Newspoll: 50-50 (open thread)

Both leaders down on net approval in the latest Newspoll, the Coalition only slightly favoured over Labor on inflation, and little change on voting intention.

The Australian reports that Newspoll has a tied result on two-party preferred, unchanged on three weeks ago. The primary votes are Labor 32% (steady), Coalition 38% (down one), Greens 12% (steady) and One Nation 7% (up one). Anthony Albanese is down two on approval to 41% and up three on disapproval to 54%, his equal worst net result as Prime Minister, while Peter Dutton is down one to 39% and up two to 52%. Albanese’s lead as preferred prime minister shifts from 46-39 to 45-37. The poll also finds “only a quarter” connsider inflation would be lower under the Coalition, with 18% believing it would be higher and 41% opting for neither. The poll was conducted Monday to Friday from a sample of 1263.

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.

798 comments on “Newspoll: 50-50 (open thread)”

Comments Page 14 of 16
1 13 14 15 16
  1. Scotty was destroyed by his own lack of character. Significant issues were:

    * Going overseas on vacation without telling the Aus public, not coming home when the place burst into flames, claiming not to hold a hose, forcing unhappy people to shake his hand.

    * Not doing enough about ordering covid vaccines, abrogating responsibility for quarantine, siding with Clive Palmer against WA.

    * Women issues, especially having to bleat about asking Jen what he should do, claiming women in other countries were being shot for doing similar as in Canberra, and maybe having a toxic workplace for women.

    * Inventing robodebt to punish the most vulnerable in society, falsifying data about the number of false welfare claims and defending robodebt to the death knell despite the distinct likelihood he and his cronies knew it was illegal.

    * Trying to push through legislation to give religious folk the right to discriminate against others, rather than legislating for an anti-corruption commission as he had promised to do.

    Scotty and the state premiers who botched covid lost the immediate next election. That was Marshall and Perrotet.

    Palaszczuk and Andrews were notably re-elected despite many predictions here and the determined antipathy of the Murdoch media. Why? Because they done good during covid and the public recognised that.

  2. clem attlee

    Well, what would you like?

    – The official cash rate fixed at 0.1% as your mate Nic Mckim insisted.

    – Rents not to increase regardless of interest rate increases.

    – Closure of all gas and oil projects immediately.

    – Company taxes to be raised to 40%.

    – Net zero emissions by 2040.

    Good luck with all of that, full mooner 🙂 and that’s for starters I’m sure!

  3. “ Don’t buy that electrical nonsense needing to recharge – get yourself a hybrid.”

    The criticism of hybrids is crazy. I drive a Toyota hybrid and it’s brilliant. Peak hour traffic in big cities sees millions of cars just sitting still going nowhere pumping carbon monoxide into the atmosphere. Any hybrid that is not moving goes to its battery and pumps out zero emissions.

  4. @FUBAR: Bret Walker is a very fine barrister and also the walking personification of the cab rank principle. There’s some Counsel who try to preserve their winning record by not taking shit cases. Bret takes whoever will pay and has been running some real stinker appeals of late.

    I can’t say I’ve yet seen the statement of claim. The reporting makes it sound like the kitchen sink of vibe claims has been thrown, but it only takes one good claim amid the dross in order to succeed. I haven’t heard in advance of any serious legal concerns with the legislation but I’ll wait to read the claim before having anything categorical to say.

    ROTFL at the raft of non lawyers making confident predictions that just happen to fit their predilections. Malcolm Turnbull thought he could predict the High Court, and at least he was genuinely a lawyer.

  5. Eddy

    The Greens don’t like hybrids, they want all electrical.

    They don’t want any use of petrol. The fact that they cost more, can set on fire, and need recharging all the time is irrelevant to the Greens.

    The environment, whether climate change is real or not, is an emergency or not, or is exaggerated or not, is irrelevant to them!

  6. It says everything you need to know about FUBAR that two of the six reasons he provides for Irish migration are based on Mindless Race Theory and a third on cultural stereotyping.

    EDIT: His point about the weather is well-made, but really too obvious to mention. 3/10 Can do (marginally) better.

  7. Centresays:
    Tuesday, September 3, 2024 at 8:26 pm
    Eddy

    The Greens don’t like hybrids, they want all electrical.

    They don’t want any use of petrol. The fact that they cost more, can set on fire, and need recharging all the time is irrelevant to the Greens.
    ==================================================

    Any evidence at all that an EV is more likely to catch fire than a hybrid?

    Note: Nearly all hybrid vehicles have a lithium battery too. The good news is that lithium batteries are far less likely to catch fire than a petrol tank. The bad news is hybrids have a petrol tank plus a lithium battery. So statistically i suspect they are most likely to catch fire of all of them.

  8. “ why did Labor work with the anti-union L/NP rather than the pro-union Greens ..?”

    This is the million dollar question. Why is Labor’s hatred of the Greens so pathological that they would rather deal with Dutton?

    When Labor negotiates with the Greens the legislation becomes better and stronger. When Labor negotiates with the Liberals the legislation becomes weaker and worse.

    Labor’s pathological hatred of the Greens led to Tasmania Labor just handing over government to the Liberals rather than talking to the Greens. If I was a Tasmanian who voted Labor I would never forgive them. Is this what Federal Labor will do?

    A vote for Albanese is a vote for Dutton?

  9. ‘Eddy says:
    Tuesday, September 3, 2024 at 8:19 pm

    “ Don’t buy that electrical nonsense needing to recharge – get yourself a hybrid.”

    The criticism of hybrids is crazy. I drive a Toyota hybrid and it’s brilliant. Peak hour traffic in big cities sees millions of cars just sitting still going nowhere pumping carbon monoxide into the atmosphere. Any hybrid that is not moving goes to its battery and pumps out zero emissions.’
    ————————————-
    Comparing a hybrid with an ICE car might tickle your fancy.

    The plain fact of the matter is that if the world converts ICE vehicles to hybrids the world will still have a massive CO2 emissions problem from cars alone.

    To get to net something else will have to happen in perpetuity to offset hybrid cars. What do you suggest?

  10. Hey Centre, Center or whatever you call youreself. Where did I state support for those policies? Stop verballing me. Neither you or I have seen the Greens platform for the next federal election. Still you can’t lose can you, either we get a neo liberal ‘Labor’ government, or a neo liberal Tory one. enjoy!

  11. Eddy, youll get the usual response of “the greens are unreasonable”, which doesnt quuuuite work when, for example on the EPA issue, it isnt just the Greens, but Pocock and the Teals as well.

    Are we to honestly believe that Labor couldnt get an EPA through with the Greens, or the Teals and Pocock, that wasnt better then the one with the LNP?

    I think not.

    Same with gambling; somehow the cross bench is “unreasonable” and the LNP is seen as reasonable and it just so happens both of the big parties get large donations from gambling bodies.

    And the NACC.

    It goes on and on and on, and slowly but surely the rusted on base of Labor is shrinking.

  12. Plug-in hybrids are wonderful things. They are the ideal vehicle for Australians, giving economy and low emissions on short city trips while overcoming range anxiety on long trips. Sadly, they offer the worst of both worlds for CO2 emissions, having the high initial carbon input of battery EVs and about 50% of the ongoing emissions of ICE vehicles.

    When my current ICE vehicle dies, I’ll probably buy one and feel good about it, but I know I won’t actually be doing anything to achieve net zero.

  13. Frankly, and respectfully, all of the talk here about denial of due process and natural justice around the CFMEU situation is pretty misguided. The CFMEU issue hasn’t come to a head because of an administrative decision where natural justice might be owed; the administration has come about due to the force of legislation.

    For the CFMEU to succeed, it’ll need to do more than just show there’s been some breach of natural justice; it’ll need to demonstrate that the legislation itself is invalid. That’s a very high bar. I haven’t seen the pleadings that have apparently been filed today, but my gut feeling is that it’ll be tough for the union to get up.

  14. How are they qualified to be Trustees?
    Beats me.
    Usual par for the course in Industry Funds is there’s a Trustee Board, equal numbers of Directors are elected from the shop floor, and nominated by the employers, there may be an independent Director.
    Here’s the trustees in BUSS[Q] Qld:
    https://www.bussq.com.au/about/people/board
    Ravbar has been dismissed by the Administrator from his State Secretary job, the other CFMEU member Directors appear to be long serving female clerical staff.

  15. “ I have voted Labor in every election since I was first qualified in 1980, but no longer. I will vote Greens federally, but continue to vote Labor in Victoria.”

    I have voted Labor in every election since…but no longer. I will vote Greens federally, but continue to vote Labor in SA.

  16. I think the CFMEU’s High Court case will succeed or fail on the strength of the recent legislation. There’s a lot of political reputation riding on it for a couple of political parties.

  17. Arky wrote, “ROTFL at the raft of non lawyers making confident predictions that just happen to fit their predilections. Malcolm Turnbull thought he could predict the High Court, and at least he was genuinely a lawyer.”

    You don’t have to be a lawyer, its common sense. Since when can an individaul or an organisation be lawfully sanctioned on the basis of allegations? Allegations have to be proven in a court of law. What evidence has Albanese had tested in a court of law? Drr!

  18. And one thing’s certain: you can’t take the current HC Bench for granted. Look no further than its decision last year that held indefinite detention was unlawful and unconstitutional. That the Albanese government didn’t see this coming caused a good deal
    of self-harm, and one wonders whose advice this was based on.

  19. Eddy @ #665 Tuesday, September 3rd, 2024 – 8:04 pm

    “ I have voted Labor in every election since I was first qualified in 1980, but no longer. I will vote Greens federally, but continue to vote Labor in Victoria.”

    I have voted Labor in every election since…but no longer. I will vote Greens federally, but continue to vote Labor in SA.

    I used to be a Labor member and a Labor vote but I nowadays vote Green for both federal and state (SA) elections. I still preference Labor over Liberals (and any far right parties.) Although sometimes I feel that Labor should consider themselves lucky there isn’t OPV here. I’ll leave it at that.

  20. clem attlee

    Get your eyes checked my friend, I’ve always been “centre” in the past and “Centre”at present.

    What we won’t be getting is a Greens government and if Labor want to win they should distance themselves closer to the centre and away from the Greens.

  21. Rewisays:
    Tuesday, September 3, 2024 at 8:38 pm
    ‘Common sense’ and the common law have been known to diverge, sometimes even in a yellow wood.
    ==========================================

    “That made all the difference”

  22. Stinker wrote, “For the CFMEU to succeed, it’ll need to do more than just show there’s been some breach of natural justice; it’ll need to demonstrate that the legislation itself is invalid. That’s a very high bar. I haven’t seen the pleadings that have apparently been filed today, but my gut feeling is that it’ll be tough for the union to get up.”

    Isn’t this back to front? Shouldn’t the Albanese government have acted on the basis of a lawful judgement and then based the placement of administration on this? If the contrary view is true, then this is a terrible precendent. One where allegations are sufficient and not on a burden of proof presented in a fair trial.

  23. Ill put money on it this turns out to be yet another occasion when a panicked government put forward legislation that is unlawful… Labor and the LNP have form on that

  24. Luigi Smith

    Scotty and the state premiers who botched covid lost the immediate next election. That was Marshall and Perrotet.

    Palaszczuk and Andrews were notably re-elected despite many predictions here and the determined antipathy of the Murdoch media. Why? Because they done good during covid and the public recognised that.
    Perrotet had nothing to do with the Covid mistakes, he wasn’t Premier until 2 years later.
    Palaszczuk last faced voters in 2020, about halfway into Covid.
    Labor didn’t dare risk her again.
    Labor hasn’t been punished for it’s Covid failures, apart from the NT the other day, but the chickens are coming home to roost for them.
    I’d say they’ll get flensed in the ACT too.

  25. What we won’t be getting is a Greens government and if Labor want to win they should distance themselves closer to the centre and away from the Greens.

    Being in the centre is certainly helping the Democrats and Harris.

    I agree with your view, by the way.

  26. Well, of course, Lordbain. Thank you for pointing out that legislation is sometimes found to be invalid – I thought that was inherent in what I had posted. The point I’m making is that suggesting that there’s been a denial of natural justice or due process in what has happened is effectively irrelevant. To succeed, the CFMEU will need to have the legislation found invalid. Without knowing what argument they’re running, it’s a high hurdle. They might clear it, but bleating about natural justice isn’t going to do it.

  27. Badthinker, youve said some stupid shit, but thinking that Labor is going to lose the ACT is up there.

    The Liberal brand is seen as a bad joke in the territory, so bad in fact we have “independents” that were previously Liberals running because they have a better shot not wearing the blue

  28. “ Now I don’t know about you guys, but the governments actions regarding the CFMEU…”

    No due process. People have lost their jobs. I can’t wait to see what the high court has to say. Labor just setting itself up to be slapped down…again.

    Negotiating with Dutton to bring in union busting laws. I cringe to think what the Liberals will do with these laws when they inevitably return to power.

  29. ‘Centre’ scribbled, “if Labor want to win they should distance themselves closer to the centre and away from the Greens.” The centre is the label that right wing neo liberals seek to hide behind. There is no centre when it comes to economics. But I bet you are a real social progressive arent you? Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside when you are advocating for tax cuts for high income earners and reduced services for low income people.

  30. clem attlee:

    “Isn’t this back to front? Shouldn’t the Albanese government have acted on the basis of a lawful judgement and then based the placement of administration on this? If the contrary view is true, then this is a terrible precendent. One where allegations are sufficient and not on a burden of proof presented in a fair trial.”

    I think what you’re saying is a fair enough view. But the Government is the Government, and in a legal and political system with parliamentary supremacy, the short answer is no – the Government doesn’t need to wait for accusations proven to a criminal or civil standard in courts before deciding to pass legislation to deal with a problem. That’s with the qualification that whatever legislation that is passed needs to be lawful in terms of having a head of power to support it, and subject to certain other constitutional constraints. Again, without having seen the pleadings filed on behalf of the CFMEU today, my assumption is that they’ll be arguing on the latter basis (perhaps something akin to the legislation assuming a judicial function, though that is speculation on my part). It might not be without legs – but it’s a high bar.

  31. Ok, lets put this in simple terms.

    The government does not have the ability to determine guilt without a fair trial.

    That is the basis of our legal system, which is literally on the AGs website that I linked earlier.

    In this case, Labor has determined the guilt of individuals within the CFMEU, and penalised them by removing them from their positions; note there is no evidence that several states and territory heads were aware of the actions reported.

    If this is seen as legal, then the precedent set is simple; the government of the day, if it has the numbers, can determine punishments without the courts.

    That should be terrifying, and yet alot of you seem happy because “it was my team”.

  32. Labor and the LNP seem to be playing a political version of the good cop, bad cop routine and in reality offering little that is different or is of real value to people. Not sure either of these donor captured parties can be fixed they are just getting more distant from voters over time.

    If people want centre-left outcomes they are clearly not going to get them under the fake lefty Albanese – Labor needs to be dragged against its will to enact even mild social democratic reforms by being forced into minority. Labor can try and position itself in the centre as a response to ceding leftists to the Greens but I don’t think the centre is going to hold with rapidly growing inequality and economic precarity people are likely to become more polarised.

  33. I haven’t read the Act that gave the government the power to appoint an independent administrator, but if it included a section that attempted to abrogate the precept of due process, the HC could and probably would strike it out. I’ll read it tomorrow.

  34. Confessions

    I find that the Greens supporters criticise Labor for being Liberal lite but when pressed for policies they wish implemented, we find them to be unelectable.

    Labor would lose!

  35. I think that it will matter whether the responsible minister can appoint administrators as and when he sees fit and what preliminary steps are required to do that. Using some of our visa grant and refusal cases as an example, I think the High Court will look at whether the responsible minister has acted exactly in accord with the legislation, and also when he acted and on what advice.

    I’ll guess that union officials don’t actually own the union.

    Here in Tasmania (and elsewhere I suspect), the state government occasionally dismisses a local government council and appoints an administrator. Councillors whine about it. Well-paying jobs are scarce in Tassie. But I’ve not seen a successful legal challenge.

    And I’m just guessing about the new legislation. I don’t know.

  36. Boewar wrote, “The Greens are not at all pro-union.

    The Greens want to destroy Labor.

    Unions are Labor’s bedrock.”

    Why do so many ‘Labor’ posters bag the unions on here then? Why do the Albanese government do the Tories dirty work re unions then? Why are so many unions deregistering from Labor then? The founding fathers of the union movement were right to distrust Labor, they said that the cozy life of parliament would alienate MP’S from the workers and for the most part they have been proven to be right.

  37. Lordbain said:

    “ The government does not have the ability to determine guilt without a fair trial.

    That is the basis of our legal system, which is literally on the AGs website that I linked earlier.

    In this case, Labor has determined the guilt of individuals within the CFMEU, and penalised them by removing them from their positions; note there is no evidence that several states and territory heads were aware of the actions reported.”

    The legislation actually does no such thing. It just establishes a scheme for the administration of the CFMEU. That needn’t be (and on the terms of the legislation, isn’t) tethered to any determination of ‘guilt’, wrongdoing, or anything else.

  38. I cringe to think what the Liberals will do with these laws when they inevitably return to power.
    Not much.
    Union Membership is mostly women now.
    Dutts won’t be doing anything to disturb their perception of job security.
    Keep in mind, the CFMEU hasn’t been deregistered, just placed in administration.
    Just a guess, Setka may have employed a lot of intimidating organisers, one or more may have had brains as well. He [or they] were well on the way to overthrowing Setka when he called a presser and had a rave about some AFL umpire.
    A few weeks later, Albo appoints an administrator.
    All good, but the part where Setka called a presser and threatened the AFL, that sounds a bit suss. He was on the way out anyway, against his own wishes apparently, brought the tent down, Albo sacked everybody.
    Now, I do believe in coincidences happening, and there’s a few right there.

  39. ‘mj says:
    Tuesday, September 3, 2024 at 8:55 pm

    Labor and the LNP seem to be playing a political version of the good cop, bad cop routine and in reality offering little that is different or is of real value to people. …’
    ————————
    Big fat lie. I recommend you do what Goebbels did. Keep repeating the big fat lie. It worked for him. Until it didn’t.

  40. William, I am going to complain for a second; on top of the absolute nonsense BW keeps spewing, the fact he keeps accusing people of aping Goebbels is pretty low, and I recall you deleting comments from me, TPOF and others for similar statements.

    There is argy bargy, and then theres BW spewing that…

  41. Mavis said:

    “ I haven’t read the Act that gave the government the power to appoint an independent administrator, but if it included a section that attempted to abrogate the precept of due process, the HC could and probably would strike it out. I’ll read it tomorrow.”

    The first sentence here encapsulates the misunderstanding about the administration. The legislation doesn’t give the Government the power to appoint an administrator, per se. The legislation simply provides that the CFMEU is hereby under administration, with some ancillary instruments required to facilitate this. This is the point I’m making – to succeed, the CFMEU is going to have to show that provision is invalid, rather than there was something unfair or unlawful about a decision made to place the union in administration. It’s a fundamentally different, and more difficult, case.

  42. Stinker wrote, “The legislation actually does no such thing. It just establishes a scheme for the administration of the CFMEU. That needn’t be (and on the terms of the legislation, isn’t) tethered to any determination of ‘guilt’, wrongdoing, or anything else.”

    Then how can they justify the removal of these workers from their postions? Has there been any financial inprobity?

Comments Page 14 of 16
1 13 14 15 16

Leave a Reply

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