Nothing to relate over the past week in the way of federal polling, but past time nonetheless for a new post. We do have, courtesy of the Macquarie University Housing and Urban Research Centre, a deep dive into attitudes towards housing policy from before the May election, drawn from the Australian Cooperative Election Survey conducted by Accent Research. It finds only 16% were satisfied with the Albanese government’s housing policies, with 34% dissatisfied and 32% neither, although the high level of consistency of these results by age group, housing tenure and property investment status suggests the dissatisfaction takes on a variety of forms. On the causes of the problem, the report offers the perhaps unsurprising finding that “older and right-leaning voters” blame immigration, while “younger and progressive voters identify high interest rates, high prices and low wages”.
DemosAU does have a state poll for Queensland, which comes too soon after last week’s Resolve Strategic and RedBridge Group polls to get its own post (on a semi-related point: still no date for the Hinchinbrook by-election). In contrast to those two, it finds David Crisafulli’s Liberal National Party government well on top, despite a surge to One Nation at the expense of both major parties. The LNP has a two-party lead of 54-46, essentially the same as the 54.2-45.8 election result last year, from primary votes of LNP 37% (down by 4.5%), Labor 29% (down by 3.6%), Greens 12% (up by 2.1%) and One Nation 14% (up by 6.0%). Crisafulli leads Steven Miles 44-23 on preferred premier. Further questions find the government highly rated for handling of the Olympics but rather a lot less so for housing and cost-of-living, which also register as the two most salient issues facing the state. Extensive demographic breakdowns are available in the full report. The poll was conducted October 13 to 20 from a sample of 1006.
UPDATE (Essential Research): Had I held back a few hours I would have had a new poll from Essential Research to lead with: it has Labor up a point to 36% and the Coalition down one to 26%, and the ongoing One Nation surge pushing them well clear of the Greens, respectively up two to 15% and down two to 9%, with a steady 6% undecided. Labor holds a 50-44 lead on the 2PP+ measure, in from 51-44. Anthony Albanese is up a point on approval to 45% and down two on disapproval to 44%, while Sussan Ley is steady on 32% and up two to 43%.
A question on who should lead the Liberal Party produces indecisive results, with 42% professing themselves unsure and 12% favouring “somebody else” over six designated options: 13% for Sussan Ley, 10% for Andrew Hastie, 10% for Jacinta Namatjira Price, 7% for Angus Taylor, 4% for Allegra Spender and 3% for Tim Wilson. Forty-eight per cent felt the party should adopt more progressive positions, 24% more conservative.
Albanese’s meeting with Donald Trump was rated good for Australia’s long-term interests by 37%, bad by 18% and indifferent by 26%. Support for net zero by 2050 is at 44% with 27% opposed, and a monthly national mood reading improves a bit after a sharp downturn last time, with right direction up a point to 35% and wrong track down four to 46%. The poll was conducted Wednesday to Monday from a sample of 1041.
pied piper says:
Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 4:50
Healthcare continues to get better and better. We are also experiencing surging life expectancy, meaning there are more older aged people who need more care than younger people. Meantime, the system is so good at helping people that demand for healthcare services continues to grow.
These are signs of success. We have more demand. Great. I can see this in the lived experiences of members of my own family. They are living very much longer and maintain much better health than they would have expected 50 or 60 years ago. They enjoy remarkable quality of care and life in general. This is fabulous. It is a reflection of decades of attention by the public estate on healthcare for all.
If we are short of healthcare workers then recruit more. Good workers are good workers regardless of their origins, passports or ethnicity. Bring them.
The Reactionaries will de-fund healthcare and sack the very people that we need. They will do this for ideological-political purposes. They are an absolute disgrace.
Nick @ #1749 Sunday, November 2nd, 2025 – 5:38 pm
Honestly Ezra Klein reminds me too much of the plagiarist James Somerton. Nothing about him is authentic, it’s mostly just grift in that “I’m a millionaire paid by billionaires to sell a position that they want me to sell.”
Bill Gates was the man that did not like radial tires. Not surprised the energy transition fills him with dread. A lot of change is coming.
Until around 1970, almost all cars and trucks rolled on bias-ply tires. Under the rubber treads, nylon belts ran diagonally, at 30 or 45 degrees, forming a crosshatch. This allowed for stronger sidewalls and cheaper manufacturing. The problem was that bias-ply tires needed to be changed every 12,000 miles.
Then along came radial tires. Introduced in 1949 by Michelin, radials have steel belts inside that run across the tread at a 90-degree angle. They are wider, better at dissipating heat, and safer. Although radials cost a little more to manufacture, they last at least 40,000 miles.
The first American car that came with radials was the 1970 Lincoln Continental . Four years later, Goodyear was making only radial tires. Other companies missed out and paid dearly. By the end of the decade, radials effectively had 100% market share for cars.
Which brings us back to Silicon Valley. In the 1980s and ’90s, technology was changing so fast that a new computer was almost disposable. You upgraded every few years. But as innovation slowed, they lasted longer, which meant fewer people buying computers.
Bill Gates was worried about this all the way back in 1991. “When radial tires were invented,” he said in an interview, “people didn’t start driving their cars a lot more, and so that means the need for production capacity went way down, and things got all messed up. The tire industry is still messed up.”
During the dot-com boom, Mr. Gates invoked the analogy again. “Every time I read about optic fibers or wireless, I say to myself, ‘Wow, that sounds like radial tires,’ ” he said. “When they got radial tires did people drive four times as much just because the tires lasted longer? No, the industry shrank.”
Gates is spot-on.
We’re no longer in a position where equipment and infrastructure needs to be updated nearly as frequently.
When I was helping build out MFS in the early 1990s, we ran Rockwell 3X50 multiplexors which gave a whopping 135Mb/s delivered as three DS3’s per fiber pair, and when we needed more capacity into a building, it involved pulling more fiber. Hugely expensive.
By the time I was building out Enron Broadband in the late 1990s, we were putting 40 channels of 2.4Gb/s per fiber pair, with a path to putting 80 channels of 2.4Gb/s without changing any of the existing electronics or adding more fiber, with regeneration stations needed every few hundred miles.
Now, state of the art is somewhere north of 80 channels of 100Gb/s, with 500Gb/s systems in deployment and people eyeing 1Tb/s. On the same fiber we were using in the 1990s – not just the same kind, in some cases, the exact same fiber that was laid then. And regen spans are way up too – up to 4000km in some cases.
So, today, I could deploy a 8.8Tb/s system in about the same footprint of about 600Mb/s in 1992, at about the same cost. And unlike my 1992 deployment, it’s in-place upgradeable to 1Tb/s per port blades, taking me to 88Tb/s. Crazy.
That means that despite a huge surge in total bandwidth, the total volume of fiber being built, the total volume of equipment being sold, that’s way, way down. During the telecom nuclear winter, we thought it was due to too many companies chasing too few real customers. By now, we know that thinking was wrong, and it was due to there being a hard limit to how much needed be spent, because the hard construction was really a one-time deal, and the electronics needed refreshed much, much less often.
The same applies to computers, and cell phones – you don’t need to replace your computer every year or even every other year any more. We’ve sort of plateaued into a place where everything of import happens on “the Internet”, and if you’re able to successfully run a browser, you don’t need much more. Which means that you need to update your computer much, much less frequently.
Same with your cell phone, where much longer turn cycles are being seen, partly in response to the much higher cost of units, party due to the fact that once you’re on a multi-core 64-bit processor in your cell phone… there’s not a huge amount of incentive to keep upgrading.
It’s radial tires, all over again. Gone are the days of needing new tires every year, as things were circa 1970. Tires last a minimum of 36K miles, with 60K miles not being uncommon, to the point that I’ve actually known people who have never bought a set of tires, because they’ve never owned a car long enough to face that prospect.
If you’re a consumer, that’s a huge win. If you’re a tire company, not so much.
The same will hold for the semiconductor industry, the computer industry, and likely, Microsoft, where the number of new licenses sold per year will start to drop precipitously at some point due to people no longer replacing computers as frequently.
If you’re positioning into the realm of X-as-a-Service, with revenue tied to the number of users who subscribe to your service, things are looking awesome as more people than ever will be able to access your wares. If on the other hand, you are selling gizmos and per-unit licenses? Yeah…. I’d be thinking really hard about what happened in the tire industry.
Government should open its eyes before saying it can’t find people with health system experience.
One of the big reasons for the Democrats problems is that they listened to and thought like people like Ezra Klein for too long.
Thank goodness reality is starting to break through, and that doesn’t entail moving to the political right. Straight talking about “left” issues works a charm – witness Mamdani.
Wat Tyler says:
Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 5:56 pm
Arky @ #1650 Sunday, November 2nd, 2025 – 2:03 pm
@Corleone –
“I can’t understand Anglicanism”
While I can’t either, for the reason you expressed – it’s a sect established entirely so a long dead King could get legal divorces he couldn’t get in Catholicism
I apologise but I’m going to nitpick a little here. Henry VIII wasn’t trying to get a divorce, he wanted his marriage to Catherine of Aragon annulled.
…and perfectly illustrating why religious organs should never be allowed to have anything to do with the regulation of marriage…
ajm @ #1755 Sunday, November 2nd, 2025 – 6:03 pm
Speaking of Mamdani, Cuomo’s campaign is so pathetic that they’ve been reduced to making AI attack ads against him.
One was a Halloween ad in which they made AI-Mamdani cheerfully declare to a NY couple that he’s a Socialist, and promptly snatched 52% of their candy because Communism, I guess?
Another one was a frankly weird 70’s style “Oh I’m an amendment to be~” ad where the male-presenting “bill” was randomly pregnant between every alternating scene.
Re: Ezra Klein
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/02/opinion/democrats-liberalism-elections-crick.html
So three observations:
1) I hate how Americans write – so needlessly verbose, like they are auditioning as a screenwriter for “The West Wing”
2) I see nothing of relevance in this for Australian politics at this present moment – as in, I wouldn’t draw any particular attack points directed to Labor, LNP, or Greens here (you’ll see below).
3) Let me summaries the article as simply as I can:
** Democrats, start acting like an Australian political party. **
Fundamentally, the Democrats can overcome all these contractions, competing interest groups, misdirection, and excessive professionalization if Congressional members actually stopped being lazy and sat down and agreed on a “Party platform”.
Because if you have all these federal members from different parts of the country, with different right/left leans, then Party leadership needs to stop letting them behave like a pack of stray cats and actually sit in a room and do some policy development.
Hell, allocate “spokespersons” and get them to lead policy development internally and get their “backbench” equivalent on side. Sort out what are essentially factional differences and get people on side to major policy packages before you have house/senate majority, so you are not spending those precious majority time fighting each other.
If the Democrats have a problem with listening too much to “progressive media” or “think tanks”, well they already have plenty of diversity in their ranks. Ocasio-Cortez, Fetterman, Sanders, Manchin? Lock these people in a room and don’t let them out until a unified policy pitch is written.
I don’t think what Americans want are a galaxy away from what Australian voters want (and I know this is a controversial opinion …). I think they want government policy that offers believable and achievable improvements to economic conditions (and like Australia, secure borders).
The Democrats offered wishy-washy while the Republicans offered tax cuts. I actually don’t think it is really more complicated than that.
Most of the Henry VIII “debate” is rubbish. There were tensions all over Europe from the Pope using his religious position (anyone who goes against me is condemned to hell) to leverage temporal power over local Kings etc. In turn some of those Kings effectively captured the Popes and used that power against other Kings.
There were all sorts of reactions to this, of which Henry breaking the Church of England away from the Pope was just the local English example.
In turn, a range of religious reformers took advantage to push their ideas of a reformed Christianity in their countries, with varying success.
Henry himself was a conventional Catholic in terms of religious belief – he was just dealing with the Pope and the Spanish ganging up against his dynastic desires.
Bizzcan @ #1758 Sunday, November 2nd, 2025 – 6:14 pm
That’s a great point. US Elected Reps in the House and Senate still hold a lot of power even if they’re in the minority. Them forming a Shadow Cabinet against Trump, even if it’s unofficial, would be much better than what they have now, which is pretty much just people like Hakeem Jeffries whining about broken promises about inflation while Trump’s administration is happily building concentration camps for ICE to throw people into without due process.
They’re only narrowly behind in the house, they have like 213 members, give the more talented of them things to do in speaking for the party about each specific position the Republicans are failing. Hound them and shadow them.
So far the biggest opposition to that evil ghoul Kristi Noem has been from South Park for crying out loud. Surely there’s someone in the elected Democratic Party that can do better than that?
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-11-02/nationals-formally-abandon-net-zero-by-2050/105962162?utm_source=abc_news_app&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_app&utm_content=safari
Canavan says the Nationals have “found their voice”.
They can keep bleating on Sky News and in the Murdoch press to the 4% that support them as their share of the vote diminishes until they no longer have a relevant voice at all.
I cannot stand that wispy milquetoast voice that Ezra Klein speaks in! I can’t listen to his podcasts as a result.
Canavan says the Nationals have “found their voice”.
Yeah. As ‘The little Coal-powered Locomotive that Couldn’t.’
C@tmomma @ #1762 Sunday, November 2nd, 2025 – 6:30 pm
Yeah, my feelings exactly. He just sighs almost everything into the microphone and it just raises the hair on my neck like nails on a blackboard.
SL, thanks for the info on the Tomago situation.
This from Renew Economy (which I accept would be biased) is informative about the 2017 events: https://reneweconomy.com.au/nsw-heatwave-another-catalogue-of-fossil-fuel-power-failures-16667/
It’s along the lines of what I recall.
The Russians are inside parts of Pokrovsk.
– London
Reuters
—
Members of a US congressional committee investigating the Jeffrey Epstein case have intensified their calls for Andrew Mountbatten Windsor to answer questions about his ties to the late financier and sex offender, the BBC reported on Saturday
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/11/01/uk/us-lawmakers-urge-andrew-to-address-epstein-links-intl
________________
Mountbatten Windsor should agree to give evidence via video from his secure Sandringham compound.
He needs to expose the entire House of Epstein.
It’s the least he can do now.
Andrew fixed palace visit for firm with £1.4M deal with ex wife.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy5q05v0q1xo
Was there no end to his royal shitfuckery?
Boerwar says:
Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 6:53 pm
The Russians are inside parts of Pokrovsk.
While Russia burns.
I call that a Pyrrhic victory.
Kirsdarke,
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought that.
The artist formerly known as Prince:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AulTNgfH98Q
I guess over the top shouting heads are peoples thing instead? Yelling about every little comment made by the right, pod/vidcasts that require a near exhaustion levels of attention and energy to get through day in day out. It’s great that Mamdani is winning (in New York against of all people Cuomo, so like, wow yeah!) I’d rather listen to something thoughtful and insightful than the shrieking of Balwalk or even PSA
Rex:
Apparently, there’s an FBI office in the US Embassy in London.
Mavis
I doubt Mountbatten Windsor would leave the security of the Sandringham compound to give evidence.
Kirsdarke, C@tmomma
I share your sentiments on Ezra. Lately I’ve been enjoying the ‘angry liberal wine mom’ energy of Jennifer Welch (the I’ve Had It podcast) – much more authentic analysis with some sass
I’ll give ‘I’ve Had It’ a listen.
Ms Ferguson on the other hand is in huge trouble. Left to fend for herself and exposed to the realities of commoner life.
FBI Director, Kash Patel, visited his office in Canberra recently. https://www.facebook.com/abcnews.au/posts/fbi-director-kash-patel-paid-a-quiet-visit-australia-this-week-with-home-affairs/1317546066393327/
Splitsville again?
“A leading moderate Liberal has urged Sussan Ley to leave open the option of breaking up the Coalition after the Nationals dumped net zero and backed taxpayers underwriting new coal-fired power stations.
After the Nationals unanimously agreed to oppose any net-zero target in a special partyroom meeting on Sunday, Liberal senator Dave Sharma said the Coalition agreement should be reconsidered if the parties had climate policies that were irreconcilable.
“The Nationals have set their policy. It is now up to the Liberals to set our policy,” Senator Sharma said.
“If the two can’t be reconciled then we need to consider the future of the Coalition.”
One Liberal MP said breaking up the Coalition was a “viable option”, arguing the Nationals had already damaged the party’s hopes of winning back city seats at the next election.
“They are terrorists,” the Liberal MP said.
“The first rule of being a parasite is not to kill your host.”
Another Liberal said the move was “an attempt to corner us and I don’t think it will be successful”.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/moderate-liberals-want-viable-option-of-coalition-split-on-the-table/news-story/b97bf33d27dc1f6b78bb26da1a7e7832?amp
A leading moderate Liberal has urged Sussan Ley to leave open the option of breaking up the Coalition after the Nationals dumped net zero and backed taxpayers underwriting new coal-fired power stations. After the Nationals unanimously agreed to oppose any net-zero target in a special partyroom meeting on Sunday, Liberal senator Dave Sharma said the Coalition agreement should be reconsidered if the parties had climate policies that were irreconcilable.
“The Nationals have set their policy. It is now up to the Liberals to set our policy,” Senator Sharma said. “If the two can’t be reconciled then we need to consider the future of the Coalition.”
One Liberal MP said breaking up the Coalition was a “viable option”, arguing the Nationals had already damaged the party’s hopes of winning back city seats at the next election. “They are terrorists,” the Liberal MP said. “The first rule of being a parasite is not to kill your host.” Another Liberal said the move was “an attempt to corner us and I don’t think it will be successful”.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/moderate-liberals-want-viable-option-of-coalition-split-on-the-table/news-story/b97bf33d27dc1f6b78bb26da1a7e7832?amp
Bonza,
Ditto with IHIP. Those ladies are so authentic. Originating from Indiana gives their commentary a Mid West perspective that the Republicans can’t easily dismiss.
Ye gods, they in the Coalition really do hate each other, don’t they?
Honestly hard to see how they can win elections from here. It’s like how Labor was in the 1950’s-60’s, really hard to win elections when they hate each other more than they hate their opposition.
May well it continue.
Trump supporter in Philadelphia.
‘Trump supporter in Philadelphia.’
A thing of beauty is a joy forever.
Fastwheels @ #1783 Sunday, November 2nd, 2025 – 7:49 pm
No.
Body shaming isn’t cool
The Nationals have ridden to power on the coat-tails of the Liberals for too long. They believe that the % of the vote and the seats they win make them indispensable. Time for them to find out that they aren’t. Time for 3-cornered contests with the Liberals in all the seats that the Nationals hold. And the Nationals can try and win city seats. Lol.
It is hard to see the value in remaining in coalition in opposition.
“zawsze sie zastanawiam co doprowadza kobietry do takiego stanu” = I always wonder what drives women to such a state.
Which isnt really much better to be fair.
Will the Nats tail wag the Tory dog?
“For the second time in three years, David Littleproud’s Nationals have ratted on the Liberal Party and staked out a policy position that has potentially dramatic consequences for the senior Coalition party.
On November 27, 2022, Littleproud, then Nationals MP Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and the rest of the party room, announced the Nationals would formally oppose the Voice to parliament.
It would be almost six months before Peter Dutton announced the Liberals would take the same position but the result was all but inevitable. It’s now all but inevitable now that the Liberals will dump support for Australia to reach net zero emissions by 2050.
The only surprising thing about the Nationals’ decision is that it took them this long.
What is notable is that Littleproud has again taken a maximalist position on a crucial policy issue that leaves the official opposition leader – then Dutton, now Sussan Ley – facing two choices: fall into line behind the Nats and look weak, or stake out a different position and potentially split the Coalition.”
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/the-nationals-decision-on-net-zero-will-push-sussan-ley-s-leadership-to-the-brink-20251102-p5n74w.html
Even if the coalition were to split now, it would be quite clear that to form a government, it would have to be reconstituted post-election. And the prospect of post-election coalition negotiations would be a gift from God for the ALP, as they could point out to voters that the outcome of such negotiations – including what policies would have to be changed as the price for getting the Nationals to sign on – would be entirely up in the air. “If you don’t know, vote No” would get the mother of all re-runs.
Unless, of course, the Liberals, freed up to contest seats where there is a National Party incumbent, decided to try to knock off enough of them to govern in their own right. In which case the campaign in rural areas would be a shit-fight, quite enough to persuade voters in the cities that the Liberals and Nationals weren’t fit to govern.
The problem for the coalition is that up until recently, the policies on which both parties agreed far outnumbered those on which they had fundamental differences. That’s doesn’t seem to be the case any more.
Looks like we have a Newspoll. Can some get the figures pls
Core support for the Coalition has crashed to a record low 24 per cent, with Sussan Ley’s net approval rating plunging to minus 33 after weeks of Liberal and Nationals infighting, clashes over net-zero emissions by 2050 and leadership rumblings.
An exclusive Newspoll conducted for The Australian shows support for One Nation, minor parties and independents has hit new highs, as Pauline Hanson’s conservative party attracted a record-high primary vote of 15 per cent.
Combined support for the Coalition and Labor at 60 per cent is now at its lowest level since Newspoll first counted primary votes in November 1985.
As Coalition MPs gather in Canberra ahead of a crucial second-last parliamentary sitting week of the year, the Opposition Leader is facing a tough period before the Christmas break as she seeks to broker a deal to water down the Liberal Party’s net-zero commitment, finalise energy policy pillars and unite the divided conservative parties.
The poll of 1265 voters, which was in the field between Monday and Thursday last week, revealed only 25 per cent of Australians are satisfied with Ms Ley’s performance compared with 58 per cent dissatisfied and 17 per cent uncommitted. Her minus 33 per cent net approval rating is worse than Peter Dutton’s poorest result, which was the minus 24 recorded on the eve of the election.
Senior Liberal sources told The Australian that Ms Ley would now accelerate policy positions ahead of the final parliamentary sitting week between November 24-27 and is prepared to split from the Nationals after the junior Coalition party on Sunday announced it was abandoning support for net zero.
Despite backroom discussions about leadership, Ms Ley’s supporters say her detractors remain divided, with no obvious challenger in the wings and no “war room” established. While Ms Ley’s preference is to not split from the Nationals after their near-divorce following the disastrous election, senior Liberal figures believe they must act decisively in no longer allowing the “tail to wag the dog”.
They are also seeking to calm colleagues on the bleeding of votes to One Nation by suggesting the shift is temporary and unlikely to hold towards the 2028 election.
After returning to The Lodge on Sunday following ASEAN and APEC meetings in Asia last week, Anthony Albanese’s end-of-year priorities are focused on nailing down Labor’s overhaul of environmental laws, rolling-out the social media ban for children under 16 and bulk-billing changes.
Seizing on divisions in the Coalition, the Prime Minister will ramp up pressure on the Liberals and Nationals to back Labor’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act changes, which would streamline approvals and help the government turbocharge its Future Made in Australia, clean energy and housing agendas.
Voters turning away from the Liberals and Nationals have landed with One Nation, minor parties and independents rather than Labor or the Greens, whose primary votes fell by one point to 36 and 11 per cent respectively.
One Nation’s primary vote, which has jumped from 11 to 15 per cent since last month’s Newspoll, eclipses its previous high of 13 per cent in June 1998. One Nation won 6.4 per cent of the vote at the May 3 election. Mr Albanese for the first time since the election also copped a negative report card, with 46 per cent of voters satisfied and 51 per cent of voters dissatisfied with his performance, which is his highest dissatisfaction rating since polling day. The Labor leader holds a commanding 54 to 27 per cent lead over Ms Ley as to who voters believe is the better Prime Minister. The ALP retains a clear 57 to 43 per cent margin on two-party-preferred vote.”
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/newspoll-coalition-hits-historic-low-of-24pc-amid-sussan-leys-struggles/news-story/739877883ee405aeab0fc34c2d7b5218?amp
Gosh 24%.
It’s the end of her.
Thanks Upnorth
I’m sure the LNP can only go up from here.
And so what is the top story in the 9Fax media?
The Liberals are likely to dump Net Zero by 2050 as well. 🙄
The electorate sent them a message in May but they only seem to be listening to their donors, SAD and their Boomer membership.
And I don’t think they have the persuasion power to turn the electorate around to their anti diluvian point of view.
Minus 33 on net/sat.
I think she was minus 19, four weeks ago.
Haemorrhaging support.
The Opposition Leader’s net approval rating, which has fallen from minus 7 in July to minus 33 last week, is closing in on the records of unpopular opposition leaders including Bill Shorten (minus 38 in 2015), Simon Crean (minus 39 in 2003), Alexander Downer (minus 49 in 1994), Kim Beazley (minus 33 in 2006), Andrew Peacock (minus 44 in 1990) and John Howard (minus 34 in 1988 during his first stint as Liberal leader).
Under Ms Ley’s leadership, the Coalition primary vote has plummeted since Mr Dutton achieved 31.8 per cent at the election. In five post-election Newspolls, the Coalition primary vote fell to a historic low of 29 per cent in July before falling further to 27 per cent in September.
The Coalition primary vote of 24 per cent is dramatically lower than results recorded during the tumultuous 1980s and early 90s period for the Liberals and Nationals when Bob Hawke and Paul Keating won five consecutive elections. The lowest primary votes recorded during that period were 38 per cent in September 1994 and 39 per cent in June 1987, March 1990 and December 1992.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/newspoll-coalition-hits-historic-low-of-24pc-amid-sussan-leys-struggles/news-story/739877883ee405aeab0fc34c2d7b5218?amp
Luigi Smith says:
Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:13 pm
I’m sure the LNP can only go up from here.
====
Nup.
She’s heading into Brendan Nelson Territory.
Terminal