Newspoll: 55-45 to Labor

No Christmas cheer for the Coalition from the final Newspoll for 2018.

The Australian reports Newspoll has closed its 2018 account with another crushing 55-45 lead for Labor, from primary votes of Coalition 35% (up one), Labor 41% (up one), Greens 9% (steady) and One Nation 7% (down one). Scott Morrison edges to net negative territory on his personal ratings, being down one on approval to 42% and up three on disapproval to 45%. Bill Shorten is respectively down one to 36% and up one to 51%. Morrison’s lead as preferred prime minister is 44-36, narrowing from 46-34. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1731.

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.

2,921 comments on “Newspoll: 55-45 to Labor”

Comments Page 58 of 59
1 57 58 59
  1. Disturbingly matey between all Counsel and the Judge too.

    No one putting the case as to whether what had occurred in terms of a suppression order is justifiable and practical.

  2. Player One @ #2849 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 9:52 pm

    Andrew_Earlwood @ #2848 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 9:50 pm

    For all his incandescent rage Judgey forgot to suppress the names of the parties when he permitted the transcript of today’s judicial tantrum to be published.

    Own goal. Much?

    The names do not appear in the transcript I have read. Do you have a link?

    Ah yes, the name does appear. But on a transcript published outside Australia.

  3. “The names do not appear in the transcript I have read. Do you have a link?”

    I just clicked on the Michael Smith link – top of page one – next to “Parties” …

    And there is an open discussion in the transcript of sentencing dates, which would only follow ‘conviction’ (unless one is in Wonderland, which could be a possibility given the vapours everybody was having).

    Facepalm

  4. ‘Disturbingly matey between all Counsel and the Judge too.”

    It’s more than matey… it’s egging each other on… very disturbing .
    Just like the unedifying Pink Batts RC .

    Riding instructions may be issued by the stewards tomorrow.

  5. Correct me if I am wrong but isn’t much of the law about precedent.

    His honour may well be thinking that if the media gets away with flouting his ruling this time he is neutered.

    That might suit some here but don’t compliain the next time a canny counsel gets a trial aborted or stayed because of media coverage.

    Wa has some judge alone trials. Do other states ?

  6. P1

    “Let’s be clear here – the name appears on a website published outside Australia – i.e. outside the jurisdiction of the suppression order. Where the name has already been widely reported anyway.”

    The point you make is no point at all. The court ‘published’ the transcript without doing the necessary redactions. Not just of the names, but also in relation to the course of the proceedings (ie. when the sentence dates would be). The suppression orders now appear to be otiose.

  7. Andrew_Earlwood @ #2861 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 10:21 pm

    The point you make is no point at all. The court ‘published’ the transcript without doing the necessary redactions. Not just of the names, but also in relation to the course of the proceedings (ie. when the sentence dates would be). The suppression orders now appear to be otiose.

    No, the transcript is also subject to the existing suppression order.

    Anyone who violates it could be in for a world of pain 🙁

  8. Rossmcg

    “That might suit some here but don’t compliain the next time a canny counsel gets a trial aborted or stayed because of media coverage”
    As I mentioned before other countries have no trouble selecting & empaneling juries when possible prejudecial information has been published . That’s where the effort needs to be expended.

  9. Sceptic @ #2866 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 6:30 pm

    Rossmcg

    “That might suit some here but don’t compliain the next time a canny counsel gets a trial aborted or stayed because of media coverage”
    As I mentioned before other countries have no trouble selecting & empaneling juries when possible prejudecial information has been published . That’s where the effort needs to be expended.

    Them’s the rules.

    And apparently no one has challenged the ruling. 🙂

  10. As for Kidd taking proof of correctness in his suppression ruling not being appealed. Ffs !
    He like Trump makes it about himself , I assume he thinks he’s as infallible as the Pope as well

  11. Morrison will announce recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital on Saturday. What an idiot. What conceivable benefit to Australia is there in this. There is obviously a downside. Why do we want to be Trump’s Mini-me? It now looks like Trump will be gone soon, possibly before 2020. Whatever, at least he won’t start moving anything in the near future, so Labor can hopefully de-recognise next year.

    The last similarly idiotic diplomatic decision was actually made by Saint Gough – recognising the incorporation of the Baltic Republics into the USSR. But at least that recognised reality on the ground, although again at no benefit to Australia.

  12. So the judge is talking about locking up a whole bunch of people for up to five years who are skirting around his suppression order on a case he lets the guy convicted stay out on bail before sentencing? Has he no sense of perspective?

  13. don

    I didn’t talk about the i before e except after c rule.

    I talked about the i before e when it makes a double e sound except after c.

  14. As I understand it, the high-ranking Catholic clergyman whose name was suppressed is also the subject of at least one other proceeding in its early stages. I can very easily see a judge wanting to not prejudice the second trial by allowing the media to make a big song and dance about the first!

  15. Steve777 @ #2869 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 7:37 pm

    Morrison will announce recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital on Saturday. What an idiot. What conceivable benefit to Australia is there in this. There is obviously a downside. Why do we want to be Trump’s Mini-me? It now looks like Trump will be gone soon, possibly before 2020. Whatever, at least he won’t start moving anything in the near future, so Labor can hopefully de-recognise next year.

    The last similarly idiotic diplomatic decision was actually made by Saint Gough – recognising the incorporation of the Baltic Republics into the USSR. But at least that recognised reality on the ground, although again at no benefit to Australia.

    Incredible stupidity.

  16. prettyone

    Er, no.

    Victoria already has its own version of ICAC, which deals with state issues.

    The federal one will deal with federal issues – such as whether it is corrupt for a Minister to move a Department to his own electorate, or for ex Ministers to be working for organisations whilst negotiating trade deals which could benefit them.

  17. My effing G-d, Morriscum’s doing what now?

    Does he…sigh, why do I even ask. Of course he wants to provoke more wars in the Middle East – how else to support his party’s politics.

  18. Sceptic @ #2870 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 10:34 pm

    As for Kidd taking proof of correctness in his suppression ruling not being appealed. Ffs !
    He like Trump makes it about himself , I assume he thinks he’s as infallible as the Pope as well

    How about you publish your own website, include all the details you see fit … and see just how long you last.

    But please don’t do it on William’s website. Where would I get my morning news? 🙁

  19. Matt
    “As I understand it, the high-ranking Catholic clergyman whose name was suppressed is also the subject of at least one other proceeding in its early stages. I can very easily see a judge wanting to not prejudice the second trial by allowing the media to make a big song and dance about the first!’

    And if there were 100 trials?

  20. Sceptic @ #2881 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 6:44 pm

    Matt
    “As I understand it, the high-ranking Catholic clergyman whose name was suppressed is also the subject of at least one other proceeding in its early stages. I can very easily see a judge wanting to not prejudice the second trial by allowing the media to make a big song and dance about the first!’

    And if there were 100 trials?

    Well that would obviously be determined by what any suppression order said. 🙂

  21. Judge Kidd was concerned about the media applying inappropriate pressure on him.
    That will be the least of his worries if he pursues them, rediclue is more devistating.

  22. Diogenes @ #2867 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 9:37 pm

    So the judge is talking about locking up a whole bunch of people for up to five years who are skirting around his suppression order on a case he lets the guy convicted stay out on bail before sentencing? Has he no sense of perspective?

    If everything else about your statement is factual, then it would seem he has no sense of perspective, yes.

    Judges understandably take a dim view of people not respecting their authority. But they should have enough sense to take an equally dim view of people convicted of serious crimes and charged with several additional serious crimes.

    Player One @ #2877 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 9:46 pm

    And if there were 100 trials?

    Then he is entitled to the presumption of innocence on each and every one.

    Of course, but if he tries to mount a defense on the basis of his upstanding character within the community, then prior convictions for comparable offences should be 100% fair game.

  23. P1

    I can see I’m on a losing battle here.
    “Then he is entitled to the presumption of innocence on each and every one.”
    Don’t conflate the suppression order with the presumption of innocence, totally unrelated.
    Kidd has escalated this to be about his ego… he will fail.

  24. There is something Monty Pythonesque about that transcript of the judge and lawyer choking on their Weeties while checking the media who are mocking them.

  25. Steve777 @ #2857 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 10:37 pm

    Morrison will announce recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital on Saturday. What an idiot. What conceivable benefit to Australia is there in this. There is obviously a downside. Why do we want to be Trump’s Mini-me? It now looks like Trump will be gone soon, possibly before 2020. Whatever, at least he won’t start moving anything in the near future, so Labor can hopefully de-recognise next year.

    The last similarly idiotic diplomatic decision was actually made by Saint Gough – recognising the incorporation of the Baltic Republics into the USSR. But at least that recognised reality on the ground, although again at no benefit to Australia.

    No way! Well, there goes the Indo/Australia FTA.

    This government really is trying to encourage another terrorist incident before the federal election, aren’t they?

  26. C@tmomma @ #2889 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 6:57 pm

    Steve777 @ #2857 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 10:37 pm

    Morrison will announce recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital on Saturday. What an idiot. What conceivable benefit to Australia is there in this. There is obviously a downside. Why do we want to be Trump’s Mini-me? It now looks like Trump will be gone soon, possibly before 2020. Whatever, at least he won’t start moving anything in the near future, so Labor can hopefully de-recognise next year.

    The last similarly idiotic diplomatic decision was actually made by Saint Gough – recognising the incorporation of the Baltic Republics into the USSR. But at least that recognised reality on the ground, although again at no benefit to Australia.

    No way! Well, there goes the Indo/Australia FTA.

    This government really is trying to encourage another terrorist incident before the federal election, aren’t they?

    I really enjoy travelling to another Country and hearing what a bunch of pricks my Government is.

    It really throws them off guard when I simply reply;

    Yep!!!!

  27. From the Age 12th December
    A number of readers contacted us asking why we were not reporting this major issue in the public interest. We, like all media organisations, are required by law to adhere to suppression orders and breaching such a suppression order is taken very seriously by the court, and could lead to charges of contempt of court.

    Victoria uses more suppression orders than any other jurisdiction in Australia, with the state accounting for more than half of such orders nationally.

    The wide dissemination of the suppressed information online, however, highlights the challenges of the suppression regime in some high-profile cases of public interest.

    A year-long review of Victoria’s 2013 Open Courts Act by retired judge Frank Vincent called into question the function and efficacy of suppression orders in an internet age.

    Even if major media organisations were gagged, nothing could prevent a case from being canvassed on social media, blogs and myriad other channels, he said.

    A view to the contrary is “most likely to represent wishful thinking than reality”, Justice Vincent found, and a “real world” approach is required.

    Despite this, and the principles of transparent justice enshrined in the Open Courts Act, Victorian judges were “troublingly” issuing as many suppression orders as they ever were.

    The Vincent report made 18 recommendations, none of which has been implemented by the state government.

  28. So Victoria issues more suppression orders than any other jurisdiction?

    How does this get changed? Because I doubt railing about it here is going to anything.

  29. Confessions @ #2887 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 10:14 pm

    How does this get changed?

    I think the process goes roughly like:

    1. Make a super-secret suppression order.
    2. Rant and rave and make a big public scene about how everyone isn’t respecting your super-secret suppression order hard enough.
    3. Realize that doing ineffective things is ineffective.
    4. Stop doing ineffective things.

  30. I wonder if the Murdoch media was attempting to thwart a suppression order related to a high profile Labor figure people here would have a different view.
    Suppression orders were used, and are still in place in some cases, during trials related to the Melbourne gang wars.
    Nobody seemed too bothered then because it meant that trials of some undesirables were not compromised.

  31. @a r :

    And if there were 100 trials?

    Then he is entitled to the presumption of innocence on each and every one.

    Of course, but if he tries to mount a defense on the basis of his upstanding character within the community, then prior convictions for comparable offences should be 100% fair game.

    Yes – in the courtroom. Not in a trial by media frenzy before the courtroom trial starts, hyping up the “certainty” of his guilt (alternatively: the “certainty” of it being a false accusation) to the point that no jury can be found which doesn’t already have firm, 100%-set-in-stone opinions on the matter. All to sell an extra few dead trees.

    Because if the jury is certain of the accused’s guilt or innocence prior to the trial, then the accused is not receiving justice – and neither is the accuser.

  32. Speaking of Keith Richards, you know if you’re a smoker, every time you light up god takes an hour off your life and gives it to Keith.

  33. Rossmcg @ #2894 Thursday, December 13th, 2018 – 7:46 pm

    I wonder if the Murdoch media was attempting to thwart a suppression order related to a high profile Labor figure people here would have a different view.
    Suppression orders were used, and are still in place in some cases, during trials related to the Melbourne gang wars.
    Nobody seemed too bothered then because it meant that trials of some undesirables were not compromised.

    Perish the thought!

    Some people just have no patience. 🙂

  34. I have started calling a particular social media platform “Faceborg”. The Guardian has an interesting story about them, and trust.
    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/dec/13/they-dont-care-facebook-fact-checking-in-disarray-as-journalists-push-to-cut-ties

    Fact checkers are reported as saying:

    “You’re not doing journalism anymore. You’re doing propaganda.”
    “They are a terrible company and, on a personal level, I don’t want to have anything to do with them.”

    That seems pretty clear.

    Facebook responds by saying:

    “The primary way we surface potentially false news to third-party fact-checkers is via machine learning.”

    What does that even mean? Who is this sub-dweller who has to “surface” news using “machine learning”? (Sorry. I know what this person is attempting to to say, but so often the individually chosen words themselves carry a message that tells you more than a superficial semantic interpretation.) To me this Faceborg person is saying, “It’s not my fault it doesn’t work. It’s their fault. And if it’s not their fault, well it’s the voodoo machine what did it.”

    No care. No responsibility. No trust.

Comments Page 58 of 59
1 57 58 59

Leave a Reply

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