Morgan: 59-41

Roy Morgan seems to have moved to weekly face-to-face polls, today’s offering being a survey of 955 voters conducted on Saturday and Sunday (so before the early week leadership non-event). It shows a 1 per cent shift in the Coalition’s direction on two-party preferred, with both major parties up on the primary vote: the Coalition from 34.5 per cent to 36 per cent, Labor from 49 per cent to 51 per cent.

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.

558 comments on “Morgan: 59-41”

Comments Page 2 of 12
1 2 3 … 12

  1. How do you know i was talking about Gillard with the sandwich remark BLUEBOTTLE???

    Anyway it was a generic comment about the choice between equally bad candidates…Actually if you have ever watched South Park you’d understand the reference…

    Well if Gillard will never lead the ALP who else could bar Rudd???

    The obvious choices to take over from Howard is Costello if he wants it…then Turnbull, the Bishop then Nelson…Abbot doesnt want to be leader and he’d never have the numbers….Ruddock ha as if the Libs would make count dracula our leader lol

  2. Morgan: 59-41. This 18 point gap has become so ho hum these days I tend to forget how devastating that is for the Coalition’s election hopes and it is not going away. There has been nomiraculous ‘clawing back’ of the vote evident for some weeks now. The National vote is disturbing.

    I don’t see how a switch to a ‘team’ approach after abandoning the ‘presidential’ leader v leader approach failed miserably is going to incline the ‘moron’ punter to change their minds between now and Nov 3 {thats my tip}.

    But what do I know, I don’t consider myself to be a moron: unless of course Collingwood lose tonight and I blow my $100.

  3. Costello has been handed the poisoned chalice without being handed the baton.

    If the coalition lose the election it will now be just as much his fault as Howards.

    He will never be PM.

  6. Noocat @ #9

    I agree. The “soft Labor vote” claim is ridiculous based as it is on the respondent’s interpretation of “heading in the right direction”.

    If I was asked that question, I would see that 59% of the electorate are prepared to support the ALP, and I interpret that as:

    HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

    I see Howard getting a total bollocking in the media and I think Australia is:

    HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

    I see the Chaser’s War on APEC drawing an audience of 2.3 million viewers and I think Australia is:

    HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

    But I am sure that is not what the question is asking.

    It’s the most meaningless question and interpretation and it demeans an otherwise interesting piece of research.

  7. Steven Kaye provided the data that the Libs were ahead in Eden Monaro. Credibility is no higher, but, it is good to see him kick on.

  8. Glen you should have watched question time the other day if you think Turnbull has a future with the Coalition: the man couldn’t tie his own shoe laces that day-he tripped himself three time in half an hour and was left sitting there like a stunned Mullet , alone , very alone.

    Not one front bencher let his body language or eyes lend him any SUPPORT at all, it was pathetic to watch him licking his wounds, very alone. I like Turnbull, but that performance was in all honesty not a good way to win support for a senior position like Treasurer.

    Maybe the Mill thing in Tassie is keeping him up all night- but he was terribly unimpressive and NOONE stood by him, no one.

  9. The problem with Morgan is that you might get a solid Labor person saying they are voting Labor, and because they also think Labor will win the election they may also say that the country is headed in the right direction. According to Morgan, this sort of person is a soft Labor voter, even though are rock solid and confident of victory.

  10. Subject: Heavenly Clocks
    A man died and went to heaven.
    As he stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly Gates,he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him.
    He asked, “What are all those clocks?” St. Peter answered, “Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock. Every time you lie the hands on your clock will move.”
    “Oh,” said the man, “Whose clock is that?” “That’s Mother Teresa’s. The hands have never moved,indicating that she never told a lie.” “Incredible,” said the man. “And whose clock is that one?” St. Peter responded, “That’s Abraham Lincoln’s clock.The hands have moved twice telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire life.”
    “Where’s John Howard’s Lie Clock?” asked the man. “ Johnny Howards’ clock is in God’s office. He’s using it as a ceiling fan.

  11. Glen says (post 6) “The sample size was small just 955 so i wouldnt take this polls so seriously except as a trend.” I don’t think so. That’s quite a respectable size, especially for a face-to-face. By comparison the latest Newspoll (telephone i/vs) was only marginnally larger at 1147. Morgan may be underestimating the nats, but still Newspoll only have them on 4%. Anyway, even if you only take this as part of a trend (ie no significant change) it’s still quite extraordinary.

  12. add on another 4% then the Coalition is on 40% primaries

    entirely at the expense of the Libs.

    Say instead that all the missing Nats voters were down the paddock for the night and didn’t get counted at all. Then the true result is 58.5 41.5 (5). You only get 1.5 extra for the coaltion total, not 2.5.

    More realistically than this, say that an entire country area is missed or undercounted. Some ALP voters will also be missed. Say you drop an area that is 75/25 Nats (and that is a very generous split). Then the true result is 59.5 40.5 (5). You only get 0.5 extra for the coaltion total

    Only if all of the missing Nats voters were positively counted as ALP voters (they must be the ones that share JHo’s sense of humour) can you subtract the full measure from the ALP and give it to the Nats.

    Do you understand now why you cannot just add ‘missing’ Nats votes to the coalition total?
    Do you promise not to make this mistake again in the future?

    One thump for yes; two thumps for no.

  13. Crikey in their lead article referred to Liberal Party polling showing a set of anomalous results – not necessarily bad- but results that puzzle their strategists.
    Frustratingly for the politically insatiable the matter was left at that. I can only think that they may be picking up on what Possum’s pollycide analysis outlined. Namely, that there is a big swing on in the Liberal seats but not uniformly so.

  14. Sorry, ballsed it up again.

    add on another 4% then the Coalition is on 40% primaries

    Glen does it need to be explained to you every time why you can’t do this?

    There are a number of possible ways the Nats vote could be undercounted. To make the maths easier, lets say the poll result is 60 40(2.5), but you know that the ‘real’ Nats vote is 5.

    If it is due to a ‘3 cornered contest’ situtation then the true result is 60 40 (5). The extra Nats vote comes entirely at the expense of the Libs.

    Say instead that all the missing Nats voters were down the paddock for the night and didn’t get counted at all. Then the true result is 58.5 41.5 (5). You only get 1.5 extra for the coaltion total, not 2.5.

    More realistically than this, say that an entire country area is missed or undercounted. Some ALP voters will also be missed. Say you drop an area that is 75/25 Nats (and that is a very generous split). Then the true result is 59.5 40.5 (5). You only get 0.5 extra for the coaltion total

    Only if all of the missing Nats voters were positively counted as ALP voters (they must be the ones that share JHo’s sense of humour) can you subtract the full measure from the ALP and give it to the Nats.

    Do you understand now why you cannot just add ‘missing’ Nats votes to the coalition total?
    Do you promise not to make this mistake again in the future?

    One thump for yes; two thumps for no.

  15. BLUEBOTTLE i made a post about Turnbull lackluster performance yesterday…but that being the case he’s still more a leader than anybody on Labor’s front bench atm and that’s saying something…

  16. While we’re on Newspoll predictions, I might just mention the Labor 2PP figure for each Newspoll so far this year: 55, 56, 54, 57, 61, 57, 59, 57, 59, 57, 55, 60, 56, 55, 56, 55, 59. The really noticeable thing is that they tend to oscillate up and down with each poll. Apparently there is some statistical explanation for this phenomenon and it is what you would expect in a polling series. Only once have there been two up movements in a row, and only once have there been two downwards. Each was associated with a move to a new central value around which the oscillations resumed.

    On the basis of this observation, I’d say it is most likely that the next Newspoll will be a ‘fightback’ for Howard of 1 or 2 percent. Even a 3 or 4% figure would not surprise me. It will only be remarkable if there is another upward movement of a couple of percent or more – at which point the margins of error between say a new figure of 61 and the previous central value of 55.5 (in the middle of the recent 55 to 56 oscillations) would barely overlap.

  18. Yep Dave R, I can see myself answering the question about Australia heading in the right direction in very similar ways. Basically, I think Australia is finally moving in the right direction because people seem to be waking up to Howard’s lies, and actually contemplating on voting him and his deceitful government out. Definitely the RIGHT direction.

  19. Glen #51

    Personally i loved the comparison (an avid South Park fan myself….at least we have compulsory voting so no need for Puff Daddy and his song…vote or die….)

  20. We’ve now had 64 polls since December 2006 interviewing 80,000 people and it shows, that the ALP vote is over 48, the Coalition vote is
    struggling to now stay above 38, and the Others sit in the mid 13’s. 

    Most ominously for the Coalition is there has been no narrowing of the vote, in fact it’s widened in the last month.  A two party projection with a 58% flow to the ALP results in 56.6/43.4, but with a flow of 66% results in
    57.7/42.3 which is a 10.5% swing. 

    The latest polling summaries are here:

    http://www.ozelection2007.info/forums/viewtopic.php?id=536

  21. Martin B

    It’s dejavu all over again

    I say the Nat vote is too low…
    You say its because people chose the Liberals instead…
    Then i say its because of the city bias…

    Look if the Greens were on 2% would you think that was a credible result, what makes the Nats any different…fact is Morgan undervalues their vote period!

  22. I love the double-think about Costello. According to some Libs I heard on the radio this morning, it’s difficult for a Treasurer to have a positive public profile and so there will be a delay before he shows up as a plus in polling.

    Huh ? I thought Pierre was the Greatest Treasurer Ever ? All those tax cuts, middle class welfare and plasma TVs should have helped his popularity, surely ?

    Just imagine what a negative he would be if he had ever taken a tough decision ? Not that the ticker-less clown is capable of taking such a tough decision.

  24. There seems to be no thought being given to the fact that it is the Government’s policies notably work choices and lack of action on climate change that is driving the swing to Labor. Unless Costello repudiates these and comes up with a set of policies which set him apart from Howard then he remains on an unpopular bandwagon.
    And the commentariat are saying people will now be looking at Labor’s team and names like Gillard, Swan Garrett are being thrown up as though they are some sort of negative. Are they? I don’t know. They aren’t to me but perhaps there is polling which shows they are.

  25. #41 Not quite sure how you interpret that. Seems to me that it implies that many lib supporters thought (and still so) that the ever so nice chap Beasley was the best electoral asset they had at the time, and long for those easy days to return!

  27. Glen without looking at their polling methods we can never be certain that there is a city bias. However, agregated polling of Newspoll has shown huge swings to the ALP in regional areas, with the ALP polling a primary of over 50% in regional areas. Also note that election victories in Victoria and Queensland in the past have been based on huge wins in the bush.

    This may reflect a good campaign strategy from Country Labor and a general lack of strategy from the Nationals. If you need more evidence of this just look at the desperation being shown by the Queensland Nationals in regard to the local council amalgamations and the fact that they’re running on a joint ticket for the Senate for the first time this election. This may mean they don’t have confidence they’ll be elected off their own vote.

    Also, if you take a look at it, most Nationals seats are safe and unwinnable and then look at the 2PP as the relevant vote for the remainder of Australia, it doesn’t look too good.

    Again, the main thing is that without looking at Morgan’s polling techniques we can’t really say whether there is a city bias. Additionally, Newspoll continually underestimates the Green vote but still manages a good estimate of the 2PP anyhow.

  28. Oh and another thing. I find it odd that in al the chat initiated by Downer last week at the behest of Howard about his leadership no-one asked Costello what he thought. All the meetings took place without him and indeed it seems the people involved went to great lenghts to keep him in the dark. What goes on? Surely they would have had him along to see what he thought and to see if he was ready to pick up the leadership.
    And If the Libs win and Howard hangs on until he is blasted out is it a given that the party will give Costello the nod?
    If they don’t even ask him along to important meetings why are they going to vote for him for PM? Looks to me like they have handed him the hospital pass. If the Libs win it will be because of Howard if they lose it will be Costello’s fault and he will be no certainty to lead the opposition .

  31. I agree with glen the nat vote is way to low…

    I think an interesting perspective is analysing these result from preferences, I also believe the Family first vote is way to low..

    Once the negative campaigning start from the liberals, there will be people who will not be voting for liberal or labor but will preference the party they prefer.

    I think a lot of x-liberal voters will turn to family first and strong independents then preference back to the liberals, if you monitor the family first preferences they started out at 50/50 split now its a 30/70 preference split in liberals favour. This shows a strong even preference trend towards the coalition as more negative analysis comes out about labor

    I think family first will poll about 4-6 nationally and I don’t think it necessary matter who they preference.. There will be generic preference flow back to liberals what ever preference deals they choose..

  32. Martin B, don’t worry about Glen. At oz politics we spent an entire thread trying to prove to Glen that Labor neads only 16 seats to win outright. At the end we unanimously agreed that Glen couldn’t count to 21 if he was naked. 🙂

  33. #66 canberra boy that analysis assumes the underlying trend is fixed. For all we know those samples are a 100% accurate reflection of voter intention at the time. I think the question is, is there a trend?

  34. Does anyone care about this poll at all? Seems we are all champing at the bit for NewsPoll to see if the dramas of this week have had any effect.

  35. Chris B at 54:

    “For those of you who don’t think Nuclear Power will be an issue. Here is the ALP’s advertisement I mention yesterday.”

    Holy Steaming Smokestacks Batman, that is an absolute corker of an ad!

    That will play well in QLD for the ALP.

    The tranquil dusk fishing setting, the lifestyle connotations, the juxtaposition of the way Qld always has been vs what it will become… that is a highly intelligent piece of political advertising that burrows deep into the most sacred lifestyle shibboleths of Qld’rs north of Brisbane everywhere.

  36. i never understand the preference thing.

    Labors primary vote goes up by 2%, the Coalitions by 1.5%, Labor gets the majority of preferences yet the 2PP goes down for Labor. Shouldnt the 2PP at least stay the same if not improve for Labor??

    ….Am I missing something???

  37. Costello was the architect of worse choices, when he costarted the HR Nicholls society it was with the aim of destroying the unions and reducing workplace benefits, both he and Minchin apologised to the society for not taking worst choices far enough, their next aim is to remove the basic wage, i cant see Rudd and the unions not letting this little gem out of the bag during the campaign.

  38. Yes, it’s a pity Morgan didn’t do a ph poll taken Wed/Thur, as I was expecting. Maybe he’s using too many resources in the reactor for federalelection.com.au. We’ll probably get another reactor report next week.

  39. Andrew, an equivalent primary vote gap will lead to a smaller 2PP for Labor when both sides are up, as there is a smaller pool of preferences available.

  40. I think the ALP are hypocrites when it comes to Nuclear energy…

    1. The only major nuclear accident was in Soviet Russia about 20 years ago and only happened because they shut down the safe guards…

    2. Australia has 30% known reserves of Uranium and yet we dont enrich it or use it for power generation.

    3. Nuclear energy is safe and almost fool proof…the Europeans have nuclear energy and are expanding their programmes like the French who use 80% Nuclear.

    4. Nuclear Energy has Zero thats right Zero Carbon Emissions and yet Garrett says Nuclear power should not be a part of the solution…

    5. As much as solar, wind, geothermal and tidal or all well and good they as yet cannot provide base load power and clean coal technology is decades off…

    I would have no problems living next door to a nuclear power station, so why would anybody else? Ill tell you why because of the feral left who spread disinformation and fear about nuclear energy which pales belief…

  41. Rob (#83) – I’m not saying the underlying trend is either fixed or flat. Merely that it is more likely than not that the next Newspoll figure will be better for Howard, but if it is better for Labor by 2% or more, it may represent a recent swing toward Labor which we would only be able to confirm with subsequent polls. If we’re talking trends, the best I could say is that the slow trend away from Labor which seemed to exist in the polls from May onwards has stopped and may have reversed.

  42. I don’t think we should be too hard on Glen trying to spin the polls. If the polls were this bad for Labor, I’d be trying to put a positive spin on them too!

  43. Glen said

    I would have no problems living next door to a nuclear power station, so why would anybody else?

    Glen, why don’t you just paint a target on your chest and hand out arrows? Now I know you’re a stirrer 🙂

  45. Glen, is there any ideological coherence to your position there, or are you cutting and pasting? Just for starters, Australia does not have the money or capacity for nuclear for a long time. Howard tried to put this on the agenda as a wedge and has been comprehensively outflanked. I think that is all there is to it.

  48. If you look at the US, the closer you live to a nuclear power station your lifespan is longer, your chance of chronic disease is lower, your income is higher, your education standard is higher.

    But is is a great scare campaign. 🙂

  50. Glen it isn’t just the ‘feral left’ arguing against the nuclear industry, even if you accept such a grouping has any influence. There are lots of economic reasons why we shouldn’t pour billions into the technology and therefore neglect development of areas Australia is well suited for, such as solar and geothermal. But to me the best argument is based on a risk/benefit analysis of the waste storage problems. We seriously have to contemplate continuous safe storage of some of these by-products for 100,000 years. I just don’t think that’s a reasonable burden to impose on whatever the hell shapes up as human civilisation over the next 100 millennia, just to solve our short term energy problems. It seems a typically short-sighted, selfish, dare I say, right-wing approach to take. On a par with chopping down old forests to make paper. Only worse.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 2 of 12
1 2 3 … 12