Nine Newspapers yesterday had Resolve Strategic’s quarterly state breakdowns, combined from their past three monthly polls. These aren’t news with respect to the three largest states, results for which are provided with each poll. That leaves fresh results for Western Australia, which show Labor on 30% (up one on last quarter, down from 36.8% at the 2022 election), the Coalition on 37% (up two, up from 34.8%), the Greens on 12% (down four, down from 12.5%) and One Nation 5% (steady, up from 4.0%). and South Australia, which show Labor on 27% (down one on last quarter, down from 34.5% at the election), the Coalition on 34% (down two, down from 35.5%), the Greens on 12% (down two, down from 12.8%) and One Nation on 8% (up two, up from 4.8%). The combined sample for the poll was 4831, with surveying conducted between October 1 and December 8.
Also published on Sunday were familiarity and net likeability results for 34 politicians from the most recent monthly survey. These seem to have elicited rote responses for most of the lower-ranking government ministers, eight of whom scored between between 41% and 55% on name recognition and between minus one and minus five on net likeability. Coalition politicians in the same name recognition range did better, ranging from even to plus seven.
The most instructive results were for those with familiarity scores of 70% and upwards, peaking at 98% for Anthony Albanese (minus 17 on net likeability) and 95% for Peter Dutton (even). Jacinta Price was the most favoured major party politician with 71% familiarity and plus 8 net likeability, though David Pocock and a number of Liberals did only slightly less well with much lower familiarity scores. Labor’s best performer was Penny Wong with 89% familiarity and plus 2 on net likeability. The worst result for a major party politician was Barnaby Joyce with 90% familiarity and minus 22 net likeability.
Jacqui Lambie tops the list, with 80% familiarity and plus 14 net likeability. David Pocock and Zali Steggall’s results were respectively good and mediocre, but otherwise non-major party politicians did poorly, Adam Bandt, Sarah Hanson-Young, Bob Katter and Fatima Payman all landing between minus 11 and minus 17. Worst-rated of all was Lidia Thorpe, whose recent activities have succeeded to the extent of scoring her 73% familiarity, with a net rating of minus 41 presumably demonstrating one point or another.
UPDATE: Further results have been published for age broken down into three cohorts. For 18-to-34, Labor is on 33% (up two from last quarter, steady on what was presumably the pre-election Resolve Strategic poll), the Coalition 27% (up two on both counts), the Greens 23% (down four, down two). For 35-to-54, Labor is on 30% (up two and down four), the Coalition 34% (down two and up two) and the Greens 12% (steady on both counts). For 55-plus, Labor is on 25% (down two and down eight), the Coalition 50% (up three and up four) and the Greens 4% (steady and down one).
Thanks Bird of Paradox,
Quite a significant 11% swing in Altona. Possibly a similar swing coming up in Werribee.
Both by-elections will provide a good read on where Victorian’s are sitting atm.
Me, personally, I believe things are very sour for Labor down there atm & going by the poll data tab on bludgertrack too. We’ll see.
Evening Been There, & good to see you back,
What’s your view?
ALP majority, or minority with the Greens or Teals, or minority with both the Greens & Teals providing C&S?
Average wage earners are better off than people on welfare but the largest group on welfare is trapped on it by poor policies so government should fix that but if they don’t they should up welfare payments to that group.
FUBARsays:
Monday, January 6, 2025 at 11:43 pm
Mexicanbeemer says:
Monday, January 6, 2025 at 10:56 pm
That’s a terrible idea. Look what’s happened to the UK Conservatives trying to play Watermelon. They’re out of government and the UK has some of the highest energy prices in the world, massive energy poverty. A complete disaster.
Stick to being Conservatives and tell the ecofascists to pound sand.
——–
Conservatives won two elections after that term but only lost because Johnson Truss and Suniak failed on Brexit and failed to improve the economy and manage the NHS.
Just did 8 days in Melbourne. It was like being in Kuala Lumpur except with better coffee and triple the food prices.
I don’t know, maybe I should just think about certain options all things considered. I mean I spent 5 years in university learning science only to find out that the Australian Coalition doesn’t think much of Australian scientists at all, and my HECS debt just keeps on growing higher, currently going up above $70K. And it looks like they’ll just win and keep on winning.
So anyway, returning to last night’s enlightening discussion…
Someone impugned Nena, suggesting she was a one hit wonder (can’t remember who, too lazy to look it up).
In fact, that’s only true in the English-speaking world. In Germany she had a string of hits, including but not limited to, ‘Rette Mich’, ‘Irgendwie, Irgendwo, Irgendwann’, and ‘Willst Du Mit Mir Geh’n’.
So there.
So, regarding the Canada situation, there’s another sticky element.
Both NDP and Bloc Quebecois have both signalled that they would join the Conservatives in a No Confidence motion. Should they go through with that, assuming all MPs vote the party line on that, there will be enough votes for the motion to pass. If it succeeds, the government collapses and the PM has no choice but to advise the Governor-General to call an early election for as soon as realistically possible.
While it should be pointed out that they have no confidence in a Trudeau Government and I suppose it’s possible another leader could get at least the NDP to back down, I think the general consensus is the government is cooked and a No Confidence motion might be necessary to put it out of its misery. Which is especially jarring for the Liberals, as they are in a leadership crisis.
I honestly don’t know how this mess is going to play out (other than ending with a Poilievre Conservative Government.) I had thought that Trudeau would resign, some “safe” successor would be PM until October and then lose to the Opposition. But now I honestly don’t know.
Trudeau pulling the trigger on an election and leading the Liberals to defeat might be off the cards now, as it would be a disastrous campaign to have one side be led by someone they don’t want as leader.
Parliament resumes on 27 January.
Ante Meridian says:
Tuesday, January 7, 2025 at 12:04 am
I find it sickening when politicians (and the public) demonise the unemployed while at the same time enacting policies designed to enshrine a minimum level of unemployment – the Non Inflationary Something Whatever, you know the one I mean. So they make sure (or try to make sure) a certain number of people cannot find work no matter what, then blame the poor bastards for their plight.
______________________________
It’s the Non Accelerating Inflationary Rate of Unemployment – or NARIU, an idea from the 1970s when we had stubbornly high inflation and unemployment – for a long time it was assumed to be about 5%. The idea behind it was that Govt should not pursue policies designed to lower unemployment by more than the ‘natural rate’ for fear of wage inflation.
Theories that require a unemployment to be above the natural rate abound in microeconomics as well, efficiency wage theory requires a high level of unemployment to act as a bargaining tool to suppress wages and to act as a worker output incentive , i.e. fear of unemployment for slack work . This leads nicely into earlier theories such as labour process models and the Marx/Engles notion of “reserve army of labour”. However, for Marx the reserve army was an esstial element of the operation of the capitalist system and included both the unemployed and underemployed/marginally attached workers in low wage, insecure employment.
When looking at employment over the long term a notable trend is the revison to employment arrangements more common in the 19th century, such as a growth in the gig style contracting jobs, insecure casual work, work outside the FT week with employment entitlements and individual contracting/self employment. It is a bit hard to account for all the reasons why this change has happened. Some argue neoliberiam and the dismantling of employment protection/IR regulation but this is only a part, there is also technological change in the way and how, structural economic change where traditional industries that suit the stable ongoing employment are far less prominent and international changes/competition/trade where firms no longer need the static bureaucratic structures but can outsource tasks previously done by internal employees on a job by job basis.
Dr Fumbles Mcstupidsays:
Tuesday, January 7, 2025 at 2:03 am
That’s a good piece of stuff that you’ve put together regarding employment, changes relating to employment and the “stickiness” of the employment issues.
New thread.
FUBAR @ #2126 Monday, January 6th, 2025 – 7:49 pm
YOU are a LOT nauseating.
President Carter did a lot more in his life for the betterment of mankind than you ever will in your miserable, greedy, grasping life.
But I bet the beatifying words tumble from your lips when Big Gina, George W. and Donald Trump die. 😐
Ante Meridian @ #2249 Tuesday, January 7th, 2025 – 12:04 am
Have to agree with this. It is what you expect from Conservatives and Neoliberals.
To get the same policies from a Labor government is truly nauseating. If we really wanted higher unemployment, we already had one party with those policies. We didn’t need another.
This is a big factor in why Labor are losing support.
Mexicanbeemer on Mon at 10.56 pm
“Australian politics might be better off if teals back the liberals …”
Read the chapter I linked about the Teals. They are serious about action to mitigate global warming. Dutton is not. Notoriously so. Evidence 1) his arrogant comments dismissing the plight of S Pacific islanders in the face of rising sea levels; 2) his absurd nuclear policy.
If the Liberals were serious about cooperating with the Teals they would not be led by Dutton.