Newspoll now has Abbott ahead of Shorten 41-37 as better PM. Michelle Grattan says that back in February Shorten had an 18 point lead.
In terms of performance approval Abbott has also edged ahead for the first time in 14 months, though both are in clear negative territory. Abbott is on -15 to Shorten’s -18.
By contrast when Galaxy asked Queensland voters “Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way Annastacia Palaszczuk is doing her job as Premier?” 59% were satisfied and 27% dissatisfied, giving her a net performance approval rating of +32.
Labor is now ahead in Queensland 52-48 TPP. More here at the ABC. The disgraceful partisanship of the Courier Mail continued. They managed to fashion a negative headline out of the story. 52-48 seems pretty good to me.
At the national level Morgan declared the ‘Budget bounce’ over as there poll moved Labor up two points to 53-47 TPP. Newspoll shifted from 53-47 to 52-48. That makes 24 consecutive Newspolls with a Labor lead, but courtesy of the Greens being stronger than they were at the election.
Essential has the parties steady on a 52-48 Labor lead.
The Oz was suggesting that overall the first budget damage to Abbott is now almost repaired. Be that as it may, the party seems to be happy with where they are. Some have suggested that the Cabinet leaks on the citizenship matter have leadership implications, but no-one in the ranks seems to be stirring the leadership pot. Stripping citizenship and same-sex marriage are occupying the political mind.
11 thoughts on “Poll stuff: Abbott edges ahead of Shorten”
My guess is that the leak came from Abbott himself as a way of undermining Turnbull (and Bishop) with the right wing of the party. Not sure what McFarlane was trying to do verifying that the leak was accurate after Abbott said that the leak wasn’t accurate.
Shorten is not looking brilliant at the moment. Labor’s moves on both gay marriage and small business came across as being more about smart alec tactics than actions of substance. Not helped by getting little media attention for the policy things Labor has brought out.
John, I think you could be on the money about Abbott.
Bishop and Turnbull were also pissed that the paper hadn’t been circulated beforehand. Laura Tingle told Phillip Adams that at the end of the meeting Turnbull said “I suppose we’ll see it in the Tele tomorrow!” (the meeting started at 7pm). And there it was the next morning on p.5.
That almost certainly came from Abbott’s office.
Yep: Abbott got a result that he would have liked. A petition from the party room urging him to go hard with his crazy citizenship scheme and, by implication, support against some of his potential challengers
The Courier Mail is privately owned so there is no reason why it should be bi-partisan. Obvious partisanship may in fact be preferable to false bi-partisanship, for reasons that should be obvious.
Or false non-bi-partisanship that the ABC oozes ?
I think the word you’re searching for is non-partisan.
The ABC being somewhat left counterbalances the Murdoch Empire being on the right. I’d happily see Murdoch’s media assets being confiscated on character grounds (phone tapping etc..) but that ain’t gonna happen any time soon.
The bias in the Courier Mail is very clumsy and transparent and is not at all consistent. Denis Atkins, their national correspondent, is a journalist with integrity, and so are many of their opinion writers.
My wife says we shouldn’t be buying it. I need it to check the funeral notices. It also has a neat weather section and keeps me up to date on rugby league.
Good media gives space to credible commentators with a wide range of opinions.
It also gives space to news reports that are not just selected to support a particular line.
Then there are the headlines that don’t reflect what is said in the report/ article. Once upon a time time management people used too say you can save time by just reading the headlines. These days saving time that way would be a route to being grossly misinformed about the world.
Former Imigration Minister Amanda Vanstonegot stuck into Tony Abbott, his citizenship policy and the way he handled it. As usual Amanda was pretty blunt about both the policy and the way Abbott dumped it on cabinet.
In terms of the policy she said:
Shorten should be rejecting the proposal on a number of grounds including Amanda’s argument.
He should also be attacking the proposal on unfairness grounds. What could be more [unfair] than a new form of punishment that can only be applied to some Australians but not others?
It is not enough to waste time arguing about who can and can’t be punished using this law.
John thanks. I’ve edited the comment to make it how I think you intended it. Can you check it please?
I also posted it on the citizenship thread.
Comments are closed.