Morgan: 55-45

The latest Roy Morgan fortnightly (I think) face-to-face survey of 1772 voters has the two-party vote steady at 55-45, with the Coalition primary vote remaining at 40.5 per cent and Labor down 0.5 per cent to 47 per cent. There are also supplementary figures on strength of voting intention, which at first look like splendid news for the Coalition – their vote is 34 per cent “strong” and 6.5 per cent “soft”, compared with 30 per cent and 17 per cent for Labor. However, I am slightly dubious about the method here, which involved asking respondents if they felt Australia was “heading in the right direction” and marking their Coalition support as “strong” if they said yes. For what it’s worth, the survey records a sharp rise in expectations of a Labor victory.

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.

618 comments on “Morgan: 55-45”

Comments Page 11 of 13
1 10 11 12 13
  1. Cui bono, Richard, not qui bono. It’s Latin not French. But your point is correct. A Liberal Party report can only have been leaked from inside the Liberal Party, and only by forces trying to undermine Howard. The obvious parallel is the way Hawke destabilised Hayden in the lead up to deposing him on the day the election was called.

    The observation that Howard is turning into Latham is shrewd one. It’s the obvious counterpoint to Rudd turning into Howard.

    I have now booth-mapped Blair and La Trobe. Herbert is next.

  2. My stab at tomorrow’s Newspoll: ALP 53-47 …unfortunately… irrespective of whether it’s about rates going up or bumbling Immigration Ministers, if the media focus has been on national security and hard economics, I can’t help feeling that it will only help Lord Sidious and his minions…

  3. Can any average joe seriously name 5 of the ALP’s front bench without naming Rudd Gillard or Garrett i think not…why??? because those people are nobodies and like Rudd Gillard and Garrett have little or no political experience necessary for them to run the country i mean cmon!!!

    How can anybody be so dumb as to make a bloke PM when he’s never had to lead anything in his life except the ALP for a few months i mean is he seriously up to the job yet i think not.

    Rudd will have a hard time when the Coalition brings out a good scare campaign about having the ALP running the entire country i mean people is it really a good idea that in the unlikely event that Howard loses the highest level of political office the Liberal Party will hold is the Mayor of Brisbane…is this really a good idea for a democracy NO!

    Rudd is not experienced enough to run the country and if you guys didnt pick it up that was in the leaked report the Coalition knows Rudd’s weakness and he’ll be hammered in the advertising mercilessly.

  4. With the Andrews malpractice, Nelson “Oil up”, Downer/Abbott/Rudduck everything, I am not sure that comparing the opposition line up is worth anything except another distraction

  5. Cerdic – I commend you on your improvement in presentation and dialogue but I refuse to engage you while you insist on the childish name calling. At least have the decency to address people by there proper names. Most here do that. It adds nothing to your arguments.

  6. The other thing you fail to see is that much of the vote shift is an anti government swing as opposed to a pro Labor swing. Labor’s scare campaign will be far more effective than the governments.

  7. I bet you they could Garry!

    Labor dosent have a scare campaign they just get the States to mouth off towards the Government Rudd is such a pansy that he wont attack Howard because he’s got nothing down below…

  8. The release of the internal polling information is just more Howard trickery. The second most obvious point of the data released is that the electorate weren’t much interested in Costello. Is this code for there can’t be a leadership change to Cossie?

    The first obvious point is that Howard is old, tricky and past it. This is already being fobbed off as old news. Even if the next Newspoll is static or improves marginally, then Howard and the screaming banshees of the GG will be proclaiming him the comeback kid!

    I smell a rat!

  9. Ah yes … Costello the “castratti” of federal politics. Turnbull (From Flushing Meadows?) Brough .. pedalling furiously but not making much headway and Bishop … which would that be Bronnie or Julie.

  10. William, I think you need a new thread every day – I have difficulty opening a thread with more than 500 entries in it.

    Of course the reason this thread is so long is that you are allowing all this childish partisan trolling. It’s your site and you can run it how you like, but unless you stop this, I for one will lose interest in coming here.

  11. Not from this far down Glen and in totally different circumstances. Different issues, different opposing people, different times and different attitudes. What happened in past elections has nothing to do with this situation. Of course if would like to list those things of the past elections which are relevant to this election please do so.

  12. Please don’t go Adam. I just ignore the childish prattlings, just about everyone is doing the same now. Eventually they’ll go away.

    Your input is valuable in any discussion such as this.

  13. Alternatively, William could instal an “ignore” function, as many chat sites have, so that we could just not see persistent trollers (that’s you Cerdic). Is this technically possible?

  14. Would be really good if we could get that. There are only one or two of them here (well, one main one) and no-one is bothering to respond to him anymore anyway, so it’s not like you miss any of the thread.

  15. Why is it that so many posters finish with

    so says …..??? whats up with that?

    Oh and i am wondering whether anybody will vote for the ALP when they dont have a tax policy to take to the election…is this because they intend to increase taxation??? hmmmmmm

  16. Adam – I don’t get this term ‘troll’ you keep using. Is it supposed to be abusive or insulting, or is it supposed to actually mean something? Is it some sort of jargon that is used in the world of blogging that I have not come across before? Please explain.

    So says Cerdic Conan.

  17. In the HUGELY unlikely event that Dudd was to win this election, we would have wall to wall Labor Governments.

    This would give them the opportunity to increase the rate of the GST. Given that Labor is traditionally the party of high taxes (as they believe in taxation as a means of redistributing money from high income earners to low income earners), is there any lefty out there who really believes that Labor wouldn’t jump at such a rare opportunity to increase the GST?

    And how do you feel about that prospect? Do you think it would be good policy and good for our economy?

    So says Cerdic Conan.

  18. Trolling is the posting of comments that have no purpose other than to antagonise other users and start fights. It’s what you, Edward and one or two others (who are probably all the same person anyway) do here. It seems to be a popular passtime among Young Liberals.

  19. Yes me, scare tactics again… will not save the born to rule mob… and by the way what is wrong with the poor getting more money as it is time the rich paid more tax. Unfortunately Labor won’t increase taxes to them as it was party that gave them a decrease in taxation from 60 cents in the dollar to 49 cents. Keep scaring the electorate though Cedric we love being spooked…

  20. OK, I’ve been working on my senate calcuator – Cassandra – you can see the initial result at

    It’s basic at the moment (no config options) but it is a fair and accurate implementation of the system used to count the votes. I hope to add lots of options over the next few weeks.

    I would love to put in the voting tickets from 2004, but the AEC website only seems to have them in PDF format. Does anyone know where to get spreadsheet versions of how-to-vote tickets?


  21. Adam – thanks for the clarification. Is this a term that you coined yourself though, or is it official blogging jargon? It’s just that I’ve never come across it before.

    My comments are however, not intended to antagonise other bloggers or start fights. They are intended to educate, and point out inconvenient truths. If this results in other bloggers becoming antagonised or feeling like fighting, then I suggest they have issues they need to address.

    And by the way, I do not post on this blog by the name of Edward, or any other name. I only post under the name Cerdic Conan.

    That allegation is a bit like me saying that you and all the other left wing bloggers are probably the same person. It’s silly, isn’t it?

    So says Cerdic Conan.

  22. And one more thing Adam – I am not a Young Liberal, never have been, and never will be.

    So says Cerdic Conan.

  23. Marky Marky – the problem with your idea of increasing taxes on higher income earners is that it reduces incentive and starngles business, thus stifling economic growth. It has all been tried before, and this has been the inevitable result. It would be a really retrograde move, akin to taking our industrial relations system back to the dark days of the Hawke Government (remember the Recesssion we had to have?).

    So says Cerdic Conan.

  24. I’m mindful of the length of the threads, but there’s an upside for me – it results in fewer comments, which frankly comes as a relief. Nonetheless, I am now be emerging from a period of relative inactivity on the posting front, so this will be less of a problem as of tonight’s Newspoll result.

    I can feel another fight brewing, so the comment deletion sword has been unsheathed. One boringly partisan comment from CC has been chopped, and there will be more to come if things don’t improve. And don’t bother whingeing about my adjudication. If you don’t like it, you know what you can do.

  25. Dembo, that’s a very clever and useful device. It seems to have a bug in it though. When I enter Labor 42, Liberal 42, Green 10, Dem 3, FF 3, it gives “Elected Labor3” twice.

  26. Glen – “So says Cerdic Conan’ has always been my sign off. Others bloggers have chosen to imitate it from time to time for reasons best known to themselves.

    So says Cerdic Conan.

  27. Cerdic,

    Your dogmatic faith in the invincibility of Howard is looking increasingly isloated and Pythonesque.

    No one of substance or credibility (that rules out your fellow trolls btw) agrees with you.

    The polls don’t agree with you, the betting markets don’t agree with you, all expressions of the community’s political preference, and to make matter’s worse, Howard’s own research agency and his former confidantes don’t agree with you.

    To cast Howard at the moment as a man of steel is laughable. He’s looking more like a crumpled aluminium can by the day.

  28. There has been an argument put that if Labor wins the next election then this opens up the way for a change (read increase) in the GST.

    This is completely false unless-
    1) Labor win a majority in the Senate or
    2) There is a “double dissolution”.

    In fact it is easier for the current Federal Government to change the rate of GST.

    Those, who know little about how our system of Government works, will erroneously argue that what is needed to change the rate of the GST is the agreement of the States.

    This is complete and utter bunkum.

    What is need is the numbers in the House of Representatives (HR) and the Senate, which the current Government has.

    I can here the cries of (false) victory now as they yell “but you need the States to agree”.

    Again this is rubbish.

    It is true that there is a clause in the GST legislation that says this but like any piece of legislation all it need is a simple amendment to pass through the HR and the Senate and as the current Government has these numbers in both Houses of Parliament they are in a prime position to change the rate of the GST.

    (What this really means is that this clause is nothing but window dressing and a piece of flimflam).

    Now I think most would agree that the chances of the Labor party getting control of the Senate is very slim indeed particularly when some here are arguing that they wont even win the HR. Now I have not done the numbers but I would guess that Labor would have to take more that 3 Senate seats in each state to be anywhere near controlling the Senate

    I think that most would agree this (along with the argument) is fanciful indeed.

    However, if there is a double dissolution surly the voters will be able to pass judgement on such an issue and hopefully no one is arguing that the Parliament ignore the voters …… or are they?

  29. Glen said: “and Gillard who has disappeared of the face of the map because she is sooooo much of a weakness to the ALP why else have they been hiding her! ”

    They’ve been hiding her because her screechy, ugly belligerence is an utter turn-off. That’s been coming through in the Government’s own polling (not that they need it to tell them she’s a liability for Labor) and they’re planning to target her during the election campaign. When it comes down to it, I don’t think Australians will want this viper just a heartbeat away from the Prime Ministership.

    Of course, this doesn’t mean the rest of Rudd’s aren’t liabilities themselves; on the contrary, they consitute the worst frontbench ever assembled in this country on a federal level, government or shadow. Out of them all, I’d say Lindsay Tanner and Bob McMullan are the only competent figures amongst them.

  30. Steven Kaye
    ” Of course, this doesn’t mean the rest of Rudd’s aren’t liabilities themselves; on the contrary, they consitute the worst frontbench ever assembled in this country on a federal level, government or shadow. Out of them all, I’d say Lindsay Tanner and Bob McMullan are the only competent figures amongst them.”

    Instead of harping on about the opposition “liabilities” how about some constructive criticism on the “strengths” of the government front bench, and more importantly who should be replacing them so as to give the government a “fresh Face”

  31. If Gillard is a liability, what then is John Howard? Or Abbott?

    Every time Howard opens his cake-hole, his stocks head south.

    Abbott is nothing more than a gross embarrassment to humanity.

  32. More wishful thinking from ya Steven. The thing that you should realise, is that Gillard isn’t trying to win over people like you, and her time in the shadow-health portfolio showed that she well and truly had the measure of tony abbot. Abbot is a shadow of himself since then, and if you need any justification for this belief, how come it wasn’t HIM who announced the bail-out of the hospital in Tasmania?

    Abbot is viper. He’s quoted as saying “lying to the ABS wasn’t really that bad”, when being interviewed.

    Howard has a bench full of liabilities. Downer is completely untrustworthy. Nelson is a failure as defense minister. Abbott is a completely out of his depth in Health.

    But the fact that you’re focusing on the ALP’s candidates proves how much they’re dictating the agenda. And that is the death knell for any government, when the opposition is dictating the agenda to an incumbent.

  33. Don’t worry Steven, I think you’ll learn to love a bit of female domination. Just lie back and think of Australia.

  34. Cybercynic, I don’t think any of them should be replaced, but that’s because I don’t believe the media narrative about the Government being stale and out of touch. We’ve got an excellent PM, a brilliant Treasurer and extremely capable people in all the major portfolios. Compared to them, their Opposition counterparts are buffoons.

  35. Remember Cardinal Pell?

    TONY JONES: Tony Abbott on another matter, have you met Archbishop Pell during the election campaign?

    TONY ABBOTT: Not that I can recall.

    TONY JONES: Not that you can recall, because we believe that you’ve had at least one meeting with him quite recently?

    You don’t recall that?

    TONY ABBOTT: Well, when? Where?

    TONY JONES: At the presbytery in Sydney.

    TONY ABBOTT: Ah, actually now that you do mention it, I did met with Cardinal Pell. So what? Why shouldn’t I meet with Cardinal Pell?

    THAT’s the kind of guy who aspires to leadship in this country. He out-and-out lies to the Australian public.

  36. Since so many people want to compare 1996 to 2007 lets compare….


    Keating Factor – Everybody had enough of him (baseball/cricket bats)

    Labor had stuffed the economy – 96billion dollars of debt and unemployment at as high as 10%

    Competent Opposition Leader – Howard Opposition leader 4-5 years and faced an election in 1987



    Howard Factor – has the experience and the record of leadership 11 years in the top job with a proven track record + is hated by only the fringe of society and while not ‘loved’ is almost universally respected.

    Coalition has not stuffed the economy – Unemployment at around 4.2%, interest rates lower than under Keating and no net govt debt.
    Governments dont lose when the economic times are good!

    Incompetent Opposition Leader – Rudd been a leader for a few months, in parliament less than 10 years has never made a tough decision in his life and has no track record.

    Result…..????? anybodies guess but for Rudd to win he needs a landslide a rarity in Australian politics especially with a Government who has done nothing to deserve to lose.

  37. “Result…..????? anybodies guess but for Rudd to win he needs a landslide a rarity in Australian politics especially with a Government who has done nothing to deserve to lose.” Very debatable point.

  38. Steven,

    Every credible poll says you and your mates in the Liberal Party government are up the creek in a barb wire canoe chasing farts with a tennis racquet.

    Deal with the reality.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 11 of 13
1 10 11 12 13