Post-budget polling part two (open thread)

Further indications that the reaction to the budget has cost Labor a point or two on the primary vote.

Two further additions to the post-election budget polling pile (perhaps shortly to be joined by Essential Research). The fortnightly Sky News Pulse poll by YouGov finds Labor down two points to 28%, the Coalition up two to 23%, One Nation up one to 25% and the Greens down one to 13%. Labor has two-party leads of 52-48 against the Coalition and 53-47 against One Nation, which are in from 54-46 and 57-43 last time (the latter seemingly being an aberration, the previous result having been 54-46).

Anthony Albanese’s leads as preferred prime minister are in from 45-36 to 41-38 against Angus Taylor and from 54-35 to 50-38 against Pauline Hanson. Approval and disapproval ratings are not yet available, but we are told Anthony Albanese has gone from a net minus 14 to minus 19 (UPDATE: Albanese is down two on approval to 37% and up two on disapproval to 56%; Angus Taylor is down two to 36% and steady on 42%). The poll finds 9% expecting the budget will leave them better off and 44% worse off, with 47% for about the same. Thirty-one per cent agreed the negative gearing and capital gains tax changes would help first homebuyers, with 38% disagreeing and 31% unsure. The poll was conducted last Tuesday to Monday, from a sample of around 1500 (UPDATE: 1504, to be precise). I will have further detail later today.

The weekly Roy Morgan poll has Labor down a point to 29.5%, the Coalition down one to 24%, One Nation up two-and-a-half to 24.5% and the Greens steady on 11.5%. Labor leads 54-46 on respondent-allocated preferences, out from 53.5-46.5, and 52.5-47.5 on previous election preference flows, in from 53.5-46.5. The poll was conducted last Monday to Sunday from a sample of 1668.

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.

1,411 thoughts on “Post-budget polling part two (open thread)”

Comments Page 29 of 29
1 28 29
  1. nath says:
    Saturday, May 23, 2026 at 7:40 pm
    Taylormadesays:
    Saturday, May 23, 2026 at 7:16 pm
    Gsays:
    Saturday, May 23, 2026 at 7:00 pm
    VIC legislators gotta get a shuffle on with their political funding arrangements and maybe their group voting ticket arrangements……..
    What’s the best theories on why the Labor government have consistently failed to do something about this?

    Mine is that they would prefer to deal with people who are pragmatic enough to pay someone to get them into Parliament.

    The minor party candidates who benefit from the existing system hold the balance of power in the Legislative Council.
    My guess is that it’s being left to the last minute to avoid retribution on other legislation.

  2. Andrew_Earlwoodsays:
    Saturday, May 23, 2026 at 10:21 pm

    So, in sum I propose that by 20203 there be a $885 pa tax cut for lower-middle income folk, plus a reduction of the top marginal rate to 40%.

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
    Totally disagree with this just as it is.

    From your earlier figures totalling $10.8 – $13.6 Billion, cutting the top rate costs $3 – $5 Billion – say, 30-35% of the total. To go to the top 5% of earners, who are already getting a tax cut from your changes to lower brackets. Counting those cuts at lower levels, it would appear that nearly 40% of these cuts would go to the top 5% of earners. This seems like poor policy from a progressive perspective, and poor politics from a Labor perspective, essentially contradicting the rationale for their (generally very good) alterations to the “Stage 3” cuts.

    How will this be offset? Getting some hard numbers on the rather hand-wavy ideas in your first post seems to be more useful exercise than simply spitballing a random number for the top rate. I don’t think those measures would cover the ~$12 Billion you’ve just dropped.

    I’ve never understood the obsession with reducing personal income tax rates, considering rates far higher in the past didn’t crash the economy. While I’m right on board with ideas to transfer tax imposts away from earnings and towards wealth (which your posts don’t address), paring back PAYG rates without finding other sources of revenue (and closing loopholes and evasion) simply boosts the argument for that most regressive of tax measures – broadening GST and/or increasing the rate. This would consume all the benefit lower rates have for working stiffs, while leaving more money in the pockets of the rich.

    I find this a rather surprising take for someone who I thought was pro-Labor. It’s probably reasonable policy and politics for the Liberals, though, if that’s the intent.

  3. Asha:

    So, the Greens got my 1 vote and Christ only knows where those preferences eventually went.

    *after a quick wiki-dive*

    Looks like your vote ended up with Mark Furner, possibly the last Labor #3 to ever win a senate seat in Qld. He’s still in the game (now state MP for Ferny Grove), the Green who didn’t win is now leading the party (Larissa Waters), and Andrew Bartlett was with the Democrats to the bitter end and also popped up as a temporary senator for the Greens. Even the pointless #6 spot for the Lib/Nats got into parliament later on and is still there, although maybe not for much longer. Meanwhile, something called Pauline’s UAP got 4% and didn’t get in. I wonder what happened to her?

  4. “Looks like your vote ended up with Mark Furner, possibly the last Labor #3 to ever win a senate seat in Qld. He’s still in the game (now state MP for Ferny Grove), the Green who didn’t win is now leading the party (Larissa Waters), and Andrew Bartlett”

    @Bird of paradox

    I remember vaguely hearing some complain about Mark Furner win over Larissa Waters was due inadequacy of the senate voting system. I don’t know all the nuts and bolts of it though but I presume there referring to backroom preferences deals. Furner did benift by Labor’s improved vote in Queensland from Kevin07 and also the Democrats demise which the Greens hadn’t completely filled the void of the Democrats as that third force by 2007.

    That was the first and likely last time Labor will win 3 senate seats in Queensland for sometime. It should be noted though federal Labor in WA won 1 senate seat in 2013, but 3 senate seats in 2022. And federal Labor in SA won 1 senate seat in 2013, but won three senate seats last election, so never say never.

  5. @Pi:

    “Hilarious. You blame the ALP, because decades ago, you were too lazy to vote below the line.”

    Incorrect. Mabwm blames the ALP because ALP HQ was too clever by half – as it often is – and chased RWNJ votes over actually helping its own cause – as it often does. And let’s face the reality: Getting Steven Fielding elected to the Senate was far from the only time the ALP has shot itself in the foot to avoid being “too leftie” for some nebulous “middle of the road” Australian’s liking.

    It’s something of a recurring theme: For a supposedly “socialist” Party, the ALP is very quick to crack down on any leftward drift in its policies/candidates, and very quick to embrace rightward drift.

Comments Page 29 of 29
1 28 29

Leave a Reply

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