Lateline reports tomorrow’s Newspoll has Labor’s lead widening to 56-44 from 55-45 last fortnight. Similarly, Kevin Rudd is up 1 per cent as preferred leader (to 44 per cent), and John Howard down 1 per cent (to 39 per cent). Thanks as always to the commenters who passed this on. More to follow as news comes to hand.
UPDATE: News reports the primary vote too has switched 1 per cent either way, with Labor up to 48 per cent and the Coalition down to 39 per cent. Interestingly, there was an 8 per cent narrowing on the question of which party was better for handling national security, despite 49 per cent support for the government’s handling of the Haneef case.
UPDATE 2: Report by Dennis Shanahan in The Australian.
UPDATE 3: The Australian’s graphic here.
Watson in 1934 and Bruce in 1955 make it four: to be precise, at least four.
The nexus and its implications were referred to in earlier comments (although not by that name). As I said, the Hawke Government was apparently willing to incur the odium of increasing the cost of Parliament by 35 new Members and Senators in 1984 (and the Chifley Government increased it by 71 new Members and Senators in 1949). The foundations for your doubts may be strong, but I don’t know what precisely they are.
Opps,
Looks like I had a brain explosion in that 3rd last paragraph
“Does this mean that Mr Howard was unfit to be Prime Minister from 68 till today?â€
should read
Does this mean that Mr Howard was unfit to be Prime Minister from his election in 96 till today?
My apologies
Pythonesque report on Peter Dutton in the Oz:
“He refused to answer repeated questions about whether the government was in denial about the possibility of political devastation.”
1993 was considered the unlosable election, but Paul Keating managed to grab the victory from the jaws of defeat. Some media correspondents have suggested that John Hewson was a lot further in front than Kevin Rudd is now and was still defeated. So they suggest, Rudd could easily suffer the same fate.Â
What do the figures tell us?Â
The Coalition did lead the ALP by a big margin when “Fightback” was launched in late Nov. 1991, but that lead was slowly but surely whittled away and in fact Hewson was a fair way behind by the end of 1992. He did recover in the early part of 1993 to lead again, but was unable to sustain it and lost the election.
The ALP in 2007 did not have as large a primary vote lead in the first four months of Rudd’s leadership (Dec 06 – Mar 07) as the Coalition had in the first four months following the launch of fightback (Dec 91 – Mar 92), but the ALP’s two party projected vote was higher than Hewson’s. In the next four months (Apr – Jul), however, the ALP’s primary vote in 2007 was better than the Coalition’s in 1992 and its two party projected vote was significantly better.
The ALP and Kevin Rudd are in a better position than John Hewson’s Coalition was and as a result Paul Keating and the ALP were in a better position in 1992 than John Howard and the Coalition is now.
Primary voting intentions 1993 election polling vs 2007 election polling
Dec 1991 – Mar 1992Â Coalition 49.5Â ALP 37.6Â Â Two party projection 54.7/45.3Â
Dec 2006 – Mar 2007Â Labor 47.3 Coalition 38Â Â Â Two party projection 56.1/43.9
Apr 1992 – Jul 1992Â Coalition 46Â ALP 37.5Â Â Â Two party projection 52.6/47.4
Apr 2007 – Jul 2007Â Labor 48.5Â Coalition 37.6Â Â Two party projection 56.8/43.2
Aug – Sept 1992 Coalition 45.8 ALP 37.8Â Â Two party projection 52.4/47.6
Oct – Dec 1992 Coalition 43.1 ALP 44Â Â Â Two party projection 48.3/51.7
Jan – Mar 1993 Coalition 46.7 ALP 41.6Â Two party projection 51.4/48.6
Election result Coalition 44.3 ALP 44.8Â Â Two party preferred 48.6/51.4
Frankly, the way important public policy is currently being held hostage to the liberal party’s increasingly bizarre wedge stunts, they just dont deserve to be re-elected.
I think in the last few weeks the government’s actually managed to put themselves into the “dangerous, untested” territory usually occupied by opposition. I think many will be asking teh same question as they asked of Latham . eg “Shit, what if these whackos actually got ELECTED!” “Id better move to a lib marginal, or we’re screwed!”
I think, for an incumbent government, its been an extraordinarily hapless performance to look like the amateur outfit in a two-horse race.
I voted for the package that Hewson put forward in that election. It was good policy. I voted to kick Keating out… in spite of the many good things he did for the country, foremost being (in my opinion) the Mabo legislation. I even voted for the GST.
But the demonization of helpless people during the 2001 election was beyond the pale, and there is nothing that this government could do that would change that perception. They turned this nation into a nation of scared little white men, hiding behind their bigotry, and calling it ‘conservatism’. Howard went after the Pauline Hanson supporters, and they’ve been poll-driven by those same Pauline Hanson supporters ever since.
I recognize that Latham was too much for a lot of people, but that clearly is not the case with Rudd. This really is going to be a landslide, and it can’t come too soon.
Comment by Pi deleted. Unpleasant – indeed, McCallumesque – description of the Prime Minister from Hoots excised. Those who accuse me of left-wing bias in my comment moderation can stick that in their pipes and smoke it.
Adam, I thought the Liberal number three was Mathias Corman. I take it he got promoted when Ian Campbell pulled the plug? “I don’t know” is the honest answer to your question. While I have you, do you like the new font size? And can anyone figure why the AAP chose Eric Locke as its go-to guy in this item on the WA Liberal Senate ticket?
There are two simple words that will stop people voting for Labor…
W a y n e S w a n
Plain and simple he and Gillard are Labor’s weakest link…
I have maintained that if the newspoll has Labor out by more than 55-45 then they will win but if it is below 55-45 i believe the Coalition can claw a victory out of defeat…still there is 4 months till election day plenty of time for Krudd to stuff it up…lets not forget he has the same losers running his campaign that did Beazley’s so anything can happen + Rudd is so inexperienced and he’ll suffer for that come polling day…do you all really think that when people have to decide whether to risk an Opposition with Wayne Swan as the alternative Treasurer that people are going to vote Labor i doubt it…
Nice to see Steven Kaye and the rest of the boys from Ozpolitics blog…pollbludger is a much better website….anyhoo just remember how bad it was for us when we lost in 1993 because it can happen to you!
I’ll take your Swan and Gillard, and raise you a Tony Abbott and Wilson Tuckey!
But that’s just it, pi – “Kevin07” is just a glib vote-grabbing exercise and propaganda tool, not a genuine attempt to connect with younger voters. Otherwise they wouldn’t be screening out posts critical of Rudd and his policies. You know, for all his faults, I think Mark Latham was actually genuine about increasing participation in the political process; Rudd just cares about getting elected.
Not sure the Lib intervention is actually smart politics by Howard. The amalgamations are unpopular here in Qld – but only in distinct areas. The Sunshine coast are against it – Noosa in particular which may grab JWH more votes in Wide Bay, but only at the expense of the Nats. Other places include mainly country areas which they were not likely to gain anyway such as Maranoa and Kennedy.
The mainly metro areas outside this, I don’t think will garner a lot of support for any interventions. Rudds support, like Beattie’s is higher in the metro areas.
What is it with posters who deride the likes of Costello and Turnbull as “barristers with briefs”?
It takes real skill, dedication and intellect to succeed as a barrister, and is an honourable profession – most unlike the professional unionists the ALP comprises, who haven’t even been down a coal mine or got their hands dirty.
Steven, I think that ANY attempt that is made to make politics inclusive, especially amongst the generally disaffected voters, is a good thing. How can you make policy if you don’t have a broad-base of constituents? And that includes the millions of people between the ages of 18-24.
What you shouldn’t do, is change the electoral act so that you can disenfranchise these people by restricting their access to the vote. One party is trying to include people in the vote, the other is trying to exlude them.
Pi Tuckey is not a minister last time i checked…
Labor’s front bench is void of talent and alternative leaders who does Labor have i mean serious Gillard and she’s unelectable…
The Howard Government have several…
Costello
Nelson
Turnbull
J. Bishop
Howard is right to keep bashing the States if Rudd doesnt want a fight and wants to have a small target election campaign the Coalition is going to have to beef up against the measly State Governments…
Costello is electable do you say Glen? Liberal party polling (and just about every other poll) suggest otherwise. What, you think people are going to elect Nelson? Turnbull is completely untested in any political arena, and has far less experience than Rudd. Abbott? Are you serious?
In fact, the way it’s looking, there aren’t too many places in Australia (in either state or federal houses) that you can find electable coalition candidates. Perhaps they need new blood?
The liberal/national cupboard is looking pretty bare there mate.
Howard’s intervention in Qld: very predictable! I guess he thinks it’s a way of getting at Rudd by attacking Beattie.
What a federalist this Prime Mininster is becoming: what’s next, the total abolition of the states and the sacking of every state Labor administration?
William, it is a pleasure being moderated by you – McCallumesque indeed!
I will endeavour to avoid refering to our glorious leader in that way again. I’ve heard he is wonderful with small children and animals.
Pi the Nationals are not the same without Ando ill admit that but the Libs do have talent why look at the rising star of Peter Dutton today he’ll make Johnny proud one day!
I have to agree that the ALP front bench is pretty light on when it comes to talent: Rudd, Emerson, Tony Burke and Chris Bowen are the only shining lights for me. Swan is a dud, Gillard is a proven policy failure, Macklin is a lightweight. You can’t blame Rudd for this, he has to make do with what the factions serve up. Bill Shorten and a few others won’t have any trouble becoming ministers or shadow ministers after the next election.
That’s the spirit, Hoots. I hope you’re reading this, Edward St John.
The 1993 comparison is interesting. There are however some differences.
Labor actually needed a swing towards it in order to win. Labor had fewer seats. Keating wasn’t as popular and there was a recession.
Come 2007, Rudd is popular. Howard isn’t unpopular. The economy is in good shape. The Coalition has more seats and can probably survive a 4% swing against it if it plays its cards right.
Bottom line, a win for Howard isn’t out of the question, but it is not probable.
Glen, I agree that in about two or so elections, people like Turnbull and Nelson might be electable. This is the inevitable consequence of a leader like Howard having so much control over the party for such a length of time. All dissent has been quelled, and now the election has become about Howard.
He should have walked. I see a lot of parrallels between Costello and Keating, in spite of the obvious one. Costello (with his walk for reconciliation) proved that he’s his own man, and that he actually has a conscience. It would be a real election about policies now, and could have been a very close contest.
Now, it’s damage control. Howards only tactic is to rely on fear and ignorance (unions, states, terrorists, interest rates, etc etc ad nauseum) and those wedges simply don’t work anymore. It’s 1996 all over again, and for exactly the same reasons.
# Simon Howsonon 07 Aug 2007 at 2:36 pm
Howard is clutching at straws in question time, he has announced a new policy (which you aren’t actually allowed to do in question time) about letting the AEC pay for council amalgamation votes in Queensland.
Simon, if you read between the lines, Gary answers that question.
Gary Bruce on 07 Aug 2007 at 5:04 pm
Will Howard’s intervention into Queensland politics (council amalgamations) have anything effect on the Federal election outcome? Popular move?
I live in sunny QLD. The bulk of the people living in Brisbane City Council area is HUGE-they couldn’t give a toss about it if you ask me.
The only effect Beattie’s insistence on Council Amalgamations will have in my opinion is in provincial-rural areas which are dominated by Liberal/National voters anyway. The Coalition seats within the Brisbane catchment area are GONE.
What it means, without going digging through my research on this question a few weeks ago, is that Labor may not pick up 1-2 seats it might have reasonably expected to have a shot at (I can nominate them later if you want me to go digging again) and it will protect the margins of seats like that (some) thought could go if a big (8%+) swing sweeps across QLD.
I think Howard is clutching at straws if the best he has to offer in Parliament today is to try and drive a wedge between Beattie and people who would normally vote for the Coalition anyway. In suburbia, it is a polarised issue at best, some for it, others against, most not caring.
If, however, Howard was to come up with something to radically and quickly address the WATER issue here in QLD, he would score brownie points in suburbia as much as in the bush. I think Rudd is aware of the significance of the WATER issue up here and is saving a ripper policy in his back pocket for that one- He hasn’t had to use ONE trump card yet.
Howard trying to link the Coucil amalgamation issue to Federal issues is a desparate move that will go nowhere. Transfering the cost from ratepayer to taxpayer achieves nothing. Councillors will still be out of pocket by $1100 and the polls will not have improved any for Howard.
By the way the mask was ripped of the Member for Noosa’s stunt of being prodevelopment but pretending to be green today in Question time in the State parliament. He was left very embarrassed and redfaced.
Evan, I actually like Gillard, I think she will be a future PM….
The polls haven’t moved for the Coalition this year as they moved for the ALP in 92-93. Also of course the ALP traditionally receive the bulk of the preferences from the minors.
Anyone who believes the Coalition is on track to win is deluding him/herself.
The Kevin07 campaign has already paid dividends with young women pictured wearing the shirts in the media.
It is quite reminiscent of the 72 campaign.
The ALP have some devastatingly good ad men and women and there’s heaps of material to work with.
The multi-millions of our money spent by Joe Hockey on the IR campaign have been entirely wasted with the revelations of the young man claiming to be unpaid.
The election probably will be held no later than mid-November which gives John Howard about twelve weeks to make up lost ground.
He is liable to go further backwards in the next week after these latest revelations and if there is a rate increase tomorrow.
That means even more ground to make up.
It’s extremely unlikely he can do it.
I certainly wouldn’t be putting my money on the Coalition to win and not many others are either by the look of it.
It would be like backing a lame horse to win the Melbourne Cup.
A-C said
“Bottom line, a win for Howard isn’t out of the question, but it is not probable.”
I think you are right, A-C.
What concerns me is Howard may be able to cling to power with a completely cynical marginal seat strategy – A stupid hospital decision here, opposing council mergers there, you know the type of thing.
Not just simple pork barrelling, but more like dressing up a pig with lip-gloss until the election.
Glen: Lets compare the competency or the lack thereof of the front benches:
I’ll take your Gillard and Swan, and compare them to ex front benchers Vanstone, Santoro, Ian Campbell, Peter Reith.
And then looking currently at Kevin Andrews, Joe Hockey, Alexander Downer, Christopher Pyne, and Helen Coonan.
I know who I’d prefer any day of the week.
Grooski, Gillard is absolutely dreadful. If she ever leaves politics she can land a role in “Kath and Kim” as Kath’s older sister.
So, Evan, you’re admitting the very structure of the Labor Party rewards incompetence. So why should this mob be in Government?
“…And I have a pretty good track record with picking election results …..”
Ah, but Cerdic, did you pick Kennett losing in 1999? I noticed you used that as an example of how the polls don’t work. Were you right or wrong then?
Actually the polls weren’t all that far out in what they attempted to do. Their 2pp intentions were pretty close. Where they went wrong was in assuming the election would be decided in the marginals. Most of their qualitative polling was in the metro marginals (where most marginals were located). That suggested that Labor would win one, at best two, metro marginal seats. That prediction was spot on. Yet Kennett was not safe.
The only trouble was that they didn’t consider the collapse in coalition support in erstwhile safe rural and regional seats. I’d expect the pollsters to have corrected for that since then.
In fact, if you have a look at some of Possum’s analyses, you’ll see he looks at some of those factors. On his reckoning, it aint looking at all pretty for the coalition in country and regional areas and in otherwise safe Lib metro seats. In fact, at present it is looking like the perfect storm for Labor: the smallest swings (about 4%) are in safe Labor strongholds. The largest swings are occurring in the marginals and the safe coalition seats.
Not looking good at the moment, Cerdic, but keep posting. Glen could do with some cheering up.
Glen, if you honestly think that the benches will decide this election then you have no idea. Abbott, Costello, Downer, Andrews, Hockey, can I stop laughing now?
Grooski said –
“Evan, I actually like Gillard, I think she will be a future PM….”
Count me as a fan of Gillard as well, I like the way she comunicates, she seems to me be genuinely good-humoured, and she voices my own political views pretty closely.
Also, she’s often up against Abbot or Joe (I think I just saw a Union Boss) Hockey, both of which have the charisma of a cold cup of vomit, IMHO.
Dario, if the benches have no bearing why are Labor hiding Gillard?
If I were Howard I would..never mind.
A numb nut like me speculated Howard would change tac and go after the economic credentials of State Leaders because they can’t get any mud to stick on Rudd on this very blog site weeks ago, and he did. What does that say for Textor et al.
They are as clever about election strategies as the part time electioneering hack. Did they get him 4 on wins on the trot ? I doubt it based on their current pathetic efforts which even a numb nut like me could predict-
Its getting to be like Days Of Our Lives, come back to it after a few months and you can pick up the storyline in 1 episode; it hasnt gone anywhere. JWH needs a new script writer, and fast.
Steven Kaye said
“Dario, if the benches have no bearing why are Labor hiding Gillard?”
Isn’t the bigger question: Why hasn’t Howard hidden Kevin Andrews – can the guy even spell “incompetent”?
Chooses not to de-bait Glen, Steven Kaye, Cerdic or Nostradamus. It takes up so much space and its a waste. Carry on, Ill wait for this wave of perplexity to hit the sand.
Steve Kay saith: Kevin07″ is just a glib vote-grabbing exercise and propaganda tool,”
Whereas “Howard57” will be a dynamic demonstration of the power of the interwebs ability to harness the enthusiasm of today’s young folk and to show them that John Winston Howard (the Battler’s Friend ™) is just the Grand-dad to lead them further into the 21st C.
William, font is fine.
J-D, I think if a Rudd government tried to enlarge the Reps it would be attacked with a shrill populist campaign about wasting the taxpayers’ money on more politicians etc etc by the Opposition and its media attack dogs. Hawke (who had control of the Senate with the aid of Don Chipp) was prepared to weather that – I doubt Rudd be. It’s a second-order issue and Rudd will need to conserve his political capital for bigger battles with a hostile Senate.
Today’s intervention by Howard in the Qld LGA amalgamations takes the biscuit for cynicism.
Did Howard have anything to say about the Kennett amalgamations in Victoria.
Has Howard ever taken a principled stand against the LGA amalgamations that have occurred peiecemeal over the last 25 years in NSW – under governments of all hues?
Did Howard support the constitutional amendment to acknowledge the existence of that tier of government in the free trade agreement between the several colonies… errr… I mean the Commonwealth Constitution?
The answer is “No”.
The offer to pay for plebescites will only be supported by a few affected councillors, some of the employees in the higher paid echelons of local government who will face redundancy and the owners of local papers which will only get display advertising revenue from one council instead of two or three.
I’m from Victoria, Bendigo (very marginal Labor seat) to be exact and an local opinion poll recently showed Labor only 5 points ahead of the Liberals. Labor should hold a seat like Bendigo, if there is large enough swing to Labor. If not the Liberals might gain it.
Howard was not Opposition leader when Kennett amalgamated the Victorian councils. Although he opposed a constitutional amendment to acknowledge the existence of local government back in 88 to hurt Labor, (by sinking a referendum sponsored by Labor).
Personally I would like to see the states abolished and their powers distributed to both local (give them urban planning for example) and federal governments, along with other organizations (like schools being ruled by councils of parents and teachers).
The Liberals have a better potential leaders than Labor. The Liberals have Nelson and Turnbull. More than I can say for Labor.
Didn’t I read a story a few days ago that Rudd was going to have a meeting with Beatie about the amalgamations?
Julia Gillard did an excellent job when she filled in for Rudd in Parliament. Eyeball Howard calmly all the way through and spoke fairly well.
I agree she is a potential PM one day – but she will have competition with Shorten. She seems to appeal more the more you see her and get used to her voice.
True blue Lib voters will of course hate her.
What are peoples views on Bob Browns suggestion that the pollies take a pay cut and giving more to pensioners ( $60 pf ) When this goes to parliament ( wednesday? ) do you think the Major parties would go for it? Would Fielding support it?
In the ads the actor asks he had “heard” young workers could be ripped
off. Now we know how he knew…
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/second-worker-complains-about-advert-actor/2007/08/07/1186252687510.html
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/ad-axed-as-actor-branded-a-ripoff-boss/2007/08/06/1186252631522.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
Ad axed as actor branded a rip-off boss
Michael Bachelard
August 7, 2007
THE Federal Government’s $37 million campaign to sell its Work Choices
legislation was in tatters last night after allegations that an actor
in a Workplace Authority ad was a bad employer who ripped off junior
staff to the tune of thousands of dollars.
I have deleted two comments – one from Asanque and one from Greensborough Growler – which consisted of lists of cabinet members with insults attached.
Tristan, are you able to tell me where and when this poll was published?
I have to concede that the way its looking Howards in deep sh**. Nothing is going well for him and i think the Libs need a new leader to have any chance and could be the difference of 1 or more terms in opposition.
William will you be putting the Minor party candidates into your guide?