The second Newspoll conducted under the new regime of online polls conducted by YouGov records the Coalition with a 52-48 lead, out from 51-49 a fortnight ago. On the primary vote, the Coalition is up a point to 42%, Labor is steady on 33%, the Greens are down one to 11% and One Nation is steady on 5%. Both leaders’ personal ratings are improved after weak results last time, with Scott Morrison up two on approval to 45% and down four on disapproval to 48%, and Anthony Albanese up two to 40% and down four to 41%. Morrison’s lead as preferred prime minister is out from 46-35 to 48-34.
Respondents were also asked to rate the leaders according to nine attributes, eight positive and one negative. Morrison scored higher than Albanese for the experience (68-64), decisiveness and strength (60-51) and having a vision for Australia (60-54), while Albanese had the edge on caring for people (60-55). There was essentially nothing to separate them on understanding the major issues (57-56 to Albanese), likeability (56-56), being in touch with voters (50-49 to Albanese) and trustworthiness (49-48). However, Morrison’s worst result was his 58-40 lead on the one negative quality that was gauged – arrogance.
The poll was conducted Wednesday to Sunday from a sample of 1503. The Australian’s paywalled report of the results is here.
In other poll news, a uComms poll (apparently minus the ReachTEL branding now) for the Courier-Mail ($) suggests Queensland’s embattled Deputy Premier, Jackie Trad, is in grave danger of losing her seat of South Brisbane to the Greens. The poll shows the Greens on 29.4%, Labor on 27.5% and the Liberal National Party on 26.6%, with 10.4% undecided. Labor is credited with a 52-48 lead on respondent-allocated preferences, but this may flatter Labor given the LNP’s announcement that they would direct preferences against them. No field work date is provided that I can see, but the sample size was 700. The deficiencies of automated phone polls in inner city seats were noted by Kevin Bonham, among others.
UPDATE: In better poll news still, the results from the post-election Australian Election Study survey are available in all their glory, courtesy of the Australian National University. You can view the ANU’s overview of the findings here, but the real fun of this resource is that it allows you to cross-tabulate responses to 3143-respondent survey across a dizzying range of variables. The survey also includes demographic weightings that presume to correct for the biases introduced by the survey process. The survey also addresses a long-standing criticism by including a component of 968 respondents who also completed the 2016 survey, allowing for study of the changing behaviour of the same set of respondents over time.
Rest assured you will be hearing a great deal more about the survey going forward, but for the time being, here’s one set of numbers I have crunched for starters. This shows the primary vote broken down into three age cohorts, and compares them with the equivalent figures from the 2016 survey. This produces some eye-catching results, particularly in regard to a probably excessive surge in support for the Coalition among the middle-aged cohort – mostly at the expense of “others”. By contrast, the young cohort swung heavily to the left, while the boomers were relatively static.
Vic says:
Monday, December 9, 2019 at 10:02 am
…”Regarding the ‘protecting jobs’ mentality – gas chambers provided jobs too you know”…
Is being a coal miner now morally equivalent to nazism?
Mavis @ #144 Monday, December 9th, 2019 – 10:04 am
At least 53/47, but quite possibly higher.
It’s a psephological thing, but I’ll just tip the cup over again and get back to you.
@mediawatcher83 tweets
@observationpt @frontrunnerlea @JanGulli12 @denniallen @AlboMP LEAN has existed a long time, and is having no influence. I admire its members’ will and persistence but don’t be fooled into thinking it’s effective. The only thing I which shifts results is shifting your vote. Rusted on voters result in bad policy
Not Sure @ #131 Monday, December 9th, 2019 – 9:48 am
Sorry if I wasn’t clear but I was commenting on what Firefox said, not you.
Not Sure
Yeah it is when your last name is Rinehardt or Adani. 🙂
Not all comments using Nazi analogies are the Godwin’s Law immediate discredit.
And isn’t mundo enjoying basking in the warm and fuzzies of his guts? How antediluvian, anti-education and pro the way the Coalition wants Australians to behave, of him.
Not Sure @ #151 Monday, December 9th, 2019 – 7:17 am
Of course not. The Nazi gas chambers targeted a specific demographic of people. Coal will kill everyone irrespective of race, creed, national origin, gender or even species. Which makes coal more egalitarian than the gas chambers.
guytaur
Well, that’s wrong. LEAN has successfully negotiated new environmental policies within Labor. If Labor had won the election, LEAN’s environmental policies would have been legislated, and provided a lot stronger protections for the environment than presently exist.
Of course, it’s hard for any Labor organisation to have much influence when Labor isn’t in government, but LEAN certainly has runs on the board.
Confessions @ #136 Monday, December 9th, 2019 – 9:52 am
Being a devout Iridologist I submit for your study and comment.
Close examination of the subjects “beady eyes” and attempting a correlation with an appropriate diagnostic indicator reveals the following.
I submit that the unsub (oft used in crap TV shows) has severe problems at area 25 – which in accordance with folklore would show that this subject has probably been the victim/volunteer at area 51 (alien spaceship crash) with the standard sexual poking/proddings and interferences before returning changed for the better to walk among his fellows.
What he was like prior to aforementioned Alien touchups is anybodies guess.
More lawn edging.
zoomster
The commentator was talking about now not what happened before the last election.
I posted mainly for the rusted on comment. You in particular should know how true that is having dealt with the rusted on voter culture the Nationals have cultivated.
@Triplejay58 tweets
“It’s not about believing in climate change, but accepting the facts. But the facts and stories have been distorted by vested interests.” #auspol #DrKarl #ClimateCrisis
https://australiascience.tv/vod/dr-karl-do-you-believe-in-climate-change/
It’s just as well some of us aren’t throwing in the towel and predicting Coalition governments as far as the eye can see due to Scott Morrison’s political ‘genius’.
As a psephologist counselled us on the weekend, in 2004 John Howard won so big he took the House AND the Senate. In 2007 he lost so bad he lost his own seat.
Just think about that every time you are tempted by mundo’s siren call. Or any of the other Hanrahans wrt Labor’s chances at the next election. Notice how they have seamlessly and conveniently pivoted to placing great store in the Newspoll results? I have.
“You know, if The Greens’ ranters were true to their word, they would throw away their computers, produced with coal-fired power in China and from fossil fuels that make the plastic they are created from and only engage with PB via letters written on recycled paper with vegetable ink and sent by carrier pigeon.”
***
Using recycled paper instead of a computer isn’t actually going to help. While recycled paper is certainly more environmentally friendly than using virgin/new paper, there’s still a large environmental impact from the transport and production of recycled paper. Best to avoid using paper at all where possible, power your electronic devices with renewable energy, and make sure they are setup properly to avoid wasting power when they aren’t being used. Don’t buy a printer at all unless you absolutely need one. Send all written correspondence electronically.
The Greens are pro-tech and pro-power. We aren’t wedded to yesterday’s practices. Yet more reason to continue the transition to renewables.
Cat
Yes we get it. Every critique of Labor is to you a call for an LNP election victory instead of a warning.
Listen to those trying to say danger cliff edge ahead instead of being a lemming because its the party line.
C@tmomma says:
Monday, December 9, 2019 at 10:19 am
…”Sorry if I wasn’t clear but I was commenting on what Firefox said, not you”…
I apologise.
I understood what you were saying, my excuse is that I am mildly hungover and have a tendency towards sneer when this happens 🙂
Anyway, I’m off to take the kids to the beach in my environmentally destructive 3 tonne diesel truck.
I’ll do my best not to do too much polluting while I’m there.
Have a nice day.
Oh, and yes, they are wagging school, and therefore not learning how to be responsible, carbon neutral little citizens of a type acceptable to certain others.
Danama Papers @ #157 Monday, December 9th, 2019 – 7:22 am
Another key difference between coal and Zyklon B is that coal will eventually also kill the owners of, and workers in, the coal industry. It will also kill its promoters and enablers.
Zyklon B didn’t kill the owners of IG Farben, its workers, promoters or enablers.
Kayjay:
LOL!
guytaursays:
Monday, December 9, 2019 at 9:53 am
I’m talking you and everyone having blackouts everyday.
At the moment that’s what would happen if we turned off the coal plants.
That’s why the focus needs to be putting in place the renewables and the storage, so we can dump coal.
We’ve barely scratched the surface when it comes to putting the storage in place.
That’s why the mining argument lacks logic.
DP,
You going to pay the coal miners’ wages and all their bills so they can stop work NOW?
Not to mention the fact that Gina et al would be quite happy to import workers to Australia to do their jobs for $2 a day once the Aussies were gone. And Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton would happily oblige her and Clive and whoever else. But hey, ideological purity is a wonderful thing when you can afford it, eh?
“Sorry if I wasn’t clear but I was commenting on what Firefox said, not you.”
***
He was probably confused since you said you were going to ignore us Greens about 5 minutes before you decided not to lol
Not Sure says:
Monday, December 9, 2019 at 10:17 am
“Is being a coal miner now morally equivalent to nazism?”
Are you endorsing the return of slavery?
Are you endorsing using child labour in mines?
Danama Papers says:
Monday, December 9, 2019 at 10:22 am
…”Coal will kill everyone irrespective of race, creed, national origin, gender or even species”…
No,it won’t.
Coal mining is the new Asbestos mining.
Not Sure,
Party with the kids like it’s 1999. Have a great day. 🙂
Barney
Actually we can turn off the coal power plants today as long as we have renewables in place first.
I am not buying your false premise of people going into power stations and turning off the coal power plants this very minute argument.
Edit: In case you forgot Jay Weatherill shut down this argument with the help of Elon Musk.
How the New York Times views our government-led collective insanity:
“As many here see it, Australia’s conservative government, in refusing to address the threat of climate change, is favoring the country’s powerful fossil fuel industry over its largest city, as well as the rural areas where fires have already destroyed hundreds of homes”
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/06/world/australia/sydney-fires.html
Vic says:
Monday, December 9, 2019 at 10:32 am
…”Are you endorsing the return of slavery?
Are you endorsing using child labour in mines?”…
Are you attempting to out-stupid Firefox?
Alpha Zero @ #173 Monday, December 9th, 2019 – 10:33 am
No it isn’t. 🙄
And what a reprehensible thing to say. And I’ll remember to remind anyone daring to think about voting for The Greens how low they will go in order to scare people into voting for them.
Cat
Yes it is. Black Lung disease. Polluting atmosphere killing people. Look at the Singleton Air Quality Index.
Edit: That is of course ignoring the Greenhouse contribution of coal.
Aldo outlined an eminently sensible position for Labor. It is a demand side problem. Australia exporting jobs would be a solid case of cutting you nose off to spit your face.
It good to see the Greens carry on as they are, as Labor does not support their idiot-cracy it will make it very easy to distance themselves from their nonsense.
I think Labor have a very clear position, it is a demand side problem, not going to destroy jobs to support Green-stunts.
Not Sure,
You’ll look pretty cool, and it will be better for the planet, if you buy one of these eventually:
mundo
says:
It’s why so many here were completly blindsided by the May Scrottslide.
____________________
The people were ready to vote out Morrison as evidenced by his meagre majority. They were ready in 2016 too. But in 2013 the ALP parliamentarians decided to have as their leader an untrustworthy and unlikeable hack who tore down 2 previous ALP PMs and whose union career included reprehensible behaviour towards low paid workers. Enough people were aware of this history as is shown in the leader attributes discussed earlier. Albanese might have beaten MT in 2016. This could be the second term of an ALP government. But the ambitions of a very untalented hack had to be accommodates because of his skill in arranging factional deals.
I’m thinking of setting up a meth lab to help fund my retirement (I only did Chem to second year Uni level but I’m sure it would come back to me!). I know meth causes some social problems but if users don’t buy it from me they will just buy from others. Clearly any problems with meth use need to be handled by focusing on the demand side.
oops
Alpha Zero,
Do you want to know how different Asbestos-induced Mesothelioma is from Coal mining-induced disease?
I have a close friend whose father was diagnosed, without any forewarning of illness, with Mesothelioma, about 2 months ago.
He’s dead now.
Being a Coal Miner, and its health outcomes, as bad as they may be objectively, doesn’t compare in any way, shape or form to that.
nath
I would have agreed with you before the capitulation under Albanese to those very same factions.
In hindsight I think the UK Labour party got it right and not the Labor party on the leadership vote.
At least Labour is fighting for principles and its values not for the special interests of a few multimillionaires and a small number of union members in a particular industry.
C@tmomma @ #169 Monday, December 9th, 2019 – 7:31 am
Did we prop up asbestos miners when their product was declared toxic? Did we provide millions in aid money to restore the town of Wittenoom? Did we prop up all the workers who worked in chemical factories producing CFCs and lost their jobs when their product was declared toxic?
As you have regularly pointed out in previous posts, even the coal miners themselves know what they’re doing is wrong, and that they hate what they’re doing.
Jolyon Wagg @ #183 Monday, December 9th, 2019 – 10:40 am
An obviously flippant post which doesn’t consider the actual differences between the apples and the oranges.
Labor needs to rescue the workers that are mining coal from their multimillionaire overlords. Not aid and abet them.
Danama Papers @ #187 Monday, December 9th, 2019 – 10:43 am
Are you a false equivalence, coal is the new asbestos, proponent too?
However, if I am to take what you are saying seriously, you want the government, because Labor aren’t in power remember, to shut down every coal mine in the country the way they did to the Asbestos mines?
And what is your magical solution to the massive social dislocation that that action would cause? And don’t come the raw prawn with, we’ll all be rooned if we don’t!
I’m just looking for some practical responses from you.
Jolyon Wagg says:
Monday, December 9, 2019 at 10:40 am
I’m thinking of setting up a meth lab to help fund my retirement (I only did Chem to second year Uni level but I’m sure it would come back to me!). I know meth causes some social problems but if users don’t buy it from me they will just buy from others. Clearly any problems with meth use need to be handled by focusing on the demand side.
An attempt to outlay supply that by pretty much any measure, failed.
To fill in the argument, outlawing supply has:
1) Not reduced the street price much.
2) Means the industry does not pay to clean up the mess.
3) Means those effected less likely to seek help.
4) Money in the pocket for those that wish to corrupt.
guytaursays:
Monday, December 9, 2019 at 10:34 am
We can?
Where’s the renewable capacity?
Where, in particular, is the storage?
I’m just highlighting that we have a long way to go to reach the point where we no longer need some coal power.
How many storage projects have been announced?
And yet people rabbit on about coal mines.
FredNK
Not what Labor has lauded with Nicola Rozon’s Tobacco legislation. I agree with you that total outright banning without practical replacement is required.
However Labor does not need to become drug pushers to argue for practical solutions.
Cat,
I agree that there is very little in this world compared to the suffering of Mesothelioma. I didn’t mean to push the analysis down that path.
However, there are comparisons between the 2 types of mining for sure. In short, some people are willing to risk the lives of miners, their towns and the life on the planet in order to be able to exploit it for a quick and easy buck. There are alternative solutions to our energy consumption, even gawd forbid, de-powering stuff that does not need to be on!
Barney
The technology exists today. We can transition much much faster and not pretend its a black and white you must push for more coal mines or you are for blackouts.
Not Sure says:
Monday, December 9, 2019 at 10:35 am
“Are you attempting to out-stupid Firefox?“
Guess which people would be most against voting being weighted by education level & IQ score?
Hint -it’s the same group comprised of people who typically make the statements “why don’t academics/scientists get a job in the real world” & “you might have a PhD, but I have a degree from the University of Life”
Exactly.
If we take your sarcasm as read, you must think that prohibition of drugs is working a treat, right? We just have to prohibit harder to solve drug use problems.
Good to see progressives joining the conservatives on this.
Get a better argument.
[Did we prop up asbestos miners when their product was declared toxic? Did we provide millions in aid money to restore the town of Wittenoom?]
Yes in a way through tariff protection on imported asbestos for point one in the 1950s after Government health departments were warning against asbestos dangers etc.
A fair bit of government money would have been spent supporting Wittenoom – there is a photo of Sir Charles Court at the mine at some stage.
guytaur says:
Monday, December 9, 2019 at 10:50 am
FredNK
Not what Labor has lauded with Nicola Rozon’s Tobacco legislation. I agree with you that total outright banning without practical replacement is required.
However Labor does not need to become drug pushers to argue for practical solutions.
That is not Labors position. Labors position is simple. We are not going to export jobs for Greens stunts. Australia will stop using fossil fuel when our renewable target is 100% and we have reached it.
Australia will stop exporting coal when demand has fallen to a point where it is un-viable. A reduction in demand will cause that.
It really is that simple.
A reminder for all here. Every time you say that arguing against the Joel Fitzgibbon lets be for coal position you are arguing against Peter Garrett’s position. He is not a Greens party member.