ACNielsen: 54-46

As foreshadowed earlier this evening by a cunning stuntman in comments, ACNielsen shows Labor’s two-party lead narrowing to 54-46 from 56-44 earlier in the month. Primary vote figures suggest rounding accounts for part of the 2 per cent shift – the Coalition is up from 40 per cent to 42 per cent, but Labor also is up from 47 per cent to a formidable 48 per cent. Here’s a table of ACNielsen’s recent results. In typing the results over the template from my earlier Galaxy table, I was struck by how similar the two series have been.

TWO-PARTY PRIMARY
ALP LNP ALP LNP
Oct 19
 54 46 48 42
Oct 6
 56 44 47 40
Sep 8
 57 43 49 39
Aug 11
 55 45 46 41
Jul 14
 58 42 49 39
Jun 16
 57 43 48 39
May 19
 58 42 48 39
April 21
 58 42 50 37

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.

832 comments on “ACNielsen: 54-46”

Comments Page 11 of 17
1 … 10 11 12 … 17

  1. Stephen Kaye
    LP health:
    1 hospital
    750 hospitals
    decent sized hospitals

    Can it get any worse? If/when the election is lost Tony Abbot will be burdened with a fair chunk of the blame – he’s bloody hopeless.

    LP education: again, after 11 years how can any deviation from the status quo be credible?

  2. Just a suggestion.

    This is important stuff, so can we lefties just discuss it amongst ourselves for a little while and ignore the spoiling attempts of the other side. We can talk to them again later.

  3. Once again, allow me to remind people of the top four issues of importance as rated by voters in the Newspoll of just a couple of days ago.
    1. Health/Medicare.
    2. Water planning
    3. Education
    4. The environment.
    Rudd has very neatly come up with a tax plan that compares well to the coalition’s yet has a greater emphasis on health and education. On the issue of the timing – i don’t see any problem with this at all. Plenty of time to sink in before the debate and there is little to suggest that this policy is anything other than carefully crafted. Rudd’s people are handling the news cycle masterfully at this point and seem to be acutely aware of the campaign poll cycle also – very smooth stuff.

  4. The education stuff is in there just to provide a nice segue away from the tax area into the real Labor stengths…

    They also pointed out that “becuase our tax cuts are in areas of investment they are less inflationary”.

    That argument is true – not sure it completely applies to education tax breaks but it shows that someone with a bit of economic clout is asvising them this time…..

  5. Rudd was knowledgable,passionate and bang on message – its was an education story, a nation building story as well as a tax story. Will dominate Saturday’s media and Sundays columns. Will go down well with the core ALP supporters – and parents.
    Will make no difference to the polls – they come and go.It will give him something to say on Sunday night about nation building. Its space he owns.

  6. Glen at 454 costello is an economic fraud there will be little he has to say.
    well done team, we’ll see your low tax threshold refund and we’ll raise you education rebate and health.
    New leadership vs Go for bust.

    Oh and i’ll have a didjaridoo (instead of baseball bat). It will be quite apt and those things are heavy.

  7. J-D at 446

    In the late 80s/early 90s I went to uni with someone who worked for one of these companies. The Libs paid for some polling of one of their initiatives – it might have been “Incentivation” or “Its time for plain thinking” or something. He said he didn’t like the policy, and so he was stuffing up the polling to make the Libs drop it. ie. when the odd person said they liked it, he would say the person responded that they didn’t like it. Obviously he couldn’t do that with everyone, but if enough ppl had heard of the policy, he could skew the results somewhat…

    I’m sure the polling companies are careful these days – I suspect employees who give statistically unlikely results are closely scrutinised. I would imagine (but don’t know) that they also record telephone interviews, which would make that sort of abuse much less likely.

  8. Why is the policy a failure?

    The selfish middle class is the key to JWH success.

    “Deferring” tax cuts for those earning over $180,000 will just go down like a lead balloon to these people.
    Similarly the education tax refund or whatever goes to FTB Part A only.

    Unfortunately those earning over $100,000 in Australia (as a couple) dont see themselves as wealthy. They see themselves as needy. The targetting which excludes those people is just dumb.

    People can see and smell the tax cuts. Labor always goes for the half-baked measure. Either you are redistributive or not. Labor has tried to have an each way bet – we are redistributive but only for those earning $180K per year. We want to help families but only certain kinds of families and only with micky mouse rebates. Its all shades of Beazley rejecting the 2005 tax cut round.

  9. Baz, I think you’re putting too much store in it being ‘ripped apart’. Unlike last election when treasury did the dirty on Latham’s tax plan, Labor have appointed a pannel of independant ‘expert’ auditors who, no doubt, have made it water tight. Releasing it now gives it more media exposure over the weekend and only exposes it to 2 days of scrutiny. Releasing it on Sunday would mean that it would have got drowned out by the debate.

  11. Optimist
    In terms of managing the news cycle – I totally agree.
    The ALP has been working on buttoning each week for some time now, to the extent that some on the right were complaining that it was directly targeting weekend polling. The suggestion was that people poll a little to the left over the weekend, but a little to the right during the week. Maybe that’s so; maybe that’s why the Liberal policy was launched on a Monday to hit the midweek polls?
    What day of the week do we vote on again?
    I hope someone’s planning it, because from the outside – it looks slick.

  12. From the Australian:

    The cost will be $31 billion initially. The cost of the “goal” of three rates is not known and would come in after the next term. Mr Swan said Labor would take advice and ”will only do it if it is affordable”.

    Expect the government to go to town on this.

  14. AND of course Labor will have other policies releasea during the campaign -this tax policy is simply to draw a significant difference between Liberal party philosophy [big business] and the Labor party [people].

  15. ESJ, if you think Howard’s ‘selfish middle class’ earns anywhere near 180k (per person, btw, thats how the tax scale operates), you’re a bit out of touch mate.

  16. The Ruddster kicks *rse again!
    Howard has been trying to copy Rudd’s agenda all year.
    Climate Change
    Education Revolution
    Health funding
    States reform
    Broadband
    etc
    Howard is the real ME TOO.
    Out of ideas, wrong era, wrong generation, no future.
    All that is left is poisonous negative bile instead of a positive vision for the future.
    Try and match this kick *rse tax policy.
    Leaves Libs and co for dead…

  17. Ed
    It sounds like you’re disappointed you’re not fighting an ideologue this time around.
    Your “Half baked” might well translate to “middle of the road”?

  20. Ashley at 512 – I agree the Gove will talk about that – but they said similar things in their announcement…. So it shouldn’t get too much traction.

  22. What do you people think “aspirational” means?

    There are an awful lot of tradespeople who used to vote Labor who earn that sort of income (180K). They are some of the types of people Labor needs to win. In Lindsay for example a lot of those people like the idea of having moolah.

    The problem is because your average Labor MP earns about 100K they think that is too much money.

    Whether you like it or not they are the sort of people Labor needs to win over.

  23. ESJ: ‘The selfish middle class is the key to JWH success.

    “Deferring” tax cuts for those earning over $180,000 will just go down like a lead balloon to these people.’

    If you are earning over $180,000 you are NOT middle class. You are a tiny minority of the population.

    Honestly what planet do you live on?!

  24. Finally, something of substance from Labor!
    Yes, I’m sure Costello and Shanahan will try to tear it apart, but so what? As long as there are no holes, Rudd is on a winner.

  25. 471
    thats a pitiful effort at analysis even by your normal standards.

    steven kaye-So Team Rodents cunning plan was to launch their tax policy on day 1 in order to flush out the ALP’s policy early in the campaign so they can spend the rest of the campaign picking it apart- Yeah ok

    And- theres still more big $$$ speding to come from the Tories that will no doubt consist of more bribes. What a cynical. low, base opinion you guys have about the electorate.

  26. ESJ: ‘What do you people think “aspirational” means?’

    It means seeking to have something you don’t have. If you’re earning over $180,000 a year and are still aspiring, then I’ve another name for you.

    Greedy.

  27. John Hunt is a Coward.

    Never a truer word was spoken.

    Forget Kevin07 t-shirts, this the slogan that should be appearing on the t-shirts of all ALP supporters.

  28. “People earning over $180 000” are middle class: LMFAO
    The Liberals on this board never cease to amaze me with the inanity of their commentary

  29. Rudd’s inclusion of the elective surgery proposal AND the education fund in the tax policy announcement was a free kick for Labor.

    He gets to announce these policies in addition to the tax breaks for lower and middle class earners while still bringing it in under the LNP costs. this allows him much more money to devote to the other aspects of his health and education policies that are yet to be announced.

    You can now expect more money for:

    Aged care and mental health care funding policies to get old and mentally ill people out of hospitals;
    Childcare policy of some description (including it in the education system or tax deductability?);
    Paid maternity leave for all;
    Higher education policy (free or massive subsidy for those people studying courses considered to be in the national interest – as decided by his higher education council); and
    massive climate change policy.

    Anything else I’ve missed?

  30. Rudd was very impressive with his delivery.

    confident, concise, serious, humorous.

    If he takes this demeanour with him on Sunday night and beyond then the annihilation will be complete.

  31. “There are an awful lot of tradespeople who used to vote Labor who earn that sort of income (180K).”

    No there aren’t. There aren’t an awful lot of any people earning that much. Statistically if there is only 2.9 billion being cut from here, given that we’d be talking about large amounts of money per person, there can’t be.

  32. It’s important to realize that if you’re earning over $180k, you still get the tax cuts on your pay below that level. The only difference here is that you still pay the existing rate on the marginal earnings above $180k.

    So everyone still gets immediate tax cuts. It’s just that the cut for those earning over $180k is slighter smaller under ALP’s plan than the Coalitions’, with the savings going to fund the education refunds for anyone with kids who receives FTB A.

  33. #520
    Yes, Swan mentioned that the Government had ALSO not produced such costings. So I think that they will gain little traction. If any coalition staffers are reading this, I suggest to them that they are very careful in how they attack this policy. If they try to engineer a “black hole” of funding that isn’t real, they add to the perception of playing dirty to win. I think Rudd is onto a winner with this one. He didn’t rule out tax breaks for people earning over $180k (like himself), but deferred them toll the next budget cycle.

  34. The Health stuff was smart, Rudd hinted it was part of a larger package. But it re-enforces spending the surplus on Health not Tax Cuts – which people will like.

    Still leaves Labor with a few hundred million up the sleeve as well.

  35. There’s something painfully desperate in the tory posts here. Rudds basically done what your little man has done you gooses -with a couple of gestures toward the feel good service stuff. Are you upset that people on mega incomes miss out..(having had a funding bonanza over the last couple of years) The incentive argument at the top end of the scale is laughable….study after study has shown that people on those incomes a more inclined to work less if given a tax break than work more – they’re already working long hours. Its only on the bottom end that the incentive to work applies.

  36. I wish we had ignore buttons on this blog we could use from time to time to filter out the noise from the dicussion.

    I’m still polishing my MSM baseball bat, waiting to see if they give Labor’s tax policy the same treatment as the LNP’s.

  37. ESJ to say that an “awful lot” of tradespeople earn 180K per year is bulldust. The real “selfish middle-class” as you put it earn in the $70K-$120K region.

    Howard has been effectively wedged here because people will see that Rudd is committing funds to other worthwhile education and health expenditure. It looks more like a plan and less like a bribe, which is all the liberal policy is.

  39. ESJ: There are an awful lot of tradespeople who used to vote Labor who earn that sort of income (180K). They are some of the types of people Labor needs to win.

    You’re quite wrong there. Only 2% of the population earns over 180k. “Winning over” (or indeed losing) an additional 10% of these 2% would have negligible effect on the election outcome.

  40. 525 –

    “steven kaye-So Team Rodents cunning plan was to launch their tax policy on day 1 in order to flush out the ALP’s policy early in the campaign so they can spend the rest of the campaign picking it apart- Yeah ok”

    Worked a treat, didn’t it? Face it, the Government well and truly dominated week one.

  44. There are an awful lot of tradespeople who used to vote Labor who earn that sort of income (180K).

    For low values of “awful lot”.

    Fewer than 3% of households in Australia have a household income of this level.

  45. Re 439

    “Glen Says:
    October 19th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
    What the hell does a tax policy have to do with reducing elective surgery waiting times or is this the unholy mutation of fiscal conservatism and socialism…”

    Uh DUH …. if you listened to it, you heard his voice explaining it. Obviously, you didn’t listen. Not that I am surprised. I didn’t listen to Howards either. But you ought not to criticize something when you chose out of your own free will (???) not to listen to it. The explanation was there, you just didn’t hear it. Go and listen to a podcast for your answer ……

  46. God, the labor votes gonna collapse when that critical 2% desert it. And to think of all those poor disappointed aspirational fellows…ESJ you’re a genius

  48. Martin B Says:
    October 19th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
    “There are an awful lot of tradespeople who used to vote Labor who earn that sort of income (180K).

    For low values of “awful lot”.

    Fewer than 3% of households in Australia have a household income of this level.”

    How touchingly naive you are Martin B. 3% of households in Australia have a DECLARED income of this level.

  49. 180K…quite apart from the fact that if you’re earning in those regions as a tradesperson and paying tax on it, well, you need a lesson on tax anyway.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 11 of 17
1 … 10 11 12 … 17