Q. Do you approve or disapprove of the job Julia Gillard is doing as Prime Minister?

Julia Gillard’s approval rating has changed little since last month. 32% (no change) approve of the job Julia Gillard is doing as Prime Minister and 58% (up 2%) disapprove – a change in net rating from -24 to -26 over the last 5 weeks.

73% of Labor voters approve (down 1%) and 19% disapprove (up 3%).

By gender – men 32% approve/60% disapprove, women 33% approve/57% disapprove.

Q. Who do you think would make the better Prime Minister out of Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott?

37% (no change) believe Julia Gillard would make the better Prime Minister and 38% (up 1%) prefer Tony Abbott.

Men prefer Tony Abbott 40%/36% and women prefer Julia Gillard 37%/35%.

Q. Recently US government figures have indicated they want Julian Assange to be prosecuted. If he is charged by the US, what do you think the Australian Government should do?

34% think that if Julian Assange is charged by the US, the Australian Government should call for the US to observe due process and offer consular support and 24% think the Government should offer him protection from extradition and prosecution. Only 9% think the Government should support US attempts to prosecute him and 13% think they should do nothing.

Support for offering Assange protection was highest among older respondents – 31% of respondents aged 55+ compared to 22% of those aged under 35.

If you offer people two options to choose from–vote for a lite version of political ideology or the real thing–most people will vote for the real thing. It’s an emotional reaction–not entirely rationale. And, therein, my friends, lies a big problem faced by Labor.

I thought about Labor’s problem this morning after reading a fine column by Ross Gittins, entitled, “Prejudices rule when judging Labor”. I think Gittins misses, or under-emphasizes, two very important points. But, let’s start with what he gets right:

The conundrum is why so many people could be so dissatisfied when almost all the objective indicators show us travelling well: the economy growing at about its trend rate, low unemployment, low inflation, rising real wages, low government debt – even a low current account deficit.

That is correct. We got it good here (see: US unemployment above 8 percent, for example). Hang on to that thought for a moment…

And:

Similarly, only the one-eyed could believe an Abbott government would have much better policies. It’s likely to be less populist in government than it is opposition but, even so, Tony Abbott is no economic reformer.

Yup. The Empty Suit, leader of the Coalition, is vapid, entirely void of anything to say that is either true, new or useful about the future.

It gets even more bizarre. The Empty Suit, and his shills in business, are so craven, they resort to the Big Lie, as Gittins observes:

So, for instance, a favourite commercial tactic at present is to search for, and give false prominence to, all stories that portray our almost-dead union movement as a threatening monster about to engulf big business.

Boosting productivity equals making industrial relations law more anti-union. End of story. [emphasis added]

Ah, yes, the Big Labor fear campaign. Again, The Empty Suit is fully engaged with the American Disease–the Big Labor threat figures prominently in the US where Republicans use it at every turn, even though “Big Labor” is, representing 7 percent in the private sector and maybe 11 percent overall, more like “Big Labor”.

The Prime Minister also has a host of other issues, not the least of which is sexism in politics–there is always a higher barrier women have to leap over when it comes to the judgement of the chattering media and know-it-alls (see: Hillary Clinton–after all, though she may have actually believed in it, her vote for the Iraq War was, at least, partially driven by the conventional wisdom that, to run for president, she had to look “strong” i.e., appear to be willing to spill blood like a man…well, that didn’t work out too well but I digress).

But, Gittins sidesteps two really fundamental points. First, remember where we started? That given the choice between ideological “lite” and the real thing people opt for the real thing. So, for example, if you run around harping, stupidly, about the need to have a balanced budget, which Labor is doing, you sound just like The Empty Suit.

For the love of God, there is no friggin’ debt crisis or even a serious debt problem–as Gittins points out. The end result of sounding like The Empty Suit–government spends too much and needs to cut back–is that (a) it leads to bad policy and people losing their jobs because of an obsession with cutting public sector jobs and (b) voters actually start believing the nonsense.

And voters are inclined, then, to vote for the real thing–because The Empty Suit, and his chorus of ideological midgets, actually hate government.

Second, and to the bigger point–and a bit wonky. People vote not based on reason, but emotion.  It is a huge–fatal–mistake to hang on to polls that say Labor’s actual policies are supported. That is a path to defeat.

May I suggest people read “The Political Brain” by Drew Westen. Here is the upshot:

In politics, when reason and emotion collide, emotion invariably wins. Elections are decided in the marketplace of emotions, a marketplace filled with values, images, analogies, moral sentiments, and moving oratory, in which logic plays only a supporting role. Westen shows, through a whistle-stop journey through the evolution of the passionate brain and a bravura tour through fifty years of American presidential and national elections, why campaigns succeed and fail. The evidence is overwhelming that three things determine how people vote, in this order: their feelings toward the parties and their principles, their feelings toward the candidates, and, if they haven’t decided by then, their feelings toward the candidates’ policy positions.

The political types, and the wonky types, might not like that. But, if you ignore what people emotionally feel, you are dead politically. And, it seems like this is what Labor is banking on to save its bacon–once people focus on how great are policies are (see: carbon pricing), all will be good.

Nope.

— Jonathan Tasini

Twitter @jonathantasini

Q. Who do you trust most to deal effectively with global economic problems – Julia Gillard and the Labor Party or Tony Abbott and the Liberal Party?

42% would trust Tony Abbott and the Liberal Party more to deal effectively with global economic problems and 32% would trust Julia Gillard and the Labor Party more.

Those more likely to trust Tony Abbott and the Liberal Party were aged 55+ (51%), full-time workers (46%) and income $1,600+ pw (48%).

Respondents earning less than $1,000 pw were more likely to trust Julia Gillard and the Labor Party  (39%) than Tony Abbott and the Liberal Party (35%).

Of those who had heard or read a lot about the crisis in Europe, 46% would trust Tony Abbott and the Liberal Party more to deal effectively with global economic problems and 41% would trust Julia Gillard and the Labor Party more.

Peter Lewis spells out how Aussies have little trust in anyone or anything — except maybe the ABC.

Trust is hot property in politics. Everyone wants to claim it while undermining their opponent’s. Broken promises are played hard in the hope of achieving political bingo: irreparable reputational damage.

Labor’s flat-lining polls are widely attributed to Julia Gillard’s ‘trust issues’. Mind you, Tony Abbott isn’t considered to be excelling in the trustworthy stakes either. They barely muster a pass mark between them.

But something even more insidious is beginning to occur, as this week’s Essential Report suggests. Loss of trust is contagious. We’re not just cynical about politicians; we are also losing faith in the institutions that underpin public life.

Read the full article on The Drum.

Q. How much trust do you have that the following people or organisations can be relied on to act in the community’s interest?

There was a substantial lack of trust in all people and organisations tested with the exception of Australian companies – which split 46% a lot/some trust and 47% little/no trust.

For both the Labor Party and the Liberal Party, the current leaders were less trusted than the previous leaders. However, all political leaders were more trusted than mining magnates like Clive Palmer and Gina Rinehart.

Among Labor voters, 58% had a lot/some trust in Julia Gillard and 58% had a lot/some trust in Kevin Rudd. Among Liberal/National voters, 58% had a lot/some trust in Tony Abbott and 44% had a lot/some trust in Malcolm Turnbull.

Q. Who do you think would make the better Prime Minister out of Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott?

37% (down 1%) believe Julia Gillard would make the better Prime Minister and 37% (no change) prefer Tony Abbott.

Men prefer Tony Abbott 38%/35% and women prefer Julia Gillard 39%/35%.