Essential Research: leadership ratings, US and China, abortion law

Higher disapproval ratings for both leaders in the latest Essential poll, which also records lukewarm feelings towards the United States and cooler ones for China.

The latest fortnightly Essential Research poll again comes up empty on voting intention, but it does offer the pollster’s third set of leadership ratings since the election. As with Newspoll, these record a drop in Scott Morrison’s net approval rating, owing to a three point rise in disapproval to 37%, while his approval holds steady at 48%. However, Essential parts company with Newspoll in finding Anthony Albanese up on disapproval as well, by five points to 29%, with approval down one to 38%. Morrison’s lead as preferred prime minister narrows slightly, from 44-26 to 44-28.

Further questions suggest the public leans positive on most aspects of the “influence of the United States of America” (defence, trade, cultural and business), excepting a neutral result (42% positive, 40% negative) for influence on Australian politics. The same exercise for China finds positive results for trade, neutral results for culture and business, and negative ones for defence and politics. Asked which of the two we would most benefit from strengthening ties with, 38% of respondents favoured the US and 28% China.

The small sample of respondents from New South Wales were also asked about the proposed removal of abortion from the criminal code, which was supported by an overwhelming 71% compared with 17% opposed. The poll has a sample of 1096 and was conducted online from Thursday to Sunday.

Note also the post below this one, being the latest Brexit update from Adrian Beaumont.

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.

1,826 comments on “Essential Research: leadership ratings, US and China, abortion law”

  1. All pharmaceuticals and medical devices should be provided to people with no out-of-pocket expense. All consultations with health care professionals should be provided with no out-of-pocket expense.

    It isn’t taxpayers who pay. The federal government pays. The government uses taxes to delete some of the private sector’s spending power. Not to gather money.

  2. Greg Sheridan’s frowny tut-tutting has been more of an own goal than a public scolding.

    Adam GartrellVerified account@adamgartrell
    8h8 hours ago
    It is, of course, an utter disgrace that — apart from John Howard in 2006, Julia Gillard in 2010 and Malcolm Turnbull in 2017 — no Australian Prime Minister has visited Vietnam since Paul Keating in 1994.

    :large

  3. I assume this refers to more fake news from the Oz.

    Mark KennyVerified account@markgkenny
    12h12 hours ago
    Two days running! Same paper, front page statement that Morrison is the first Australian PM to be invited to attend a G7 meeting. Wrong. I was with @MrKRudd in L’Aquila, Abruzzo, Italy for the G8 in 2009. G7 is same group minus Russia which has been suspended. @politicsANU

  4. I want the Greens to start pref-ing the Libs.

    They hate Labor. It’s time they dropped the pretence and expressed their true feelings. It would be better for Labor, which is a drawback from the G point of view. But it would also be better for G voters. They would know what they’re actually voting for when they vote G.

  5. If the Gs were to align themselves with the Liberals they might at last leave Labor in peace. They could direct their energies to improving their kin, the Liberals.

    They would spare no effort to correct the Liberals, to reproach them, to measure them top to toe. What a release it would be for Labor to be freed from their unwanted friends, the Greens.

  6. Former deputy Liberal leader Julie Bishop says women need to take up 50 per cent of federal parliamentary seats before there will be an end to the toxic misogyny she saw during her 20-year political career.

    With more women representatives, bad behaviour and misogyny would be called out, Ms Bishop – who retired from politics at the 2018 election – told Andrew Denton on Seven’s Interview program on Tuesday night.

    She described as “grotesque in its brutality” and “pathetic” the sexualisation of Australia’s first female prime minister, Julia Gillard, during a 2013 Liberal Nationals party fund-raising dinner in Queensland.

    The former WA representative blamed her male colleagues for creating a culture that allowed a quail dish to be likened to the Labor leader as having “small breasts, huge thighs and a big red box”, The Daily Telegraph reports on Wednesday.

    https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2019/08/14/julie-bishop-misogyny-politics/

    JBishop played her own role in the misogyny meted out to Gillard during her leadership, including doing Rudd’s bidding to ridicule her during QT. And it isn’t as though JBishop was a mere backbench Howard pot plant during her years in the Liberal partyroom. She was a minister, then deputy leader, then foreign minister and the party’s most senior woman leader. What did she do in the party to change its culture when she had the authority to stamp her mark?

  7. Dan G:

    You can always rely on the Australian to do Liberal leader hagiography. It would be embarrassing for their editorial leadership if they presumably had any self awareness.

  8. Nicholas @ #1204 Saturday, August 24th, 2019 – 8:37 pm

    All pharmaceuticals and medical devices should be provided to people with no out-of-pocket expense. All consultations with health care professionals should be provided with no out-of-pocket expense.

    It isn’t taxpayers who pay. The federal government pays. The government uses taxes to delete some of the private sector’s spending power. Not to gather money.

    People should remember that when they pony up $40-50k for stamp duty on a house, or when they pay GST on most things they purchase and see this tax component thingy on their payslip.

    You really have a very tangential attachment to the reality of life comrade.

  9. The Greens would feel better too. They would be less spurned. They might make friends with the Nationals as well. The blue, the yellow and the green….what a posie they would make. The Australian Tory Bouquet.

    They all deserve each other – deserve to be happy together.

  10. biefly

    “I want the Greens to start pref-ing the Libs.

    They hate Labor. It’s time they dropped the pretence and expressed their true feelings. It would be better for Labor, which is a drawback from the G point of view. But it would also be better for G voters. They would know what they’re actually voting for when they vote G.”

    I want Labor to start pref-ing the Libs.

    They hate the Greens. It’s time they dropped the pretence and expressed their true feelings. It would be better for the Greens, other minor and micro parties, and independents, which is a drawback from the Labor point of view. But it would also be better for Labor voters. They would know what they’re actually voting for when they vote Labor.

  11. Briefly, don’t forget the Animal Justice Party too. They need to send their preferences to the libs as well. It’s the only way that the ALP plurality can be restored. In fact you need all supposedly left wing parties to send their preferences to the Libs. It’s the only way for the ALP to win. 🙂

  12. Licia says:
    Saturday, August 24, 2019 at 8:50 pm
    Briefly ignores the truth, because the truth would set it free.

    I’m quite serious. I hope the Greens begin to prefer the Liberals. This would advantage Labor. It would allow us to reclaim our plurality. And it would be good for Green voters.

  13. GG:

    [‘Cat got your tongue? In any event. That said, you’re a veritable wanker, a nasty section of Labor.
    Your problem is you can’t handle being held account for posting lies and rubbish. I’m happy to be accountable for what I do say and post. You should try that sometime.’]

    Whatever you say, dear; it seems to me that you accept paedophiles over the objective evidence.

    I’m not suggesting you’re a ragdick?

    Pell’s a serial offender.

  14. Projection as always, the lib-lab-coal-kin write the world off for a couple of bucks and jobs that are gone in a few years.

    Briefly howls at the moon…

    Teh Greens. The great evil. The Samsquantch of politics. Briefly’s conspiracy du jour.

  15. The Greens should try their luck with the Blues. What have they got to lose – that is, apart from their PV, what do they have to lose? They have a very great deal in common with the Blues. They would get along just fine. Actually, they already do get along just fine.

  16. Peg, you have to wonder just what sort of damage rogue campaign volunteers can do in an election. They are largely unsupervised and come into contact with thousands, submitting them to their own deranged arguments most likely.

  17. Mr Squiggle says:
    Saturday, August 24, 2019 at 8:29 pm
    PsyClaw

    “BTW, I doubt that a HC appeal will be forthcoming. They have SFA grounds as far as matters of law go, just as at the C of A .’

    is the dissenting judges view a reasonable grounds for further appeal? I ask in all ignorance, I have no legal background

    ______________________________

    The problem for Pell (and his supporters) is that the High Court will only consider limited grounds for review. Unlike the appeal judges, the High Court judges will not visit the Cathedral and will not feel the Archbishop’s robes. It is only interested in general issues of law. If there is some general question relating to the understanding of what ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ means (rather than whether it was open for this jury on this evidence to find Pell guilty) then it could hear the matter, but the notoriety (or fame) of the convicted man is not usually sufficient grounds for an appeal.

    This is a good comprehensive summary of the challenges facing an appeal to the High Court: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/aug/23/cardinal-george-pells-failed-appeal-and-why-his-chances-in-the-high-court-are-slim

  18. My recommemded preferencing strategy: Liberals last. One Nation and other quasi-Liberals next to last. Labor 1 if they are the sitting member or if they have the best chance of defeating a sitting right winger. Otherwise, vote 1 for any Centre or left candidate (Green, Independent) who has a better chance of defeating a sitting right winger.

    Normally, 1 Labor, 2 Green, …. N Liberal, where N is the number of candidates.

  19. I got the memos but I don’t care. The utterly endless anti-Labor sledging here inspires me to stick it out.

    It’s an ordeal for all. I agree. But what is a bludger to do? The anti-Labor lies are too many to ignore.

    I have a clear line on the Greens. It’s coherent and it gets right to the very core of your strategy. I’m gonna go with it as long as the Pegagoguery, the Nathematics, the Rexology, the guytaur mania, the Quollism and the Firefox-a-phobias are published. There is an endless list of tropista.

    When will the Greens give up their Labor-hate?

  20. As always with briefly it projects.

    It’s not hate, it’s disappointment from progressives, we want a better world.

    The briefly cannot deal with hitching itself to a centrist-right party.

    The briefly hates itself.

  21. When will the Greens give up their Labor-hate?

    They won’t because the Greens are competing with Labor for progressive voters like you and I.

    Fortunately neither you nor I (plus many other progressive voters) are for turning, hence my advice to simply ignore them and leave them to their 8-9% of the radical vote and concentrate on the sensible centre.

Leave a Reply

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