maybe we should cease being males? I don’t know the answer.

    All I know is that I’ve never raped anyone, or felt like it. I’ve not killed anyone, or bashed them, male or female. That was the source of my anger tonight to be accused of a moveable crime for which there was no acceptable repentance or absolution.

  10. bc @ #837 Monday, June 18th, 2018 – 9:27 pm

    Barney in Go Dau says Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 12:00 am

    The point is that the Greens don’t even need to support the cuts when it’s split.

    The low income rebate will get up as everyone except the Greens support this one, while the other two are more doubtful.

    If they don’t split then there is a chance that it will all pass despite Labor Green opposition.

    To “split” the bill, the Greens need to support the amendments. If the amendments to remove the other tax cuts are approved, then the Greens can potentially vote against the bill. That then poses a dilemma for the Coalition. Do they then vote down tax cuts?

    If the Greens want to be holier than thou and vote against the amendments then the full tax cuts will likely pass.

    Yes, and what did I say different????

  11. Ratsak @ 11.18pm

    Fantastic post.

    But will the hardcore anti-man brigade here comprehend and accept your rational postulations. Or will the jaundiced view that it’s all in men’s hands continue.

    BTW I have occasion to mix with very many young mums of kids 1-5 years old. Often the topic of raising boys Vs girls comes up. The most frequent response from these mums is that boys are much harder because “that’s what boys do”. They believe that the matters of boys being so competitive, active and aggressive is a matter of nature, something immutable, pre-ordained and out of their hands.

    After reading tonight’s offerings I am tempted to hypothesise that these young mums are culpable for rape/murders ….. even with their 5 year olds they have given up on there responsibility to train their boys to be good men. But deep down I know that that’s a long bow to draw, just as blaming “men” is also a long bow.

  12. Zeh
    You can reject my analysis. But my analysis is correct.

    I do not shed any tears over men’s outrage. I find such behaviour rather pathetic. It is the pushback when women find their voice and start telling men,’Stop killing us.’

    As a collective group, men, please just stop killing us. I do not know how you can achieve this but you have managed to end up with most of the resources, power, freedoms and for the least physical work. I am sure with all that advantage you can work out how to stop the members of your social group from killing members of the other one, women.

    I am pretty confident this will reduce a lot of human on human killing.

  13. I am not anti-man. I am anti man killing woman.

    I like men. I like them even better when they are safe to be around.

    Men here do not like being judged by
    their gender.

    LOL

    Take a ticket or get in line.

  14. PTMD

    I promise to tell all the men I know not to kill you, even though I am sure they would never dream of it.

    BTW most social groups to which I belong are mixed gender. I am sad for you that you see yourself as a member of the social group “females” who are being hunted by an opposition social group “males”.

    I think that that is a very warped view of the world and can’t understand how one develops such an attitude, despite being aware of the readily available evidence which purports to explain how it occurs.

  15. Bushfire
    ‘Unwarranted attack on the male gender’

    The Male gender is attacking us every two minutes 24/7. They are killing one of us every week here. Can you imagine the world wide count?

    I think women are very tolerant and forgiving of men. We don’t carry hatred down the generations. We don’t set up religions to persecute you. we don’t routinely murder you in your sleeps.

    We love you and marry you and we love our male babies. we don’t abort you routinely because you have less right to live . We let you give our sons more pocket money than our daughters.

    We even blame ourselves for your transgressions and carry the mantle of ‘man-hater’ if we protest and ask politely for the right to live in safety.

  16. It’s the violence, stupid.

    I don’t care who did what to whom, or why, or how often, or who started it – society needs to make violence in all its forms unacceptable.

    (Making PB a safe place to scroll through at night would be a start… No, I am not joking.)

  17. 2.8 degrees here in Geelong this morning.
    Stilk 13 weeks till my annual Tweed Heads pilgrimage. Not that I’m counting or anything.

  18. BB:

    It’s not just me (although it was tonight). It can be almost anyone. She thinks she owns the blog and has to chip in her two bob’s worth even when she’s not invited or welcome, or relevant (which is the most important aspect).

    Bullshit.

    None of that is a rule of any kind.

    Anyone can chip in their two bob’s worth, they do not (and should not need to be) invited.

    Nor need they be welcome. Tough titties if you don’t find another posters comments welcome. Deal with it.

    Nor do they have to be relevant. Lots of posts are irrelevant, yours (and mine, and many others) on occasion also.

    Your post is a disaster from start to finish.

    Not for the first, and certainly not the last time, you do not own this blog and decide what gets posted.

    That is William’s job.

    Go and get nicked.


  19. Jaeger says:
    Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 5:47 am
    ….
    I don’t care who did what to whom, or why, or how often, or who started it – society needs to make violence in all its forms unacceptable.

    There are laws against killing other people; and the courts and police seem to take the crime pretty seriously. Domestic violence; not so much; but it is pretty hard task for the police; the victim is often not that interested in the help society can bring.

  20. Last night was like visiting your regular pub/club and when the conversation turns to a particular topic you come to the realisation that at least three quarters of the regulars are dickheads, fuckwits or idiots. Some all three.
    And by some strange twist of fate they all happen to be male.

  21. Frednk
    It is a joke for you?

    It is interesting the different reactions here when men are confronted directly with what men do to women.

    Everything from silence to ridicule to protestations of victimhood.

    A bit like the Israelis bombing the shit out of Palestine.

  22. Political correctness is an article of faith with some on here. It’s so comforting, because you don’t have to actually think about issues. In the world of political correctness, the invalid generalisation is king!

  23. Bushfire Bill says:
    Monday, June 18, 2018 at 8:17 pm

    Maybe a start would be funding more prevention ( and from reading this blog education) and sexual assault / domestic assault services than funding for a James Cook memorial

    Please tell the men on this blog specifically how they are supposed to organise these reforms?

    The same way we organise everything else! Men are not powerless. We can start by having properly towards each other. Then we can take the next steps, which are to listen to the victims of violence and discrimination and find ways to both avert them and heal the injuries they bring.

    This should be done for the sake of our sisters, our mothers and daughters, our wives and lovers. But it should also be done for the sake of our sons and brothers as well as ourselves. Violence afflicts us all and demands a common response.

  24. Steve77,

    we were fortunate to not be identifiable by our appearance. No hijabs and blonde.
    But for those of us who try to put ourselves in the shoes of others, it was an uncomfortable time when I kept quiet about my then religion .

    I sense a rising white supremicism world wide with women often becoming side notes and collateral damage in the scrum for power. The increasing influence of Christian fundamentalism in our LNP and their sidelining of women in their party highlights the trend to the archaic biblical belief of men being in charge. Note how strong women have been so viciously attacked…Jillian Triggs, Julia, Emma Alberici and now Angela Merkel . I speak from personal experience with siblings who are now fundamentalist Christians and have seen the changes from close up.
    Have felt for some time that this LNP has become a Trojan horse for fascist actions , a strong opinion I know, but it has been so incremental that many either haven’t noticed or don’t want to believe this could happen here.

  25. Confessions @ #831 Tuesday, June 19th, 2018 – 12:13 am

    Oh and women get raped and murdered going about their business and the old white male response to women pushing back for some kind of peer responsibility is to say ‘go light a candle’.

    That says it all about where we are now.

    Huh??? The vigil with candles in the park was the initiative of women.
    I think more people are wising up to how confessions just makes shit up.

  26. Bemused:
    [Oh and women get raped and murdered going about their business and the old white male response to women pushing back for some kind of peer responsibility is to say ‘go light a candle’.

    That says it all about where we are now.

    Huh??? The vigil with candles in the park was the initiative of women.
    I think more people are wising up to how confessions just makes shit up.]

    A woman has been raped and murdered. Confessions has responded to that event as a human being, in this case I am guessing as a human being who feels targeted by the event. She feels targeted by the event because she understandably “assesses” the risk of going out alone, particularly at night, has increased. That the risk has probably not increased is irrelevant.

    It is equally understandable that as a woman Confessions sees males as the risk she needs to guard against. Since “males” are the generic risk all males are under suspicion. Since all males are under suspicion it is understandable that a peer response be called for.

    By analogy time and again (but not always) acts of terrorism have been perpetrated by Muslims. This places all muslims under suspicion. It is right that moderate Muslims should stand up and condemn the violent acts each time they occur and seek to find ways to prevent Muslims developing extremist beliefs.

    It is irrelevant to Confessions point whether it was women or men who initiated the candle vigil. Her point is that whatever men are doing as a collective is not enough. Which plainly it isn’t when women become more fearful of going out alone after dark.

    Your debating point that the candle vigil was initiated by women (which may be right but who really cares, or knows) does not respond to the deeper argument Confessions was, IMO, making.

    And as for your last sentence, shame on you.

    As a man I am deeply troubled by Eurydice’s murder. I feel the shame. I know that when I walk at night behind women I am a cause of fear. I take all sorts of steps to minimise the fear, coughing loudly as I approach from behind and walking a wide berth and walking quickly ahead, but I loathe that knowledge. I am sure many men feel the same loathing and adopt their own attempts to minimise fear. That her murder has caused increased fear among women and increased loathing among men is a reason it has touched a societal nerve.

    Women need to speak out and express their increased fear. That is the essence of Confessions post you ungraciously quibble with.

    Men need to speak out and express their increased loathing of being the cause of the fear. By voicing these emotions we normalise the notion that women have an absolute right to walk alone at night without fear.

    As men we also need to speak out and REJECT the notion that women do not have the absolute right to walk alone at night without fear. It is NOT for us to caution women “to be careful” since the caution is incompatible with the absolute right. So long as women feel the need to be careful (and it can be recognised that they do) I will continue to loathe the fact that I am a cause of that fear when I go out at night.

  27. Puffytmd @ #872 Tuesday, June 19th, 2018 – 1:33 am

    Zeh
    You can reject my analysis. But my analysis is correct.

    I do not shed any tears over men’s outrage. I find such behaviour rather pathetic. It is the pushback when women find their voice and start telling men,’Stop killing us.’

    As a collective group, men, please just stop killing us. I do not know how you can achieve this but you have managed to end up with most of the resources, power, freedoms and for the least physical work. I am sure with all that advantage you can work out how to stop the members of your social group from killing members of the other one, women.

    I am pretty confident this will reduce a lot of human on human killing.

    I promise not to kill you.

Leave a Reply

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